Previous scholarship has linked increased representation of women, racial/ethnic minorities, the LGB community, and the working class to more representative legislative agendas and roll call voting. But it is unclear if descriptive representation of historically excluded groups also affects policy innovativeness. Borrowing from interdisciplinary research, we argue that diverse legislatures are more innovative, so long as legislators operate in a quality deliberative environment. We measure the descriptive representation of seven different underrepresented groups in state legislatures from 1984 to 2016. We find that representation of women is a key predictor of innovation, operationalized as the tendency for states to adopt new policies early. We also find the effect of women is not dependent on critical mass, is undermined by high levels of polarization, and helps boost the capacity of legislatures to produce unique policy language. Some models are suggestive of a relationship between racial/ethnic minority (Black, Latinx, Native American) representation and innovation, but the results are inconsistent. The study provides insights into how representation of women can enhance legislative capacity to innovate in public policy.
AnziaSarah F.BerryChristopher R.. 2011. “The Jackie and Jill Robinson Effect: Why do Congresswomen Outperform Congressmen?” American Journal of Political Science55 (3): 478–493.
2.
BanPamelaGrimmerJustinKaslovskyJaclynWestEmily. 2022. “How Does the Rising Number of Women in the U.S. Congress Change Deliberation? Evidence from House Committee Hearings.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science17: 355–387.
3.
BarberMichaelMcCartyNolan. 2015. “Causes and Consequences of Polarization.” In Solutions to Political Polarization in America, edited by MansbridgeJ.MartinC. J., 19–53. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.
4.
BerryFrances S.BerryWilliam D.. 1990. “State Lottery Adoptions as Policy Innovations: An Event History Analysis.” American Political Science Review84: 395–415.
5.
BerryFrances S.1994. “Sizing Up State Policy Innovation Research.” Policy Studies Journal22 (3): 442–456.
BoehmkeFrederick J.WitmerRichard. 2004. “Disentangling Diffusion: The Effects of Social Learning and Economic Competition on State Policy Innovation and Expansion.” Political Research Quarterly57 (1): 39–51.
8.
BoehmkeFrederick J.BrockwayMarkDesmaraisBruce A.HardenJeffrey J.LaCombeScottLinderFridolinWallachHanna. 2020. “SPID: A New Database for Inferring Public Policy Innovativeness and Diffusion Networks.” Policy Studies Journal48 (2): 517–545.
9.
BouchéVanessaWittmerDana E.. 2015. “Gendered Diffusion on Gendered Issues: The Case of Human Trafficking.” Journal of Public Policy35 (1): 1–33.
10.
BrattonKathleen A.2002. “The Effect of Legislative Diversity on Agenda Setting: Evidence from Six State Legislatures.” American Politics Research30 (2): 115–142.
11.
BrattonKathleen A.2005. “Critical Mass Theory Revisited: The Behavior and Success of Token Women in State Legislatures.” Politics and Gender1 (1): 97–105.
12.
BrattonKathleen A.HaynieKerry L.. 1999. “Agenda-Setting and Legislative Success in State Legislatures: The Effects of Gender and Race.” Journal of Politics61 (3): 658‐679.
13.
BroockmanDavid E.2013. “Black Politicians are More Intrinsically Motivated to Advance Blacks’ Interests: A Field Experiment Manipulating Political Incentives.” American Journal of Political Science57: 521–536.
14.
BullockCharles S.IIIHicksWilliam D.HoodM. V.IIIMcKeeSethSmithDaniel A.. 2020. “The Election of African American State Legislators in the Modern South.” Legislative Studies Quarterly45 (4): 581–608.
15.
ButlerDaniel M.BroockmanDavid E.. 2011. “Do Politicians Racially Discriminate Against Constituents? A Field Experiment on State Legislators.” American Journal of Political Science55: 794–812.
16.
CarnesNicholas. 2012. “Does the Numerical Underrepresentation of the Working Class in Congress Matter?” Legislative Studies Quarterly37 (1): 5–34.
17.
CarnesNicholas. 2013. White-Collar Government: The Hidden Role of Class in Economic Policymaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18.
CarnesNicholas. 2018. The Cash Ceiling: Why Only the Rich Run for Office and What We Can Do About It. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
19.
CaugheyDevinWarshawChristopher. 2015. “The Dynamics of State Policy Liberalism, 1936-2014.” American Journal of Political Science60 (4): 899–913.
20.
ChenJieLeungWoon SauEvansKevin P.. 2018. “Female Representation, Corporate Innovation, and Firm Performance.” Journal of Empirical Finance48: 236–254.
21.
ClarkChristopher. Gaining Voice: The Causes and Consequences of Black Representation in the American States. Oxford University Press, 2019.
22.
