This study offers a contextual explanation for discrepancies in women’s rates of election between European national legislatures and the European Parliament (EP). Many European Union (EU) member states elect more women to the EP than to their national lower legislative houses. However, the margin of difference between women’s presence in the EP and these national legislatures varies widely across member states. Using data for the EU-27, the study corroborates previous research in showing that institutional accounts offer limited leverage in explaining these varying gaps. Instead, it argues that the discrepancy between women’s descriptive representation at national and European levels in each case is the result of contextual factors: voters, parties, and upwardly mobile politicians’ valuation of the EP and EP service moderates the translation of the national pool of potential female candidates into EP officeholders.
BeauvalletWillyMichonSébastien. 2008. “Women in the European Parliament: Effects of the Voting System, Strategies and Political Resources: The Case of the French Delegation.” GSPE Working Paper 10/28/2008. http://aei.pitt.edu/12440/.
2.
BenedettoGiacomoHixSimon. 2007. “The Rejected, the Ejected, and the Dejected: Explaining Government Rebels in the 2001-2005 British House of Commons.”Comparative Political Studies40 (7): 755–81.
3.
CameronColinMillerDouglas. 2015. “A Practitioner’s Guide to Cluster-Robust Inference.”Journal of Human Resources50 (2): 317–73.
4.
ChivaCristina. 2014. “Gender, European Integration and Candidate Recruitment: The European Parliament Elections in the New EU Member States.”Parliamentary Affairs67 (2): 458–94.
5.
DahlerupDrudeFreidenvallLenita. 2005. “Quotas as a ‘Fast Track’ to Equal Representation for Women.”International Feminist Journal of Politics7 (1): 26–48.
Fortin-RittbergerJessicaRittbergerBerthold. 2014. “Do Electoral Rules Matter? Explaining National Differences in Women’s Representation in the European Parliament.”European Union Politics15 (4): 496–520.
8.
Fortin-RittbergerJessicaRittbergerBerthold. 2015. “Nominating Women for Europe: Exploring the Role of Political Parties’ Recruitment Procedures for European Parliament Elections.”European Journal of Political Research54 (4): 767–83.
9.
FranceschetSusanKrookMona LenaPiscopoJennifer. 2012. The Impact of Gender Quotas. New York: Oxford University Press.
10.
FreedmanJane. 2002. “Women in the European Parliament.”Parliamentary Affairs55 (1): 179–88.
HixSimonMarshMichael. 2007. “Punishment or Protest? Understanding European Parliament Elections.”Journal of Politics69 (2): 495–510.
14.
InglehartRonaldNorrisPippa. 2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15.
KauppiNiilo. 1999. “Power or Subjection? French Women Politicians in the European Parliament.”European Journal of Women’s Studies6 (3): 329–40.
16.
KingGaryRobertsMargaret. 2015. “How Robust Standard Errors Expose Methodological Problems They Do Not Fix, and What to Do about It.”Political Analysis23 (2): 159–79.
17.
KittilsonMiki Caul. 2005. “In Support of Gender Quotas: Setting New Standards, Bringing Visible Gains.”Politics & Gender1 (04): 638–45.
18.
KittilsonMiki Caul. 2006. Challenging Parties, Changing Parliaments. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
19.
KovářJanKovářKamil. 2012. “Women’s Representation in European Parliamentary Elections.”Politics in Central Europe8 (1): 5–34.
20.
KrookMona Lena. 2009. Quotas for Women in Politics: Gender and Candidate Selection Reform Worldwide. New York: Oxford University Press.
21.
KunovichSheri. 2012. “Unexpected Winners: The Significance of an Open-List System on Women’s Representation in Poland.”Politics & Gender8 (2): 153–77.
22.
LawlessJenniferFoxRichard Logan. 2005. It Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23.
LuttbegNorman. 1992. “Legislative Careers in Six States: Are Some Legislatures More Likely to be Responsive?”Legislative Studies Quarterly17 (1): 49–68.
24.
MatlandRichard E.1993. “Institutional Variables Affecting Female Representation in National Legislatures: The Case of Norway.”Journal of Politics55 (3): 737–55.
25.
MatlandRichard E.TaylorMichelle M.1997. “Electoral System Effects on Women’s Representation Theoretical Arguments and Evidence from Costa Rica.”Comparative Political Studies30 (2): 186–210.
26.
McCrackenKatieLovenduskiJoniMarquezSergioParryWillNiżyńskaAleksandraVárnagyRékaGhailaniDalilaŜidlauskienė.Virginija2015. “Analysis of Political Parties’ and Independent Candidates’ Policies for Gender Balance in the European Parliament after the Elections of 2014.” PE 536.448. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/536448/IPOL_STU(2015)536448_EN.pdf
27.
MeserveStephenPemsteinDanielBernhardWilliam. 2009. “Political Ambition and Legislative Behavior in the European Parliament.”Journal of Politics71 (3): 1015–32.
28.
MurrayRainbow. 2007. “How Parties Evaluate Compulsory Quotas: A Study of the ‘Parity’ Law in France.”Parliamentary Affairs60 (4): 568–84.
29.
NorrisPippa. 2004. Electoral Engineering: Voting Rules and Political Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
NorrisPippaLovenduskiJoni. 1995. Political Recruitment: Gender, Race, and Class in the British Parliament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31.
PaxtonPamelaHughesMelanie. 2013. Women, Politics, and Power: A Global Perspective. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
32.
PaxtonPamelaKunovichSheri. 2003. “Women’s Political Representation: The Importance of Ideology.”Social Forces82 (1): 87–113.
33.
ReifKarlheinzSchmittHermann. 1980. “Nine Second-Order National Elections: A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of European Election Results.”European Journal of Political Research8 (1): 3–44.
34.
ReynoldsAndrew. 1999. “Women in the Legislatures and Executives of the World.”World Politics51 (4): 547–72.
35.
RuleWilma. 1990. “Why More Women Are State Legislators.”The Western Political Quarterly43 (2): 437–48.
SanbonmatsuKira. 2002. “Political Parties and the Recruitment of Women to State Legislatures.”Journal of Politics64 (3): 791–809.
38.
ScarrowSusan. 1997. “Political Career Paths and the European Parliament.”Legislative Studies Quarterly22 (2): 253–63.
39.
SchlozmanKay LehmanBurnsNancyVerbaSidney. 1994. “Gender and the Pathways to Participation: The Role of Resources.”Journal of Politics56 (4): 963–90.
40.
SchmidtGregorySaundersKyle. 2004. “Effective Quotas, Relative Party Magnitude, and the Success of Female Candidates Peruvian Municipal Elections in Comparative Perspective.”Comparative Political Studies37 (6): 704–34.
41.
ShomerYael. 2009. “Candidate Selection Procedures, Seniority, and Vote-Seeking Behavior.”Comparative Political Studies42 (7): 945–70.
42.
StockemerDaniel. 2008. “Women’s Representation in Europe: A Comparison between the National Parliaments and the European Parliament.”Comparative European Politics6 (4): 463–85.
43.
ThamesFrankWilliamsMargaret. 2010. “Incentives for Personal Votes and Women’s Representation in Legislatures.”Comparative Political Studies43 (12): 1575–600.
44.
ValdiniMelody Ellis. 2013. “Electoral Institutions and the Manifestation of Bias: The Effect of the Personal Vote on the Representation of Women.”Politics & Gender9 (1): 76–92.
45.
VerzichelliLucaEdingerMichael. 2005. “A Critical Juncture? The 2004 European Elections and the Making of a Supranational Elite.”Journal of Legislative Studies11 (2): 254–74.
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.
