How do electoral rules shape the substantive representation of traditionally underrepresented groups? Using an original dataset of introduced and passed bills in the Korean National Assembly, which has both single-member districts and proportional representation, we examine the extent to which institutions condition the relationship between lawmaker gender and the substantive representation of women. While women lawmakers engage in higher levels of substantive representation of women, proportional representation allows both women and men to introduce more women’s issue bills than their counterparts elected through single-member districts. Furthermore, legislators elected through proportional representation are more effective at achieving passage of women’s issue legislation when compared with those elected in single-member districts, and this effect is especially pronounced for men. Our findings show that electoral systems matter for the representation of marginalized groups and that proportional representation systems allow both female and male politicians to increase their substantive representation of women.
AldrichJohn H.1995. Why Parties?Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
2.
AnsolabehereStephenJonesPhilip Edward. 2010. “Constituents’ Response to Congressional Roll Call Voting.” American Journal of Political Science54 (3): 583–97.
3.
AnziaSarah F.JackmanMolly C.2012. “Legislative Organization and the Second Face of Power: Evidence from U.S. State Legislatures.” The Journal of Politics75 (1): 210–24.
4.
AshworthScottBueno de MesquitaEthan. 2006. “Delivering the Goods: Legislative Particularism in Different Electoral and Institutional Settings.” The Journal of Politics68 (1): 168–79.
5.
BaldezLisa. 2007. “Primaries vs. Quotas: Gender and Candidate Nominations in Mexico, 2003.” Latin American Politics and Society49 (3): 69–96.
6.
BaldezLisa. 2011. “The UN Convention to Eliminate All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW): A New Way to Measure Women’s Interests.” Politics & Gender7 (3): 419–23.
7.
BarkerFionaCofféHilde. 2018. “Representing Diversity in Mixed Electoral Systems: The Case of New Zealand.” Parliamentary Affairs71 (3): 503–632.
8.
BarnesTiffany. 2016. Gendering Legislative Behavior: Institutional Constraints and Collaboration. New York: Cambridge University Press.
9.
BaumannMarkusDebusMarcKlingelhöferTristan. 2017. “Keeping One’s Seat: The Competitiveness of MP Renomination in Mixed-Member Electoral Systems.” The Journal of Politics79 (3): 979–94.
10.
BaumgartnerFrankBrouardSylvainGrossmanEmilianoLazardeuxSebastienMoodyJonathan. 2013. “Divided Government, Legislative Productivity, and Policy Change in the USA and France.” Governance26 (4): 423–47.
11.
BeckwithKaren. 2011. “Interests, Issues, and Preferences: Women’s Interests and Epiphenomena of Activism.” Politics & Gender7 (3): 424–29.
12.
BlaisAndreMassicotteLouis. 2002. “Electoral Systems.” In Comparing Democracies 2: Elections and Voting in Global Perspective, edited by LeDucLawrenceNiemiRichard G.NorrisPippa. 2nd ed., 40–70New York: SAGE.
BrattonKathleen A.HaynieKerry L.1999. “Agenda Setting and Legislative Success in State Legislatures: The Effects of Gender and Race.” The Journal of Politics61 (3): 658–79.
15.
Canes-WroneBrandiceBradyDavid W.CoganJohn F.2002. “Out of Step, Out of Office: Electoral Accountability and House Members’ Voting.” American Political Science Review96 (1): 127–40.
16.
CaprioliMary. 2000. “Gendered Conflict.” Journal of Peace Research37 (1): 51–68.
17.
CareyJohn M.2007. “Competing Principals, Political Institutions, and Party Unity in Legislative Voting.” American Journal of Political Science51 (1): 92–107.
18.
CarsonJamie L.KogerGregoryLeboMatthew J.YoungEverett. 2010. “The Electoral Costs of Party Loyalty in Congress.” American Journal of Political Science54 (3): 598–616.
19.
Caul KittelsonMikiSchwindt-BayerLeslie. 2012. The Gendered Effects of Political Institutions: Political Engagement and Participation. New York: Oxford University Press.
20.
ChaSeong-Ja. 2016. “The Legislation Related with Gender in the 19th National Assembly [19대 국회의 여성·가족 입법성과 한계].” Korean Journal of Gender and Law/젠더법학 8 (1): 35–64.
21.
ChoWonbin. 2012. “Accountability or Representation? How Electoral Systems Promote Public Trust in African Legislatures.” Governance25 (4): 617–37.
22.
CollieMelissa B.1985. “Voting Behavior in Legislatures.” In Handbook of Legislative Research, edited by LoewenbergGerhardPattersonSamuel C.JewellMalcolm E.471–502. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
23.
CoxGary W.FivaJon H.SmithDaniel M.2018. “Parties, Legislators, and the Origins of Proportional Representation.” Comparative Political Studies52 (1): 102–33.
