Chile altered its electoral rules for municipal elections in 2002. The new rules separated mayoral and council member elections, and while the latter continue to use proportional representation, mayors are now chosen based on plurality. These changes serve as a natural test of the effects of electoral rules on women’s political representation. The Chilean case demonstrates (1) that electoral reform is gendered, (2) that women’s representation is shaped by both formal and informal rules, and (3) that electoral rules have different effects on mayoral and council member positions, demonstrating that the “glass ceiling” for executive positions is harder to crack.
AltmanDavid. 2008. “Political Recruitment and Candidate Selection in Chile, 1990–2006: The Executive Branch.” In Pathways to Power: Political Recruitment and Candidate Selection in Latin America, edited by SiavelisPeterMorgensternScott, 241-70. University Park: Penn State University Press.
2.
BunkerKenneth. 2008. “Modificaciones y reformas al sistema electoral municipal en Chile, 1992–2008” (Observatorio Electoral UDP, Working Paper 1(3)). Santiago: Diego Portales University.
3.
CareyJohn M.PeterSiavelis. 2006. “Election Insurance and Coalition Survival: Formal and Informal Institutions in Chile.” In Informal Institutions and Democracy: Lessons from Latin America, edited by HelmkeGretchenLevitskySteven, 160-77. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
4.
CaulMiki. 1999. “Women’s Representation in Parliament: The Role of Political Parties.” Party Politics5:79-98.
5.
CaulMiki. 2001. “Political Parties and the Adoption of Candidate Gender Quotas: A Cross-National Analysis.” Journal of Politics63:1214-29.
6.
DarcyRobertWelchSusanClarkJanet. 1994. Women, Elections, and Representation. 2nd ed.Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
7.
DolanKathleen. 2004. Voting for Women: How the Public Evaluates Women Candidates. Boulder, CO: Westview.
FoxRichard L.LawlessJennifer. 2004. “Entering the Arena? Gender and the Decision to Run for Office.” American Journal of Political Science48:262-80.
10.
FranceschetSusan. 2005. Women and Politics in Chile. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
11.
FranceschetSusan. 2010. “Continuity or Change? In Gender Policy in the Bachelet Administration.” In The Bachelet Government, edited by BorzutzkySilviaWeeksGregory, 158-180. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.
12.
HelmkeGretchenLevitskySteven. 2006. “Introduction.” In Informal Institutions and Democracy: Lessons from Latin America, edited by HelmkeGretchenLevitskySteven, 1-32. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
13.
HinojosaMagda. 2002. “Municipales 2004: Se Buscan Candidatas Mujeres.” www.electoral.cl.
14.
HinojosaMagda. 2009. “‘Whatever the Party Asks of Me’: Women’s Political Representation in Chile’s Unión Demócrata Independiente.” Politics & Gender5:377-407.
15.
HinojosaMagda. Forthcoming. Selecting Women, Electing Women: Women’s Political Representation and Candidate Selection in Latin America. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
16.
InglehartRonaldNorrisPippa. 2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17.
KahnKim. 1996. The Political Consequences of Being a Woman. New York: Columbia University Press.
18.
KaminskyJackieWhiteTimothy J.2007. “Electoral Systems and Women’s Representation in Australia.” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics45:185-201.
19.
KrookMona Lena. 2010. “Studying Women’s Representation: A Comparative-Gendered Approach.” Perspectives on Politics8:333-40.
20.
LovenduskiJoniNorrisPippa. 1993. Gender and Party Politics. London: SAGE.
21.
MatlandRichard E.StudlarDonley T.1996. “The Contagion of Women Candidates in Single and Multi-member District Systems: Canada and Norway.” Journal of Politics58:707-73.
22.
NivenDavid. 1998. “Party Elites and Women Candidates: The Shape of Bias.” Women & Politics19:57-80.
23.
NorrisPippa. 1993. “Comparative Legislative Recruitment.” In Gender and Party Politics, edited by LovenduskiJoniNorrisPippa, London: SAGE.
24.
NorrisPippaLovenduskiJoni. 1995. Political Recruitment: Gender, Race and Class in the British Parliament. New York: Cambridge University Press.
25.
PaxtonPamelaKunovichSherri. 2003. “Women’s Political Representation: The Importance of Ideology.” Social Forces82:87-114.
26.
PetersonV. SpikeRunyanAnne Sisson. 1999. Global Gender Issues. Boulder, CO: Westview.
27.
PhillipsAnne. 1995. The Politics of Presence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
28.
