What effect do gender quotas have on political responsiveness? We examine the effect of randomly imposed electoral quotas for women in Mumbai’s city council, using a wide variety of objective and subjective measures of constituency-level public service quality. Quotas are associated with differences in the distribution of legislator effort, with quota members focusing on public goods distribution, while non-quota members focus on individual goods, member perks, and identity issues. These differences in effort seem to influence institutional performance: perceived quality of local public goods is higher in constituencies with quota members, and citizen complaints are processed faster in areas with more quota members. We suggest that men’s more extensive engagement with extralegal and rhetorical forms of political action has led to men and women cultivating different styles of political representation.
AfridiF.IversenV.SharanM. R. (2017). Women political leaders, corruption, and learning: Evidence from a large public program in India. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 66(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1086/693679
2.
AndersonM. L. (2008). Multiple inference and gender differences in the effects of early intervention: A reevaluation of the Abecedarian, Perry Preschool, and early training projects. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 103(484), 1481–1495. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214508000000841
3.
AnziaS. F.BerryC. R. (2011). The Jackie (and Jill) Robinson effect: Why do congresswomen outperform congressmen?American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 478–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00512.x
4.
AuerbachA. M.Kruks-WisnerG. (2020). The geography of citizenship practice: How the poor engage the state in rural and urban India. Perspectives on Politics, 18(4), 1118–1134. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592720000043
5.
BaltrunaiteA.BelloP.CasaricoA.ProfetaP. (2014). Gender quotas and the quality of politicians. Journal of Public Economics, 118, 62–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.06.008
6.
BanR.RaoV. (2008). Tokenism or agency? The impact of women’s reservations on village democracies in south India. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 56(3), 501–530. https://doi.org/10.1086/533551
7.
BanR.RaoV. (2009). Is deliberation equitable? Evidence from transcripts of village meetings in south India. The World Bank.
8.
BardhanP. K.MookherjeeD.TorradoM. P. (2010). Impact of political reservations in West Bengal local governments on anti-poverty targeting. Journal of Globalization and Development, 1(1), 62–74.
9.
BarnesT. D.BeaulieuE. (2019). Women politicians, institutions, and perceptions of corruption. Comparative Political Studies, 52(1), 134–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414018774355
10.
BarnesT. D.HolmanM. R. (2020). Gender quotas, women’s representation, and legislative diversity. The Journal of Politics, 82(4), 1271–1286. https://doi.org/10.1086/708336
11.
BeamanL.ChattopadhyayR.DufloE.PandeR.TopalovaP. (2009). Powerful women: Does exposure reduce bias?Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(4), 1497–1540. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2009.124.4.1497
12.
BediT. (2016). The dashing ladies of Shiv Sena: Political matronage in urbanizing India. SUNY Press.
13.
BesleyT.FolkeO.PerssonT.RickneJ. (2017). Gender quotas and the crisis of the mediocre man: Theory and evidence from Sweden. The American Economic Review, 107(8), 2204–2242. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20160080
14.
BhalotraS.Clots-FiguerasI.IyerL. (2018). Pathbreakers? Women’s electoral success and future political participation. The Economic Journal, 128(613), 1844–1878. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12492
15.
BhavnaniR. R. (2009). Do electoral quotas work after they are withdrawn? Evidence from a natural experiment in India. American Political Science Review, 103(01), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055409090029
BruléR. E. (2020). Reform, representation, and resistance: The politics of property rights’ enforcement. The Journal of Politics, 82(4), 1390–1405. https://doi.org/10.1086/708645
18.
BussellJ. (2019). Clients and constituents: Political responsiveness in patronage democracies. Cambridge Univ Press.
CheemaA.KhanS.LiaqatA.MohmandS. K. (2021). Canvassing the gatekeepers: A field experiment to increase women voters’ turnout in Pakistan. American Political Science Review, 117(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055422000375
21.
ClarkeD.MühlradH., et al. (2016). The impact of abortion legalization on fertility and female empowerment: New evidence from Mexico. Technical report Working Paper. https://ideas.repec.org/p/csa/wpaper/2016-33.html
22.
ClarkeD.RomanoJ. P.WolfM. (2019). The romano-wolf multiple hypothesis correction in stata.
