Female gender and low income are two markers for groups that have been historically disadvantaged within most societies. The study explores two research questions related to their political representation: (1) ‘Are parties biased towards the ideological preferences of male and rich citizens?’; and (2) ‘Does the proportionality of the electoral system moderate the degree of under-representation of women and poor citizens in the party system?’ A multilevel analysis of survey data from 24 parliamentary democracies indicates that there is some bias against those with low income and, at a much smaller rate, women. This has systemic consequences for the quality of representation, as the preferences of the complementary groups differ. The proportionality of the electoral system influences the degree of under-representation: specifically, larger district magnitudes help in closing the considerable gap between rich and poor.
AchenCristopher H. (1978) Measuring representation. Americal Journal of Political Science22(3): 475–510.
2.
AdamsJamesEzrowLawrence (2009) Who do European parties represent? How Western European parties represent the policy preferences of opinion leaders. The Journal of Politics71(1): 206–223.
3.
BartelsLarry Martin (2008) Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
4.
BenoitKennethLaverMichael (2006) Party Policy in Modern Democracies. London: Routledge.
5.
BerghJohannes (2007) Explaining the gender gap – a cross-national analysis of gender differences in voting. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties17(3): 235–261.
6.
BlaisAndré (1991) The debate over electoral systems. International Political Science Review12(3): 239–260.
7.
BlaisAndréBodetMarc André (2006) Does proportional representation foster closer congruence between citizens and policy makers?Comparative Political Studies39(10): 1243–1262.
BudgeIanKlingemannHans-DieterVolkensAndrea. (2001) Mapping Policy Preferences. Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments 1945–1998. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
10.
CalvoErnestoHellwigTimothy (2011) Centripetal and centrifugal incentives under different electoral systems. American Journal of Political Science55(1): 27–41.
11.
CoxGary W. (1990) Centripetal and centrifugal incentives in electoral systems. American Journal of Political Science34(4): 903–935.
12.
CoxGary W. (1997) Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
CusackThomas R.IversenTorbenRehmPhilipp (2008) Economic shocks, inequality and popular support for redistribution. In: BeramendiPabloAndersonChristopher J. (eds) Democracy, Inequality and Representation. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation, 203–231.
14.
DaltonRussell J. (1985) Political parties and political representation: Party supporters and party elites in nine nations. Comparative Political Studies18(3): 267–299.
15.
DoviSuzanne (2007) Theorizing women’s representation in the United States. Politics & Gender3(3): 297–319.
16.
DownsAnthony (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York, NY: Harper and Row.
17.
DuvergerMaurice (1963) Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. New York, NY: Wiley.
18.
EnnsPeter K.WlezienChristopher (2011) Who Gets Represented?New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
19.
EsaiassonPeterHolmbergSoren (1996) Representation from Above: Members of Parliament and Representative Democracy in Sweden. Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishers.
20.
EvansElizabeth (2008) Supply and demand: Women candidates and the Liberal Democrats. British Journal of Politics and International Relations10(4): 590–606.
21.
EzrowLawrence (2010) Linking Citizens and Parties: How Electoral Systems Matter for Political Representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22.
EzrowLawrencede VriesCatherineSteenbergenMarco. (2011) Mean voter representation versus partisan constituency representation: Do parties respond to the mean voter position or to their supporters?Party Politics17(3): 275–301.
23.
FordRobertGoodwinMatthew J. (2010) Angry white men: Individual and contextual predictors of support for the British National Party. Political Studies58(1): 1–25.
24.
GidengilElisabethBlaisAndréNevitteNeil. (2003) Women to the Left? Gender differences in political beliefs and policy preferences. In: TremblayManonTrimbleLinda (eds) Women and Electoral Politics in Canada. Don Mills, Ontario: Oxford University Press, 140–159.
25.
GigerNathalie (2009) Towards a modern gender gap in Europe? A comparative analysis of voting behavior in 12 countries. Social Science Journal46(3): 474–492.
26.
GigerNathalieRossetJanBernauerJulian (2012) The poor representation of the poor in comparative perspective. Journal of Representation48(1): 47–61.