DorrellRobert M.Jr.JansaJoshua M.. Copy, paste, legislate, succeed? The effect of policy plagiarism on policy success. Policy & Politics2022, doi:https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16445954252430
GarrettKristin N.JansaJoshua M.. 2015. “Interest Group Influence in Policy Diffusion Networks.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly15: 387‐417.
25.
GomezL. E.BernetPatrick. 2019. “Diversity Improves Performance and Outcomes.” Journal of the National Medical Association111 (4): 383–392.
26.
GossettCharles W.2014. “Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual State Legislators in the United States Developing a New Database.” SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2450622. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2450622
27.
GrayVirginia H.1973. “Innovation in the States: A Diffusion Study.” American Political Science Review67: 1174–1185.
28.
GriffinJohn D.2014. “When and Why Minority Legislators Matter.” Annual Review of Political Science17: 327–36.
29.
GrossmannMattJordanMarty P.McCrainJoshua. 2020. “The Correlates of State Policy and the Structure of State Panel Data.” Institute for Public Policy and Social Research (IPPSR).
30.
Espirito-SantoAnaFreireAndreSerra-SilvaSofia. 2018. “Does women’s descriptive representation matter for policy preferences: The role of political parties.” Party Politics26: 2.
31.
FunkKendall D.PaulHannah L.PhillipsAndrew Q.. 2022. “Point Break: Using Maching Learning to Uncover a Critical Mass in Women’s Representation.” Political Science Research and Methods10: 372–390.
32.
HabermasJurgen. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press. Translated by T. Burger with the Assistance of F. Lawrence.
33.
HabermasJurgen. 1995. “Address: Multiculturalism and the Liberal State.” Stanford Law Review47 (5): 849–854.
34.
Haider-MarkelDonald P.2007. “Representation and Backlash: The Positive and Negative Influence of Descriptive Representation.” Legislative Studies Quarterly32 (1): 107–133.
35.
HansenEric R.JansaJoshua M.. 2021. “Complexity, Resources, and Text Borrowing in State Legislatures.” Journal of Public Policy41 (4): 752–775.
36.
HardenJeffrey J.ClarkChristopher J.. A Legislature or a Legislator Like Me? Citizen Demand for Collective Dyadic Political Representation. American Politics Research2016; 44(2): 247–271.
37.
HerrickRebekah. 2009. “The Effects of Sexual Orientation on Legislators’ Behavior and Priorities.” Journal of Homosexuality56 (8): 1117–1133.
38.
HoeverInga Jvan KnippenbergDaanvan GinkelWendy P.BarkemaHarry G.. 2012. “Fostering Team Creativity: Perspective Taking as Key to Unlocking Diversity’s Potential.” Journal of Applied Psychology97 (5): 982–996.
39.
JansaJoshua M.HansenEric R.GrayVirginia H.. 2019. “Copy and Paste Lawmaking: Legislative Professionalism and Policy Reinvention in the States.” American Politics Research47 (4): 739–767.
40.
JanssensMaddyZanoniPatrizia. 2005. “Many Diversities for Many Services: Theorizing Diversity (Management) in Service Companies.” Human Relations58: 311–340.
41.
KanterRosabeth Moss. 1977. “Some Effects of Proportions on Group Life: Skewed Sex Ratios and Responses to Token Women.” American Journal of Sociology82 (5): 965–990.
42.
KearneyEricGebertDiether. 2009. “Managing Diversity and Enhancing Team Outcomes: The Promise of Transformational Leadership.” Journal of Applied Psychology94 (1): 77–89.
43.
KimDaehyunStarksLaura T.. 2016. “Gender Diversity on Corporate Boards: Do Women Contribute Unique Skills?” American Economic Review106 (5): 267–271.
KropkoJonathanKubinecRobert. 2020. “Interpretation and identification of within-unit and cross-sectional variation in panel data models.” PLoS ONE15 (4): e0231349. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231349
46.
LawlessJennifer. 2015. “Female Candidates and Legislators.” Annual Review of Political Science18: 349–366.
47.
LinderFridolinDesmaraisBruce A.BurgessMatthewGiraudyEugenia. 2020. “Text as Policy: Measuring Policy Similarity through Bill Text Reuse.” Policy Studies Journal48 (2): 546–574.
48.
MakseTodd. 2019. “Professional Backgrounds in State Legislatures: 1993-2012.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly19 (3): 312–333.
49.
MakseTodd. 2022. “Instant Credibility: The Conditional Role of Professional Background in Policymaking Success.” Political Research Quarterly75 (1): 118–33.
50.
MallinsonDaniel J.2021. “Who Are Your Neighbors? The Role of Ideology and Decline of Geographic Proximity in the Diffusion of Policy Innovations.” Policy Studies Journal49 (1): 67–88.
51.
MansbridgeJane. 1999. “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent ’Yes.” Journal of Politics61 (3): 628–657.
52.