23.
ClaytonA. (2015). Women’s political engagement under quota-mandated female representation: Evidence from a randomized policy experiment. Comparative Political Studies, 48(3), 333–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414014548104
24.
ClaytonA.ZetterbergP. (2018). Quota shocks: Electoral gender quotas and government spending priorities worldwide. The Journal of Politics, 80(3), 916–932. https://doi.org/10.1086/697251
25.
ClaytonA.ZetterbergP. (2021). Gender and party discipline: Evidence from Africa’s emerging party systems. American Political Science Review, 115(3), 869–884. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055421000368
DabyM. (2020). The gender gap in political clientelism: Problem-solving networks and the division of political work in Argentina. Comparative Political Studies, 54(2), Article 0010414020926194.
28.
De WitJ. (2016). Urban poverty, local governance and everyday politics in Mumbai. Routledge India.
29.
EjdemyrS.KramonE.RobinsonA. L. (2017). Segregation, ethnic favoritism, and the strategic targeting of distributive Goods1. Comparative Political Studies, 51(9), 1111–1143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414017730079
30.
EsareyJ.Schwindt-BayerL. A. (2019). Estimating causal relationships between women’s representation in government and corruption. Comparative Political Studies, 52(11), 1713–1741. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414019830744
31.
FennoR. F. (2003). Home style: House members in their districts New York.
32.
FerreiraF.GyourkoJ. (2014). Does gender matter for political leadership? The case of US mayors. Journal of Public Economics, 112, 24–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.01.006
GuptaA. (2012). Red tape: Bureaucracy, structural violence, and poverty in India. Duke University Press.
39.
GuptaP.ChhibberP. (2022). Bureaucratic connections and local development: A study of Palwal district in India. Regional & Federal Studies, 34(2), 1–25.
40.
HolznerB.de WitJ. J. W. (2003). Supporting decentralised urban governance: Training women municipal councillors in Mumbai, India. ISS Working Papers, 386, 1–38. https://repub.eur.nl/pub/19145/wp386.pdf386
41.
HtunM. (2004). Is gender like ethnicity? The political representation of identity groups. Perspectives on Politics, 2(03), 439–458. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592704040241
42.
IyerL.ManiA.MishraP.TopalovaP. (2012). The power of political voice: Women’s political representation and crime in India. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 4(4), 165–193. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.4.4.165
43.
JenseniusF. R. (2016). Competing inequalities? On the intersection of gender and ethnicity in candidate nominations in Indian elections. Government and Opposition, 51(3), 440–463. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2016.8
44.
JohnM. E. (2007). Women in power? Gender, caste and the politics of local urban governance. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(39), 3986–3993.
45.
JosefssonC. (2014). Who benefits from gender quotas? Assessing the impact of election procedure reform on members of parliament’s attributes in Uganda. International Political Science Review, 35(1), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512113507797
46.
Karekurve-RamachandraV. (2020). Gender quotas and upward political mobility in India.
47.
Karekurve-RamachandraV.LeeA. (2019). Do gender quotas hurt less privileged groups? Evidence from India. Working Paper.
48.
Karekurve-RamachandraV.LeeA. (2023). Can gender quotas improve public service provision?Evidence from Indian Local Government. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IO9SLQ
49.
KarpowitzC. F.MendelbergT. (2014). The silent sex: Gender, deliberation, and institutions. Princeton University Press.
50.
KaurK. P.PhilipsA. Q. (2023). A moveable benefit? Spillover effects of quotas on women’s numerical representation. Political Research Quarterly, 76(2), 680–696. https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129221108697
51.
KeeferP.KhemaniS. (2009). When do legislators pass on pork? The role of political parties in determining legislator effort. American Political Science Review, 103(01), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055409090054
52.
KishwarM. (1996). Women and politics: Beyond quotas. Economic and Political Weekly, 31(43), 2867–2874.
53.
KramonE.PosnerD. N. (2016). Ethnic favoritism in education in Kenya. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 11, 1–58. https://doi.org/10.1561/100.00015005
54.
