The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of women in politics on the risk of a coup d’état. Previous research indicates that the relationship between female political leaders and security is dependent on the office she holds. Subsequently, we expect female legislators to have a different influence than a female chief executive on the likelihood of a coup. We argue that a higher level of female representation reduces the risk of a coup d’état. However, we assert that a female chief executive has a different effect and increases coup risk. Using data covering 160 states over the years 1952 to 2009, our empirical tests provide support for our expectations. All else being equal, increased levels of women in parliament lead to a substantial drop in coup likelihood. However, the argument that a female chief executive will be more coup prone is not fully supported in our findings.
AndersonN. F. (2013). Benazir Bhutto and dynastic politics: Her father’s daughter, her people’s sister. In GenoveseM.SteckenriderJ. (Eds.), Women as political leaders: Studies in gender and governing (pp. 80–109). New York, NY: Routledge.
2.
BarnesT.BeaulieuE. (2014). Gender stereotypes and corruption: How candidates affect perceptions of election fraud. Politics and Gender, 10, 365–391.
3.
BelkinA.SchoferE. (2003). Toward a structural understanding of coup risk. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46, 494–620.
4.
BellC.Koga SudduthJ. (in press). The causes and outcomes of coup during civil war. Journal of Conflict Resolution.
5.
BuchanN. R.CrosonR. T. A.SolnickS. (2008). Trust and gender: An examination of behavior and beliefs in the investment game. Journal of Economic Behavioral Organization, 68, 466–476.
6.
BurrisV. (2008). From Vietnam to Iraq: Continuity and change in between-group differences in support for military action. Social Problems, 55, 443–479.
7.
CaprioliM. (2000). Gendered conflict. Journal of Peace Research, 37, 51–68.
8.
CaprioliM.BoyerM. (2001). Gender, violence, and international crisis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 45, 503–518.
9.
CheibubJ. A. (2002). Minority governments, deadlock situations, and the survival of presidential democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 35, 284–312.
10.
CheibubJ. A.GandhiJ.VreelandJ. R. (2010). Democracy and dictatorship revisited. Public Choice, 143, 67–101.
11.
ClarkT.LinzerD. (2015). Should I use fixed or random effects?Political Science Research and Methods, 3, 399–408.
12.
ColJ. (2013). Managing softly in turbulent times: Corazon C. Aquino, President of the Philippines. In GenoveseM.SteckenriderJ. (Eds.), Women as political leaders: Studies in gender and governing (pp. 14–22). New York, NY: Routledge.
13.
CroissantA.KuehnD.ChambersP.WolfS. (2010). Beyond the fallacy of coup-ism: Conceptualizing civilian control of the military in emerging democracies. Democratization, 17, 950–975.
14.
DollarD.FismanR.GattiR. (2001). Are women really the “fairer sex”? Corruption and women in government. Journal of Economic Behavioral Organization, 46, 423–429.
15.
EsareyJ.ChirilloG. (2013). “Fairer sex” or purity myth? Corruption, gender, and institutional context. Politics and Gender, 9, 361–389.
16.
EverettJ. (2013). Indira Gandhi and the exercise of power. In GenoveseM.SteckenriderJ. (Eds.), Women as political leaders: Studies in gender and governing (pp. 144–175). New York, NY: Routledge.
17.
FalkE.KenskiK. (2006). Issue saliency and gender stereotypes: Support for women as presidents in times of war and terrorism. Social Science Quarterly, 87, 1–18.
18.
FeaverP. (1996). The civil–military problematique: Huntington, Janowitz, and the question of civilian control. Armed Forces & Society, 23, 149–178.
19.
FeaverP. (1999). Civil–military relations. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 211–241.
20.
FeaverP. (2003). Armed servants: Agency, oversight, and civil–military relations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21.
FinerS. (1988). The man on horseback: The role of the military in politics (2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
22.
GilleyB. (2009). The right to rule: How states win and lose legitimacy. New York, NY: Colombia University Press.
23.
GleditschK. S. (2002). Expanded trade and GDP data. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46, 712–724.
24.
GoemansH.GleditschK. S.ChiozzaG. (2009). Introducing Archigos: A dataset of political leaders. Journal of Peace Research, 46, 269–283.
25.
GoldsteinJ. (2001). War and gender: How gender shapes the war system and vice versa. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
26.
HolmanM. R.MerollaJ. L.ZechmeisterE. J. (2011). Sex, stereotypes, and security: A study of the effects of terrorist threat on assessments of female leadership. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 32, 173–192.
27.