27.
GilensMartin (2005) Inequality and democratic responsiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly69(5): 778–796.
28.
GilensMartin (2009) Preference Gaps and Inequality in Representation. Political Science & Politics42: 335–341.
29.
GilensMartin (2012) Affluence & Influence. Economic Inequality and Political Power in America. Princeton: Princeton University Press
30.
GolderMattStramskiJacek (2010) Ideological congruence and electoral institutions: Conceptualization and measurement. American Journal of Political Science54(1): 90–106.
31.
GriffinJohn D.NewmanBrian (2005) Are voters better represented?The Journal of Politics67(4): 1206–1227.
32.
GriffinJohn D.NewmanBrian (2007) The unequal representation of Latinos and whites. The Journal of Politics69(4): 1032–1046.
33.
HackerJacob S.PiersonPaul (2010) Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer – and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
34.
HartLindaKovalainenAnneHolliAnne Maria (2009) Gender and power in politics and business in Finland. In: KirstiNiskanenNybergAnita (eds) Kön och makt i Norden: Del I Landsrapporter. Copenhagen: Nordiska ministerrådet, 65–130.
35.
HeadeyBruceMullerDenis (1996) Policy agendas of the poor, the public and elites: A test of Bachrach and Baratz. Australian Journal of Political Science31(3): 347–368.
36.
HuberJohn D.PowellG. Bingham (1994) Congruence between citizens and policymakers in two visions of liberal democracy. World Politics46(3): 291–226.
37.
InglehartRonaldNorrisPippa (2000) The developmental theory of the gender gap: Women’s and men’s voting behavior in global perspective. International Political Science Review21(4): 441–463.
38.
IversenTorbenRosenbluthFrances (2006) The political economy of gender: Explaining cross-national variation in household bargaining, divorce, and the gender voting gap. American Journal of Political Science50(1): 1–19.
39.
IversenTorbenSoskiceDavid (2006) Electoral institutions and the politics of coalitions: Why some democracies redistribute more than others. American Political Science Review100(2): 165–181.
40.
JacobsLawrence R.PageBenjamin I. (2005) Who influences U.S. foreign policy?American Political Science Review99(1): 107–123.
41.
KenworthyLaneMalamiMelissa (1999) Gender inequality in political representation: A worldwide comparative analysis. Social Forces78(1): 235–268.
42.
KlingemannHans-DieterVolkensAndreaBaraJudith. (2006) Mapping Policy Preference II: Estimates for Parties, Electors and Governments in Eastern Europe, the European Union and the OECD, 1990–2003. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
43.
KostadinovaTatiana (2007) Ethnic and women’s representation under mixed election systems. Electoral Studies26(2): 418–431.
44.
LijphartArend (1997) Unequal participation: Democracy’s unresolved dilemma. American Political Science Review91(1): 1–14.
45.
LijphartArend (2012) Patterns of Democracy. Government Form and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries (2nd edn). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
46.
LovenduskiJoniNorrisPippa (2003) Westminster women: The politics of presence. Political Studies51(1): 84–102.
47.
McDonaldMichael D.MendesSilvia M.BudgeIan (2004) What are elections for? Conferring the median mandate. British Journal of Political Science34(1): 1–26.
48.
MansbridgeJane (1999) Should blacks represent blacks and women represent women? A contingent “yes”. The Journal of Politics61(3): 628–657.
49.
ManzaJeffBrooksClem (1998) The gender gap in U.S. presidential elections: When? Why? Implications?American Journal of Sociology103(5): 1235–1266.
50.
MatlandRichard E. (1993) Institutional variables affecting female representation in national legislatures: The case of Norway. The Journal of Politics55(3): 737–755.
51.
MatlandRichard E. (1998) Women’s representation in national legislatures: Developed and developing countries. Legislative Studies Quarterly23(1): 109–125.
52.
MatlandRichard E.StudlarDonley T. (1996) The contagion of women candidates in single-member district and proportional representation electoral systems: Canada and Norway. The Journal of Politics58(3): 707–733.
53.
MeltzerAllan H.RichardScott F. (1981) A rational theory of the size of government. Journal of Political Economy89(5): 914–927.
