Dynamics of candidate selection are central to political representation. The dominant model used to study the case of women focuses on the supply of and demand for female aspirants. This article develops a critique of this approach, by drawing on two sets of theoretical tools: institutionalism and feminism. It subsequently elaborates an alternative perspective on candidate selection based on configurations of three kinds of gendered institutions: systemic, practical, and normative. The utility of this approach is then explored through three paired comparisons of cases in which quota policies have been introduced, disrupting some but not necessarily all aspects of gendered institutional configurations.
Berkovitch, Nitza.1999. From motherhood to citizenship: Women’s rights and international organizations. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
2.
Black, Jerome H., and Lynda Erickson.2003. Women candidates and voter bias: Do women politicians need to be better?Electoral Studies22 (1): 81-100.
3.
Caul, Miki.1999. Women’s representation in parliament: The role of political parties. Party Politics5 (1): 79-98.
4.
Chappell, Louise.2006. Comparing political institutions: Revealing the gendered logics of appropriateness. Politics & Gender2 (2): 223-35.
5.
Childs, Sarah.2003. The Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002 and its implications. Representation39 (2): 83-93.
6.
Childs, Sarah, Joni Lovenduski, and Rosie Campbell.2005. Women at the top: Changing numbers, changing politics?London: Hansard Society.
7.
Critical perspectives on gender and politics: Feminist institutionalism. 2009. Special issue, Politics & Gender5 (2).
8.
Dahlerup, Drude.2001. "Men kvinderne vil jo ikke selv": Diskursen omkring betydningen af køn ved danske kommunevalg. Aalborg, Denmark: GEP.
9.
---. 2007. Electoral gender quotas: Between equality of opportunity and equality of result. Representation43 (2): 73-92.
10.
Dovi, Suzanne.2002. Preferable descriptive representatives: Will just any woman, black, or Latino do?American Political Science Review96 (4): 729-43.
11.
Duerst-Lahti, Georgia, and Rita Mae Kelly, eds. 1995. Gender power, leadership, and governance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
12.
Durrieu, Marcela.1999. Se dice de nosotras. Buenos Aires: Catálogos Editora.
13.
Ethington, Phillip, and Eileen McDonagh .1995. The eclectic center of the new institutionalism: Axes of analysis in comparative perspective. Social Science History19 (4): 467-77.
14.
Ferber, Marianne A., and Julie A. Nelson, eds. 1993. Beyond economic man: Feminist theory and economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15.
Franceschet, Susan.2005. Women and politics in Chile. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
16.
Freidenvall, Lenita.2006. Vägen till Varannan Damernas: Om Kvinnorepresentation, Kvotering och Kandidaturval i Svensk Politik 1970-2002. PhD diss., Stockholm University.
17.
Gaspard, Françoise.1994. De la parité: Genèse d’un concept, naissance d’un mouvement. Nouvelles questions féministes15 (4): 29-44.
18.
Greif, Avner, and David Laitin.2004. A theory of endogenous institutional change. American Political Science Review98 (4): 633-52.
19.
Gulrez, Fazila, and Sohail Warraich .1998. Women in politics: Update 1993-1997. In Women in politics: Participation and representation in Pakistan, with update 1993-1997, ed. Farida Shaheed, Asma Zia, and Sohail Warraich, 68-87. Lahore, Pakistan: Shirkat Gah.
20.
Hall, Peter A., and Rosemary C.R. Taylor.1996. Political science and the three new institutionalisms . Political Studies44 (5): 936-57.
21.
Harvey, Anna L.1998. Votes without leverage: Women in American electoral politics, 1920-1970. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22.
Hawkesworth, Mary.2003. Congressional enactments of race-gender: Toward a theory of raced-gendered institutions. American Political Science Review97 (4): 529-50.
23.
Hodgson, Geoffrey.1998. The approach of institutional economics. Journal of Economic Literature36 (1): 166-92.
24.
Inglehart, Ronald, and Pippa Norris.2003. Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world. New York: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Inhetveen, Katharina.1999. Can gender equality be institutionalized? The role of launching values in institutional innovation. International Sociology14 (4): 403-22.
26.
Inter-Parliamentary Union.1995. Women in parliaments, 1945-1995. World Statistical Survey. Geneva: Inter-Parliamentary Union.
27.
---. 2009a. Women in national parliaments: World classification. Situation as of 30 November 2008http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm (accessed January 15, 2009).
28.
---. 2009b. Women in National Parliaments: World average. Situation as of 30 November 2008http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/world.htm (accessed January 15, 2009).
29.
Jennings, Ann L.1993. Public or private? Institutional economics and feminism . In Beyond economic man: Feminist theory and economics, ed. Marianne A. Ferber and Julie A. Nelson, 111-30. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
Karlsson, Gunnel.1996. Från broderskap till systerskap: Det socialdemokratiska kvinnförbundets kamp för inflytande och makt i SAP. Lund, Sweden: Arkiv förlag.
31.
Kenney, Sally J.1996. New research on gendered institutions. Political Research Quarterly49 (2): 445-66.
32.
Kenny, Meryl.2007. Gender, institutions, and power: A critical review. Politics27 (2): 91-100.
33.