HuddyL.TerkildsenN. (1993). The consequences of gender stereotypes for women candidates at different levels and types of office. Political Research Quarterly, 46, 503–523.
28.
HultquistP. (2013). Power parity and peace? The role of relative power in civil war settlement. Journal of Peace Research, 50, 623–634.
29.
InglehartR.NorrisP. (2003). Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
JalalzaiF. (2004). Women political leaders: Past and present. Women and Politics, 26, 85–108.
32.
JalalzaiF. (2008). Women rule: Shattering the executive glass ceiling. Politics and Gender, 4, 205–231.
33.
JalalzaiF.KrookM. L. (2010). Beyond Hillary and Benazir: Women’s political leadership worldwide. International Political Science Review, 31, 5–23.
34.
JohnsonJ.ThyneC. (in press). Squeaky wheels and troop loyalty: How domestic protests influence coups d’état, 1951–2005. Journal of Conflict Resolution.
35.
KathleneL. (1994). Power and influence in state legislative policymaking: The interaction of gender and position in committee hearing debates. American Political Science Review, 88, 560–576.
36.
KochM.FultonS. (2011). In the defense of women: Gender, office holding, and national security policy in established democracies. Journal of Politics, 73, 1–16.
37.
LawlessJ. (2004). Politics of presence? Congresswomen and symbolic representation. Political Research Quarterly, 47, 81–99.
38.
LeonG. (2014). Loyalty for sale? Military spending and coups d’état. Public Choice, 159, 363–383.
LijphartA. (1999). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
41.
LindbergS.ClarkJ. (2008). Democratization reduce the risk of military interventions in politics in Africa?Democratization, 15, 86–105.
42.
McGowanP. (2005). Coups and conflict in West Africa, 1955–2004: Part I, theoretical perspectives. Armed Forces & Society, 32, 5–23.
43.
MillikenJ.KrauseK. (2002). State failure, state collapse, and state reconstruction: Concepts, lessons and strategies. Development and Change, 33, 753–774.
44.
PaxtonP. (1997). Women in national legislatures: A cross-national analysis. Social Science Research, 26, 442–464.
45.
PaxtonP.GreenJ.HughesM. (2008, 1222). Women in parliament, 1945–2003: Cross-national dataset (ICPSR24340-v1). Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. doi:10.3886/ICPSR24340.v1
46.
PowellJ.ThyneC. (2011). Global instances of coups, 1950–2008: A new dataset. Journal of Peace Research, 48, 249–259.
47.
ReganP.PaskeviciuteA. (2003). Women’s access to politics and peaceful states. Journal of Peace Research, 40, 287–302.
48.
ReingoldB. (1996). Conflict and cooperation: Legislative strategies and concepts of power among female and male state legislators. Journal of Politics, 58, 464–485.
49.
SchroederT. (2017). When security dominates the agenda: The influence of ongoing security threats on female representation. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61, 564–589.
50.
Schwindt-BayerL. (2010). Political power and women’s representation in Latin America. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
51.
SingerJ. D. (1987). Reconstructing the correlates of war dataset on material capabilities of states, 1816–1985. International Interactions, 14, 115–132.
52.
SingerJ. D.BremerS.StuckeyJ. (1972). Capability distribution, uncertainty, and major power war, 1820–1965. In RussettB. (Ed.), Peace, war, and numbers (pp. 19–48). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
ThomasS. (1998). Introduction: Women and elective office: Past, present, and future. In ThomasS.WilcoxC. (Eds.), Women and elective office (pp. 3–25). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
57.
ThompsonW.R.DreyerD. R. (2011). Handbook of international rivalries, 1494–2010. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
58.
TogebyL. (1994). The gender gap in foreign policy attitudes. Journal of Peace Research, 31, 375–392.
59.
Van RyzinG. (2007). Pieces of a puzzle: Linking government performance, citizen satisfaction, and trust. Public Performance and Management Review, 30, 521–535.
60.
VigodaE.YuvalF. (2003). Managerial quality, administrative performance and trust in governance: Can we point to causality?Australian Journal of Public Administration, 62, 12–25.
61.
WaltersA. E.StuhlmacherA. F.MeyerL. L. (1998). Gender and negotiator competitiveness: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 1–29.
62.
WelchC. (1970). Soldier and state in Africa. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
63.
World Bank (2001). Engendering development through gender equality in rights, resources, and voices. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
64.
World Bank (2015). World development indicators. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved fromdata.worldbank.org
65.
ZimmermanE. (1979). Toward a causal model of military coups d’état. Armed Forces & Society, 5, 387–413.
