Do female candidates give up running for office after losing more readily than their male counter-parts? I address this question by employing a regression discontinuity between last winners and first losers in city council elections in Brazil. The results show that losing an election diminishes the chances of running again for both genders. However, the effect is large for women. I offer an explanation for this gender gap in rerunning by developing a model based on the distribution of campaign financial resources among candidates. I argue that female candidates receive fewer financial resources from donors and their political parties than male candidates. Consequently, to run for office, women often need to use more of their own money. This leads to a faster depletion of their personal financial resources and, ultimately, a greater likelihood of them dropping out of politics. The argument is supported by evidence on campaign financing for the same period.
AguilarR.CunowS.DesposatoS.. 2015. “Choice Sets, Gender, and Candidate Choice in Brazil.” Electoral Studies39: 230–242.
2.
AnagolS.FujiwaraT.. 2016. “The Runner-Up Effect.” Journal of Political Economy124 (4): 927–991.
3.
AraújoC.. 2013. “Cotas Femininas e Financiamento de Campanha.” Cadernos Adenauer14 (3): 11–30.
4.
BarnesT. D.BurchardS. M.. 2013. “‘Engendering’ Politics: The Impact of Descriptive Representation on Women’s Political Engagement in Sub-Saharan Africa.” Comparative Political Studies46 (7): 767–790.
5.
BernhardR.de Benedictis-KessnerJ.. 2021. “Men and Women Candidates Are Similarly Persistent After Losing Elections.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences118: 26.
6.
BiroliF.2016. “Political Violence Against Women in Brazil: Expressions and Definitions.” Revista Direito e Práxis7 (15): 557–589.
7.
BiroliF.2018. “Reação Conservadora, Democracia e Conhecimento.” Revista de Antropologia61 (1): 83–94.
8.
BohnS. R.2023. “Women and Candidate Quality in the Elections for the Senate: Brazil and the United States in Comparative Perspective.” Brazilian Political Science Review1: 74–107.
9.
BrattonK. A.RayL. P.. Descriptive Representation, Policy Outcomes, and Municipal Day-Care Coverage in Norway. American Journal of Political Science. 2002; 42(2): 428–437.
10.
BrownA. R.2013. “Does Money Buy Votes? The Case of Self-Financed Gubernatorial Candidates, 1998-2008.” Political Behavior35 (1): 21–41.
11.
BrownR.MansourH.O’ConnellS. D.ReevesJ.. Gender Differences in Political Career Progression: Evidence from U.S. Elections. SSRN, 2021.
CalonicoS.CattaneoM. D.TitiunikR.. 2014b. “Robust Data-Driven Inference in the Regression-Discontinuity Design.” Stata Journal14 (4): 909–946.
14.
Campos Fernandez HottH. A.Menezes-FilhoN.. Length of Candidate Lists and Political Careers: Quasi-Experimental Evidence from Brazil. Party Politics, 2023.
15.
CanonD. T.1993. “Sacrificial Lambs or Strategic Politicians? Political Amateurs in U.S. House Elections.” American Journal of Political Science37 (4): 1119–1141.
16.
CarrollS. J.SanbonmatsuK.. More Women Can Run: Gender and Pathways to the State Legislatures. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.
17.
CelisK.ChildsS.. Feminist Democratic Representation. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020.
18.
ChattopadhyayR.DufloE.. 2004. “Women as Policy Makers: Evidence from a Randomized Policy Experiment in India.” Econometrica72 (5): 1409–1443.
19.
DahlerupD. (ed). Women, Quotas and Politics. New York: Routledge, 2006.
20.
DolanJ.ShahP.. 2020. “She Persisted: Gender, Electoral Loss, and the Decision to Run Again.” Political Research Quarterly73 (4): 957–966.
21.
Escobar-LemmonM.Taylor-RobinsonM. M.. How do candidate recruitment and selection processes affect the representation of women? In: SiavelisP. M.MorgensternS. (eds) Pathways to Power: Political Recruitment and Candidate Selection in Latin America. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2008, pp. 345–368.
22.
FoxR. L.LawlessJ. L.. 2010. “If Only They’d Ask: Gender, Recruitment, and Political Ambition.” The Journal of Politics72 (2): 310–326.