PosnerPaul W.1999. “Popular Representation and Political Dissatisfaction in Chile’s New Democracy.” Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs41:59-85.
29.
PosnerPaul W.2004. “Local Democracy and the Transformation of Popular Participation in Chile.” Latin American Politics and Society46 (3): 55-81.
30.
RabkinRhoda. 1996. “Redemocratization, Electoral Engineering, and Party Strategies in Chile, 1989–1995.” Comparative Political Studies29:335-56.
31.
RehrenAlfredo J.1991. “El Impacto De Las Politicas Autoritarias a Nivel Local: Implicancias Para La Consolidación Democrática En Chile.” Estudios Públicos44:207-46.
32.
ReynoldsAndrew. 1999. “Women in Legislatures and Executives of the World: Knocking at the Highest Glass Ceiling.” World Politics51:547-72.
33.
RíosMarcelaAndrésVillar. 2006. “Mujeres en el Congreso 2006-2010.” Observatorio2: 1-6.
34.
RojasPriscilla. 2008. “Historia Alianza por Chile: Elecciones Municipales 1992–2004” (Observatorio Electoral UDP, Working Paper 1(5)). Santiago: Diego Portales University.
35.
RozaVivian. 2010. “Gatekeepers to Power: Party-Level Influences on Women’s Political Participation in Latin America.” PhD thesis, Georgetown University.
36.
RuleWilma. 1987. “Electoral Systems, Contextual Factors, and Women’s Opportunities for Election to Parliament in Twenty-three Democracies.” Western Political Quarterly40:477-98.
37.
RuleWilmaNorrisPippa. 1992. “Anglo and Minority Women’s Underrepresentation in Congress: Is the Electoral System the Culprit?” In United States Electoral Systems: Their Impact on Women and Minorities, edited by RuleWilmaZimmermanJoseph, 41-54. New York: Greenwood.
38.
Schwindt-BayerLeslie. 2005. “The Incumbency Advantage and Women’s Election to Legislative Office.” Electoral Studies24:227-44.
39.
Schwindt-BayerLeslie. 2006. “Still Supermadres? Gender and the Policy Priorities of Latin American Legislators.” American Journal of Political Science50:570-85.
40.
ScullyTimothy R.1996. “Chile: The Political Underpinnings of Economic Liberalization.” In Constructing Democratic Governance: South America in the 1990s, edited by DomínguezJorge I.LowenthalAbraham F., 99-117. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
41.
SiavelisPeter. 1997. “Continuity and Change in the Chilean Party System: On the Transformational Effects of Electoral Reform.” Comparative Political Studies30:651-74.
42.
SiavelisPeter. 2002. “The Hidden Logic of Candidate Selection for Chilean Parliamentary Elections.” Comparative Politics34:419-38.
43.
SiavelisPeter. 2005. “The Hidden Logic of Candidate Selection for Chilean Parliamentary Elections.” Estudios Públicos98:1-32.
44.
SiavelisPeter. 2006. “Accommodating Informal Institutions and Chilean Democracy.” In Informal Institutions and Democracy: Lessons from Latin America, edited by HelmkeGretchenLevitskySteven, 33-55. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
45.
StudlarDonleyMcAllisterIan. 2002. “Does a Critical Mass Exist? A Comparative Analysis of Women’s Legislative Representation since 1950.” European Journal of Political Research41:233-53.
46.
Taylor-RobinsonMichelle M.HeathRoseanna M.2003. “Do Women Legislators Have Different Policy Priorities Than Their Male Colleagues? A Critical Case Test.” Women & Politics24 (4): 77-101.
47.
TremblayManon, ed. 2008. Women and Legislative Representation: Electoral Systems, Political Parties, and Sex Quotas. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
48.
TremblayManonPelletierRéjean. 2001. “More Women Constituency Party Presidents: A Strategy for Increasing the Number of Women Candidates in Canada?” Party Politics7:157-90.
49.
WelchSusanStudlarDonley T.1996. “The Opportunity Structure for Women’s Candidacies and Electability in Britain and the United States.” Political Research Quarterly49:861-74.
50.
ValenzuelaJ. SamuelScullyTimothy R.1997. “Electoral Choices and the Party System in Chile: Continuities and Changes at the Recovery of Democracy.” Comparative Politics29: 511-527.
51.
WelchSusanStudlarDonley T.1990. “Multi-Member Districts and the Representation of Women: Evidence from Britain and the United States.” Journal of Politics52(2): 391-412.