24.
CoxGary W.McCubbinsMatthew D.2005. Setting the Agenda: Responsible Party Government in the U.S. House of Representatives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25.
CrispBrian F.2007. “Incentives in Mixed-member Electoral Systems.” Comparative Political Studies40 (12): 1460–85.
26.
DetrazNicolePeksenDursun. 2018. “‘Women Friendly’ Spending? Welfare Spending and Women’s Participation in the Economy and Politics.” Politics & Gender14:137–61.
27.
DodsonDebra. 2006. The Impact of Women in Congress. New York: Oxford University Press.
28.
EtoMikiko. 2010. “Women and Representation in Japan.” International Feminist Journal of Politics12 (2): 177–201.
29.
FranceschetSusanPiscopoJennifer M.2014. “Sustaining Gendered Practices? Power, Parties, and Elite Political Networks in Argentina.” Comparative Political Studies47 (1): 85–110.
30.
GammGeraldKousserThad. 2010. “Broad Bills or Particularistic Policy? Historical Pat terns in American State Legislatures.” American Political Science Review104 (1): 151–70.
31.
GreySandra. 2006. “Numbers and Beyond. The Relevance of Critical Mass in Gender Research.” Politics & Gender2 (4): 492–502.
32.
HöhmannDaniel. 2020. “When Do Female MPs Represent Women’s Interests? Electoral Systems and the Legislative Behavior of Women.” Political Research Quarterly73 (4): 834–47.
33.
HomolaJonathan. 2019. “Are Parties Equally Responsive to Women and Men?”British Journal of Political Science49:957–75.
34.
HuddyLeonieTerkildsenNayda. 1993. “Gender Stereotypes and the Perception of Male and Female Candidates.” American Journal of Political Science37 (1): 119–47.
35.
JeongHoi Ok. 2019. “The Analysis of Legislation Initiated by Congresswomen in the 17th-20th National Assembly of South Korea [17-20대 국회 여성의원의 법안 발의 분석].” Journal of Future Politics/미래정치연구 9 (1): 61–86.
36.
JeongMinseokLeeHyeon-woo. 2020. “Do Female Representatives Represent Females? The Evidence from 19th National Assembly of Republic of Korea [여성의원은 여성을 대표하는가? 제19대 국회 여성법안 발의를 중심으로].” Journal of Legislative Studies/의정연구 59:64–103.
37.
JeydelAlanaTaylorAndrew J.2003. “Are Women Legislators Less Effective? Evidence from the U.S. House in the 103rd-105th Congress.” Political Research Quarterly56 (1): 19–27.
38.
JonesMark P.1993. “The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws in Latin America and the Caribbean.” Electoral Studies12 (1): 59–75.
39.
JonesMark P.SaieghSebastianSpillerPablo T.TommasiMariano. 2002. “Amateur Legislators—Professional Politicians: The Consequences of Party-Centered Electoral Rules in a Federal System.” American Journal of Political Science46 (3): 656–69.
40.
KathleneLyn. 1994. “Power and Influence in State Legislative Policymaking: The Interaction of Gender and Position in Committee Hearing Debates.” American Journal of Political Science88 (3): 560–76.
41.
KenneySally J.1996. “New Research on Gendered Political Institutions.” Political Research Quarterly49 (2): 445–66.
42.
KerevelYann P.AtkesonLonna Rae. 2013. “Explaining the Marginalization of Women in Legislative Institutions.” The Journal of Politics75 (4): 980–92.
43.
KimGi DongLeeJae Mook. 2017. “The Influence of a Type of Members on Their Legislative Behavior [국회의원 선출유형에 따른 입법활동 차이 분석].” Korean Party Studies Review/한국정당학회보 16 (1): 101–35.
44.
KochMichaelFultonSarah. 2011. “In the Defense of Women: Gender, Office Holding, and National Security Policy in Established Democracies.” The Journal of Politics73 (1): 1–16.
45.
LancasterThomas D.PattersonW. David. 1990. “Comparative Pork Barrel Politics: Perceptions from the West German Bundestag.” Comparative Political Studies22 (4): 458–77.
46.
LangbeinLaura I.SigelmanLee. 1989. “Show Horses, Work Horses, and Dead Horses.” American Politics Quarterly17 (1): 80–95.
47.
LeeHyunjiShinKi-young. 2016. “Gender Quotas and Candidate Selection Process in South Korean Political Parties.” Pacific Affairs89 (2): 345–68.
48.
LeeYoung-Im. 2019. “South Korea: Women’s Political Representation.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Women’s Political Rights, edited by FranceschetSusanKrookMona LenaTanNetina53–72. 627–40. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
49.