54.
MoserRobert G.SchreinerEthan (2012) Electoral Systems and Political Context: How the Effects of Rules Vary Across New and Established Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
55.
NorrisPippa (2006) The impact of electoral reform on women’s representation. Acta Politica41(2): 197–213.
56.
PaxtonPamela (1997) Women in national legislatures: A cross-national analysis. Social Science Research26(4): 442–464.
57.
PaxtonPamelaKunovichSheriHughesMelanie M. (2007) Gender in politics. Annual Review of Sociology33: 263–284.
58.
PhillipsAnne (1995) The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
59.
PitkinHanna F. (1967) The Concept of Representation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
60.
PivenFrances FoxClowardRichard (1977) Poor People’s Movements: Why They Succeed, How They Fail. New York, NY: Pantheon.
61.
PowellG. Bingham (2000) Elections as Instruments of Democracy: Majoritarian and Proportional Visions. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
62.
PowellG. Bingham (2004) The chain of responsiveness. The Journal of Democracy15(4): 91–105.
63.
RodríguezFrancisco (2004) Inequality, redistribution, and rent-seeking. Economics & Politics16(3): 287–320.
64.
RossetJanGigerNathalieBernauerJulian (2013) More Money, Fewer Problems? Cross-Level Effects of Economic Deprivation on Political Representation. West European Politics36(4): 817–835.
65.
RuedinDidier (2013) Why Aren’t They There? The Political Representation of Women, Ethnic Groups and Issue Positions in Legislatures. Colchester: ECPR Press.
66.
SawerMarian (2012) What makes the substantive representation of women possible in a Westminster parliament? The story of RU486 in Australia. International Political Science Review33(3): 320–335.
67.
SchlozmanKay LehmanVerbaSidneyBradyHenry E. (2012) The Unheavenly Chorus: Unequal Political Voice and the Broken Promise of American Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
68.
Schwindt-BayerLeslie A.MishlerWilliam (2005) An integrated model of women’s representation. Journal of Politics67(2): 407–428.
69.
SiaroffAlan (2000) Women’s representation in legislatures and cabinets in industrial democracies. International Political Science Review21(2): 197–215.
70.
SorokaStuart N.WlezienChristopher (2008) On the limits to inequality in representation. PS: Political Science & Politics41(2): 319–327.
71.
SteenbergenMarco R.JonesBradford S. (2002) Modeling multilevel data structures. American Journal of Political Science46(1): 218–237.
72.
StrømKaareMuellerWolfgang C. (1999) Political parties and hard choices. In: StrømKaareMuellerWolfgang C. (eds) Policy, Office or Votes? How Political Parties in Western Europe Make Hard Decisions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–35.
73.
StudlarDonley T.McAllisterIan (1996) Constituency activity and representational roles among Australian legislators. Journal of Politics58: 69–90.
74.
StudlarDonley T.McAllisterIan (2002) Does a critical mass exist? A comparative analysis of women’s legislative representation since 1950. European Journal of Political Research41(2): 233–253.
75.
StudlarDonley T.McAllisterIanHayesBernadette C. (1998) Explaining the gender gap in voting: A cross-national analysis. Social Science Quarterly79(4): 779–798.
76.
TaageperaRein (2002) Nationwide threshold of representation. Electoral Studies21(3): 383–401.
77.
ThomassenJacques (1994) Empirical research into political representation: Failing democracy or failing models. In: JenningsM. KentMannThomas E. (eds) Elections at Home and Abroad: Essays in Honor of Warren E. Miller. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 237–264.
78.
UraJoseph DanielEllisChristopher R. (2008) Income, preferences, and the dynamics of policy responsiveness. PS: Political Science & Politics41(1): 785–794.
79.
WängnerudLena (2000) Testing the politics of presence: Women’s representation in the Swedish Riksdag. Scandinavian Political Studies23: 67–91.
80.
WängnerudLenaSundellAnders (2012) Do politics matter? Women in Swedish local elected assemblies 1970–2010 and gender equality in outcomes. European Political Science Review4(1): 97–120.
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.