Kishwar, Madhu.1998. The logic of quotas: Women’s movement splits on the reservation bill. Manushi107:31-39.
34.
Kittilson, Miki Caul.2006. Challenging parties, changing parliaments: Women and elected office in contemporary western Europe. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
35.
Krook, Mona Lena.2007. Candidate gender quotas: A framework for analysis. European Journal of Political Research46 (3): 367-94.
36.
---. 2009. Quotas for women in politics: Gender and candidate selection reform worldwide. New York: Oxford University Press.
37.
Lawless, Jennifer L., and Richard L. Fox .2005. It takes a candidate: Why women don’t run for office. New York: Cambridge University Press.
38.
Lovenduski, Joni, and Pippa Norris, eds. 1993. Gender and party politics . Thousand Oaks: Sage.
39.
Lubertino Beltrán, Maria José.1992. Historia de la "Ley de Cuotas." In Cuotas mínima de participación de mujeres: El debate en Argentina, 9-43. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Fundación Friedrich Ebert .
40.
Mackay, Fiona.2008. "Thick" conceptions of substantive representation: Women, gender, and political institutions. Representation44 (2): 125-39.
41.
Manikyamba, P.1989. Women in Panchayati Raj structures. New Delhi, India: Gian.
42.
Manin, Bernard.1997. The principles of representative government. New York: Cambridge University Press.
43.
Matland, Richard E.1995. How the election system structure has helped women close the representation gap. In Women in Nordic politics: Closing the gap, ed. Lauri Karvonen and Per Selle, 281-309. Brookfield, VT: Dartmouth.
44.
Matland, Richard E., and Donley T. Studlar .1996. The contagion of women candidates in single-member district and proportional representation electoral systems: Canada and Norway. Journal of Politics58 (3): 707-33.
45.
Mossuz-Lavau, Janine.1998. Femmes/hommes pour la parité. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.
46.
Murray, Rainbow.2007. How parties evaluate compulsory quotas: A study of the implementation of the "parity" law in France. Parliamentary Affairs60 (4): 568-84.
47.
---. 2008. The power of sex and incumbency: A longitudinal study of electoral performance in France. Party Politics14 (5): 539-54.
48.
Nath, Meenakshi.1996. Cutting across party lines: Women members of parliament explain their stand on reservation quotas. Manushi96:7-16.
49.
Nelson, Julie A.1995. Feminism and economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives9 (2): 131-48.
50.
Niven, David.1998. Party elites and women candidates: The shape of bias. Women and Politics19 (2): 57-80.
51.
Norris, Pippa, ed. 1997. Passages to power: Legislative recruitment in advanced democracies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
52.
Norris, Pippa and Joni Lovenduski.1993. ‘If only more candidates came forward’: Supply-side explanations of candidate selection in Britain. British Journal of Political Science23 (3): 373-408.
53.
---. 1995. Political recruitment: Gender, race, and class in the British parliament. New York: Cambridge University Press.
54.
Norris, Pippa, Elizabeth Vallance, and Joni Lovenduski .1992. Do candidates make a difference? Gender, race, ideology, and incumbency. Parliamentary Affairs45 (4): 496-517.
55.
North, Douglass C.1990. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance . New York: Cambridge University Press.
56.
Orren, Karen and Stephen Skowronek.2004. The search for American political development. New York: Cambridge University Press.
57.
Perrigo, Sarah.1996. Women and change in the Labour Party 1979-1995. Parliamentary Affairs49 (1): 116-29.
58.
Phillips, Anne.1995. The politics of presence: The political representation of gender, ethnicity, and race. New York: Oxford University Press.
59.
Pierson, Paul.2000. Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review94 (2): 251-67.
60.
Ragin, Charles C.2000. Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
61.
Rahat, Gideon, and Reuven Y. Hazan.2001. Candidate selection methods: An analytical framework. Party Politics7 (3): 297-322.
62.
Randall, Vicky.1982. Women and politics. London: Macmillan. Rehfeld, Andrew. 2006. Towards a general theory of political representation. Journal of Politics68 (1): 1-21.
63.
Rizvi, Muddassir.2002. Women win record seats, but not activists’ hearts . Interpress Service, October 15, 2002.
64.
Russell, Meg.2000. Women’s representation in UK politics: What can be done with the law?London: Constitution Unit.
65.
Sainsbury, Diane.2004. Women’s political representation in Sweden: Discursive politics and institutional presence. Scandinavian Political Studies27 (1): 65-87.
66.
Saward, Michael.2006. The representative claim. Contemporary Political Theory5 (3): 297-318.
67.
Shaheed, Farida, Asma Zia, and Sohail Warraich .1998. Women in politics: Participation and representation in Pakistan, with update 1993-1997. Lahore, Pakistan: Shirkat Gah.
68.
Sineau, Mariette.2002. Institutionnalisation de la parité: L’expérience française. In Les femmes au parlement: Au-delà du nombre, 121-32. Stockholm, Sweden: International IDEA.
69.
Stimson, James A., Michael B. MacKuen, and Richard S. Erikson .1995. Dynamic representation. American Political Science Review89 (3): 543-65.
70.
Talbot, Ian.2003. Pakistan in 2002: Democracy, terrorism, and brinkmanship . Asian Survey43 (1): 198-207.