LeeperMark S.1991. “The Impact of Prejudice on Female Candidates: An Experimental Look at Voter Inference.” American Politics Quarterly19 (2): 248–61.
50.
MacDonaldJason A.O’BrienErin E.2011. “Quasi-experimental Design, Constituency, and Advancing Women’s Interests: Reexamining the Influence of Gender on Substantive Representation.” Political Research Quarterly64 (2): 472–86.
51.
MatlandRichard E.BrownDeborah D.1992. “District Magnitude’s Effect on Female Representation in U.S. State Legislatures.” Legislative Studies Quarterly17 (4): 469–92.
52.
MatlandRichard E.StudlarDonley. 1996. “The Contagion of Women Candidates in Single-Member Districts and Proportional Representation: Canada and Norway.” The Journal of Politics58 (3): 707–33.
53.
MatthewsDonald R.1960. U.S. Senators and Their World. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
54.
McKeanMargaretScheinerEnthan. 2000. “Japan’s New Electoral System.” Electoral Studies19:447–77.
55.
O’BrienDiana Z.PiscopoJennifer M.2019. “The Impact of Women in Parliament.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Women’s Political Rights, edited by FranceschetSusanKrookMona LenaTanNetina (pp. 53–72). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
56.
PekkanenRobertNybladeBenjaminKraussEllis S.2006. “Electoral Incentives in Mixed-member Systems: Party, Posts, and Zombie Politicians in Japan.” American Political Science Review100 (2): 183–93.
57.
ReganPatrick M.PaskeviciuteAida. 2003. “Women’s Access to Politics and Peaceful States.” Journal of Peace Research40 (3): 287–302.
58.
ReingoldBeth. 1992. “Concepts of Representation among Female and Male State Legislators.” Legislative Studies Quarterly58 (2): 464–85.
Schwindt-BayerLeslie A.MishlerWilliam. 2005. “An Integrated Model of Women’s Representation.” The Journal of Politics67 (2): 407–28.
64.
ShimJaemin. 2021. “Gender and Politics in Northeast Asia: Legislative Patterns and Substantive Representation in Korea and Taiwan.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy42:138–55.
65.
ShinKi-young. 2014. “Women’s Sustainable Representation and the Spillover Effect of Electoral Gender Quotas in South Korea.” International Political Science Review35 (1): 80–92.
66.
ShugartMatthew SøbergValdiniMeoldy EllisSuominenKati. 2005. “Looking for Locals: Voter Information Demands and Personal Vote-earning Attributes of Legislators under Proportional Representation.” American Journal of Political Science49 (2): 437–49.
StratmannThomasBaurMartin. 2002. “Plurality Rule, Proportional Representation, and the German Bundestag: How Incentives to Pork-Barrel Differ Across Electoral Systems.” American Journal of Political Science46 (3): 506–14.
69.
SwersMichele L.1998. “Are Women More Likely to Vote for Women’s Issue Bills than Their Male Colleagues?”Legislative Studies Quarterly23 (3): 435–48.
70.
SwersMichele L.2005. “Connecting Descriptive and Substantive Representation: An Analysis of Sex Differences in Cosponsorship Activity.” Legislative Studies Quarterly30 (3): 407–33.
71.
ThamesFrank C.2017. “Understanding the Impact of Electoral Systems on Women’s Representation.” Politics & Gender13:379–404.
72.
ThamesFrank C.WilliamsMargaret. 2013. Contagious Representation: Women’s Political Representation in Democracies around the World. New York: New York University Press.
73.
ThomasSue. 1991. “The Impact of Women on State Legislative Policies.” The Journal of Politics54 (4): 958–76.
74.
ThomasSue. 1994. How Women Legislate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
75.
TremblayManon. 2007. “Electoral Systems and Substantive Representation of Women.” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics45 (3): 278–302.
76.
VengroffRichardNyiriZsoltFugieroMelissa. 2003. “Electoral System and Gender Representation in Sub-national Legislatures: Is there a National–Sub-national Gender Gap?”Political Research Quarterly56 (2): 163–73.
77.
VoldenCraigWisemanAlan E.2014. Legislative Effectiveness in the United States Congress. New York: Cambridge University Press.
78.
VoldenCraigWisemanAlan E.WittmerDana E.2018. “Women’s Issues and Their Fates in the U.S. Congress.” Political Science Research and Methods6 (4): 679–96.
79.
VolkensAndreaKrauseWernerLehmannPolaMatthießTheresMerzNicolasRegelSvenWeßelsBernhard. 2018. “The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Version 2018b.” https://doi.org/10.25522/manifesto.mpds.2018b.
80.
WelchSusanStudlarDonley T.1990. “Multi-member Districts and the Representation of Women: Evidence from Britain and the United States.” The Journal of Politics52 (2): 391–412.
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.