KrookM. L.O’BrienD. Z. (2010). The politics of group representation: Quotas for women and minorities worldwide. Comparative Politics, 42(3), 253–272. https://doi.org/10.5129/001041510x12911363509639
55.
KumarT. (2019). How welfare can generate civic action: Evidence from affordable housing in Mumbai. [Last Accessed: 26-October-2020]. https://tanukumar.com/Kumar_APSA_2019.pdf
56.
KumarT. (2022). How the content of demands shapes government responsiveness: Theory and evidence from Mumbai.
LeeA. (2018). Ethnic diversity and ethnic discrimination: Explaining local public goods provision. Comparative Political Studies, 51(10), 1351–1383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414017740604
MintaM. D.Sinclair-ChapmanV. (2013). Diversity in political institutions and congressional responsiveness to minority interests. Political Research Quarterly, 66(1), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912911431245
61.
NorrisP.InglehartR. (2001). Women and democracy: Cultural obstacles to equal representation. Journal of Democracy, 12(3), 126–140. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2001.0054
62.
O’BrienD. Z. (2012). Quotas and qualifications in Uganda. In O’BrienD. Z.FranceschetS.Lena KrookM.PiscopoJ. M. (Eds.), The impact of gender quotas (pp. 57–71). Oxford University Press.
63.
O’BrienD. Z.RickneJ. (2016). Gender quotas and women’s political leadership. American Political Science Review, 110(1), 112–126. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055415000611
64.
PrillamanS. A. (2017). Strength in numbers: How women’s groups close India’s political gender gap. American Journal of Political Science, 67(2), 390–410.
65.
PurohitB. (2021). Can female politicians get work done? Evidence of implicit and explicit bias from bureaucrats in India. Working Paper.
66.
RavalS. (1998). Navi Mumbai woman corporator becomes victim of a turf war. India Today. [Last Accessed: 14-November-2020]. https://tinyurl.com/navI-douse
67.
ReingoldB. (2003). Representing women: Sex, gender, and legislative behavior in Arizona and California. University of North Carolina Press.
68.
RomanoJ. P.WolfM. (2005). Exact and approximate stepdown methods for multiple hypothesis testing. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100(469), 94–108. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000000539
69.
RomanoJ. P.WolfM. (2016). Efficient computation of adjusted p-values for resampling-based stepdown multiple testing. Statistics & Probability Letters, 113, 38–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spl.2016.02.012
70.
SamiiC. (2016). Inverse covariance weighting versus factor analysis. https://cyrussamii.com/?p=2177 (Accessed 3 Nov 2019).
71.
Schwindt-BayerL. A. (2006). Still supermadres? Gender and the policy priorities of Latin American legislators. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 570–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00202.x
72.
SwersM. L. (2002). The difference women make: The policy impact of women in Congress. University of Chicago Press.
73.
ThomasS. (1991). The impact of women on state legislative policies. The Journal of Politics, 53(4), 958–976. https://doi.org/10.2307/2131862
74.
TrippA. M.KangA. (2008). The global impact of quotas: On the fast track to increased female legislative representation. Comparative Political Studies, 41(3), 338–361. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414006297342
75.
VaishnavM. (2017). The market for criminality: Money, muscle and elections in India. Yale University Press.
76.
Van DijkT. (2007). Reservation in India and substantive gender equality: A Mumbai case study. International Journal of Diversity in Organisations, Communities & Nations, 7(5), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9532/cgp/v07i05/39454
77.
VoldenC.WisemanA. E.WittmerD. E. (2013). When are women more effective lawmakers than men?American Journal of Political Science, 57(2), 326–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12010
78.
WalshD. (2012). Party centralization and debate conditions in South Africa. In FranceschetS.Lena KrookM.PiscopoJ. M. (Eds.), The impact of gender quotas (pp. 119–135). Oxford University Press.
79.
WeeksA. C.BaldezL. (2015). Quotas and qualifications: The impact of gender quota laws on the qualifications of legislators in the Italian parliament. European Political Science Review, 7(1), 119–144. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1755773914000095
80.
WeldonS. L. (2002). Beyond bodies: Institutional sources of representation for women in democratic policymaking. The Journal of Politics, 64(4), 1153–1174. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2508.00167
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