23.
FragaB. L.HassellH. J.. 2021. “Are Minority and Women Candidates Penalized by Party Politics? Race, Gender, and Access to Party Support.” Political Research Quarterly74 (3): 540–555.
24.
FranceschetS.KrookM. L.PiscopoJ. M.. The Impact of Gender Quotas. OUP USA, 2012.
25.
FultonS. A.MaestasC. D.MaiselL. S.StoneW. J.. 2006. “The Sense of a Woman: Gender, Ambition, and the Decision to Run for Congress.” Political Research Quarterly59 (2): 235–248.
26.
Gavan-KoopD.SmithP. J.. 2008. “Gendering Local Governing: Canadian and Comparative Lessons–The Case of Metropolitan Vancouver.” Canadian Political Science Review2 (3): 152–171.
27.
GiraudyA.MoncadaE.SnyderR.. 2021. “El Análisis Subnacional: Aportes Teóricos y Metodológicos a la Política Comparada.” Revista de ciencia política (Santiago)41 (1): 1–34.
28.
GóreckiM. A.KukołowiczP.. 2014. “Gender Quotas, Candidate Background and the Election of Women: A Paradox of Gender Quotas in Open-List Proportional Representation Systems.” Electoral Studies36: 65–80.
29.
HaimeA.VallejoA.Schwindt-BayerL.. 2022. “Candidate Experience and Electoral Success.” Latin American Research Review57 (1): 170–187.
30.
HoganR. E.. 2007. “The Effects of Candidate Gender on Campaign Spending in State Legislative Elections.” Social Science Quarterly88 (5): 1092–1105.
31.
ImbensG.KalyanaramanK.. 2012. “Optimal Bandwidth Choice for the Regression Discontinuity Estimator.” The Review of Economic Studies79 (3): 933–959.
JanuszA.BarreiroS.-N.CintronE.. Political Parties and Campaign Resource Allocation: Gender Gaps in Brazilian Elections. Party Politics. 2021; 28(5): 854–864.
34.
JenkinsS.2007. “A Woman’s Work is Never Done? Fund-Raising Perception and Effort Among Female State Legislative Candidates.” Political Research Quarterly60 (2): 230–239.
35.
JonesM. P.2009. “Gender Quotas, Electoral Laws, and the Election of Women: Evidence from the Latin American Vanguard.” Comparative Political Studies42 (1): 56–81.
36.
JonesM. P.NaviaP.. 1999. “Assessing the Effectiveness of Gender Quotas in Open-List Proportional Representation Electoral Systems.” Social Science Quarterly80: 341–355.
37.
KanthakK.WoonJ.. 2015. “Women Don’t Run? Election Aversion and Candidate Entry.” American Journal of Political Science59 (3): 595–612.
38.
KrebsT. B.1999. “The Political and Demographic Predictors of Candidate Emergence in City Council Elections.” Urban Affairs Review35 (2): 279–300.
39.
LawlessJ. L.FoxR. L.. It Still Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
40.
MackW. R.. 1998. “Repeat Challengers: Are They the Best Challengers Around?” American Politics Research26 (3): 308–343.
41.
MoisésJ. A.SanchezB. R.. Women’s Political Representation in Brazil. Gender and Power: Towards Equality and Democratic Governance. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016, pp. 11–34.
42.
MurrayR.2014. “Quotas for Men: Reframing Gender Quotas as a Means of Improving Representation for All.” American Political Science Review108 (3): 520–532.
43.
NorrisP.Electoral Engineering: Voting Rules and Political Behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
44.
PeixotoV. d. M.MarquesL. M.RibeiroL. M.. 2022. “Financiamento de Campanhas e Desempenho Eleitoral das Mulheres nas Eleições Brasileiras (1998–2020).” Estudos Avançados36: 93–116.
45.
PhillipsA.The Politics of Presence. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
46.
PintoC. R. J.SilveiraA.. 2018. “Mulheres Com Carreiras Políticas Longevas No Legislativo Brasileiro (1950-2014).” Opinião Pública24: 178–208.
47.