MendelbergTaliKarpowitzChristopher F.OliphantJ. Baxter. 2014. “Gender Inequality in Deliberation: Unpacking the Black Box of Interaction.” Perspectives on Politics12 (1): 18–44.
53.
MillerToyahTrianaMaria Del Carmen. 2009. “Demographic Diversity in the Boardroom: Mediators of the Board Diversity–Firm Performance Relationship.” Journal of Management Studies46: 755–786.
54.
MintaMichael D.2009. “Legislative Oversight and the Substantative Representation of Black and Latino Interests in Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly34 (2): 193–218.
55.
MintaMichael D.Sinclair-ChapmanValeria. 2013. “Diversity in Political Institutions and Congressional Repsonsiveness to Minority Interests.” Political Research Quarterly66 (1): 127–140.
56.
MooneyChristopher Z.2020. The Study of US State Policy Diffusion: What Hath Walker Wrought?Cambridge University Press.
57.
MooneyChristopher Z.LeeMei-Hsien. Legislative Morality in the American States: The Case of Pre-Roe Abortion Regulation Reform. American Journal of Political Science1995; 39(3): 599–627.
OsbornTracy L.2012. How Women Represent Women: Political Parties, Gender and Representation in the State Legislatures. Oxford University Press.
60.
ParinandiSrinivas C.2020. “Policy Inventing and Borrowing Among State Legislatures.” American Journal of Political Science64: 852–868.
61.
ParryJanineDowdleAndrewLongAbigail B.KlossJessica R.. 2022. “The Rule, Not the Exception: One-Party Monopolies in the American States.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly22 (2): 226–245.
62.
PittsDavid W.2007. “Representative Bureaucracy, Ethnicity, and Public Schools: Examining the Link Between Representation and Performance.” Administration & Society39 (4): 497–526.
63.
PoggioneSarah. 2004. “Exploring Gender Differences in State Legislators’ Policy Preferences.” Political Research Quarterly57 (2): 305–314.
64.
PreuhsRobert. 2007. “Descriptive Representation as a Mechanism to Mitigate Policy Backlash: Latino Incorporation and Welfare Policy in the American States.” Political Research Quarterly60 (2): 277–292.
65.
RawlsJohn. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
66.
ReingoldBethSmithAdrienne R.. 2012. “Welfare Policymaking and Intersections of Race, Ethnicity, and Gender in U.S. State Legislatures.” American Journal of Political Science56 (1): 131–147.
67.
ReynoldsAndrew. 2013. “Representation and Rights: The Impact of LGBT Legislators in Comparative Perspective.” American Political Science Review107 (2): 259–274.
68.
RochaRene R.HawesDaniel P.. 2009. “Racial Diversity, Representative Bureaucracy, and Equity in Multiracial School Districts.” Social Science Quarterly90 (2): 326–344.
69.
SchneiderhanErikKhanShamusElrickJennifer. 2014. “Deliberation and Ethnicity.” Sociological Forum29: 791–807.
70.
ShorBorisMcCartyNolan. 2011. “The Ideological Mapping of American Legislatures.” American Political Science Review105 (3): 530–551.
71.
SouvorovaJanna. 2011. “State Legislatures Diversity, Innovation, and Policy Adoption.” Electronic Theses and Dissertations. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/1973
72.
SquirePeverill. 2017. “A Squire Index Update.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly17 (4): 361–371.
73.
SwersMichele L.2005. “Connecting Descriptive and Substantive Representation: An Analysis of Sex Differences in Cosponsorship Activity.” Legislative Studies Quarterly30 (3): 407–433.
74.
ThomasSue. 1991. “The Impact of Women on State Legislative Policies.” Journal of Politics53 (4): 958–976.
75.
ThomasSue. 1994. How Women Legislate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Van DijkHansVan EngenMarloes L.Van KnippenbergDaan. 2012. “Defying Conventional Wisdom: A Meta-Analytical Examination of the Differences Between Demographic and Job-Related Diversity Relationships With Performance.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes119 (1): 38–53.
78.
Van KippenbergDaanHoeverInga J.. Team Diversity and Team Creativity. In: Reiter-PalmonRoni (ed) Team Creativity and Innovation. Oxford University Press, 2018, pp. 41–60.
79.
VallsVíctorGonzález-RomáVicenteTomásInés. 2016. “Linking Educational Diversity and Team Performance: Team Communication Quality and Innovation Team Climate Matter.” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology89 (4): 751‐771.
80.
VoldenCraigWisemanAlan E.WittmerDana E.. 2013. “When are Women More Effective Lawmakers than Men?” American Journal of Political Science57 (2): 326‐41.
81.
WalkerJack L.1969. “The Diffusion Of Innovations Among the American States.” American Political Science Review63: 880–899.
82.
HicksWilliam D.KlarnerCarl E.McKeeSeth C.SmithDaniel A.. Revisiting Majority-Minority Districts and Black Representation. Political Research Quarterly2018.
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.