PiscopoJ. M.HinojosaM.ThomasG.SiavelisP. M.. 2022. “Follow the Money: Gender, Incumbency, and Campaign Funding in Chile.” Comparative Political Studies55 (2): 222–253.
48.
PiscopoJ. M.KennyM.. 2020. “Rethinking the Ambition Gap: Gender and Candidate Emergence in Comparative Perspective.” European Journal of Politics and Gender3 (1): 3–10.
49.
RoberdsS. C.RobertsJ. M.. 2002. “Are All Amateurs Equal? Candidate Quality in the 1992-1998 House Elections.” Politics and Policy30 (3): 482–501.
50.
SamuelsD.Does Money Matter? Credible Commitments and Campaign Finance in New Democracies: Theory and Evidence from Brazil. Comparative Politics. 2001a; 34(1): 23–42.
51.
SamuelsD.2001b. “Incumbents and Challengers on a Level Playing Field: Assessing the Impact of Campaign Finance in Brazil.” Journal of Politics63 (2): 569–584.
52.
SamuelsD.2001c. “Money, Elections, and Democracy in Brazil.” Latin American Politics and Society43 (2): 27–48.
53.
SamuelsD.Ambition, Federalism, and Legislative Politics in Brazil. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
54.
SchaeferB. M.BarbosaT. A. L.. Pagando Do Próprio Bolso: Autofinanciamento Eleitoral No Rio Grande Do Sul (2012–2016). Paraná Eleitoral. 2019; 8(1): 35–60.
55.
SchneiderM. C.HolmanM. R.DiekmanA. B.McAndrewT.. 2016. “Power, Conflict, and Community: How Gendered Views of Political Power Influence Women’s Political Ambition.” Political Psychology37 (4): 515–531.
56.
Schwindt-BayerL. A.2009. “Making Quotas Work: The Effect of Gender Quota Laws on the Election of Women.” Legislative Studies Quarterly34 (1): 5–28.
57.
Schwindt-BayerL. A.MaleckiM.CrispB. F.. 2010. “Candidate Gender and Electoral Success in Single Transferable Vote Systems.” British Journal of Political Science40 (3): 693–709.
SöderlundP.von SchoultzÅ. Trajectories of the Personal Vote Under Open-List Proportional Representation: Evidence from Finland, 1999-2019. Party Politics. 2023; 30(1): 12–23.
60.
SpeckB. W.2006. “O Financiamento de Campanhas Eleitorais.” In Reforma Política no Brasil, edited by HorizonteBelo, 153–158. UFMG: PNUD.
61.
SpeckB. W.MancusoW. P.. 2014. “A Study on the Impact of Campaign Finance, Political Capital, and Gender on Electoral Performance.” Brazilian Political Science Review8 (1): 34–57.
62.
SquireP.Challenger Quality and Voting Behavior in US Senate Elections. Legislative Studies Quarterly. 1992; 247–263.
63.
SteenJ. A.Self-Financed Candidates in Congressional Elections. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2009.
64.
Suárez-CaoJ.BatlleM.Wills-OteroL.. 2017. “El Auge de los Estudios sobre la Política Subnacional Latinoamericana.” Colombia Internacional90: 15–34.
65.
ThomsenD. M. “Gender Differences in Candidate Reemergence.” Working Paper, 2018.
66.
WassermanM.2018. “Gender Differences in Politician Persistence.” SSRN.
67.
WassermanM.2021. “Up the Political Ladder: Gender Parity in the Effects of Electoral Defeats.” AEA Papers and Proceedings111: 169–173.
68.
WindettJ.2014. “Differing Paths to the Top: Gender, Ambition, and Running for Governor.” Journal of Women, Politics and Policy35 (4): 287–314.
69.
WolakJ.2020. “Descriptive Representation and the Political Engagement of Women.” Politics and Gender16 (2): 339–362.
70.
WylieK.SantosP. d.MarcelinoD.. 2019. “Extreme Non-Viable Candidates and Quota Maneuvering in Brazilian Legislative Elections.” Opinião Pública25 (1): 1–28.
71.
WylieK. N.Party Institutionalization and Women’s Representation in Democratic Brazil. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018.
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.
