Although the presence of women has been increasing in several parliaments around the world, we still do not know much about the consequences that their presence has for policy representation. Relying on a rich comparative dataset on prospective MPs’ policy preferences in 12 countries and 87 political parties collected between 2006 and 2012 within the Comparative Candidates Survey, this article aims to understand how political parties interplay with prospective MPs’ sex to affect the latter’s policy preferences. Our results show that the descriptive representation of women makes a difference for policy representation, (i) mainly (though not only) when issues that particularly affect women are at stake and (ii) only concerning issues around which political parties do not yet have settled positions (i.e. uncrystallized issues). There are therefore empirical grounds to support an imposed representation of minority groups to deal with issues that are new on the political agenda.
AldermanRK (1967) Parliamentary party discipline in opposition: the parliamentary labour party 1951-64. Parliamentary Affairs21: 124–136.
2.
AndewegRThomassenJ (2005) Modes of political representation: toward a new typology. Legislative Studies Quarterly30 (4): 507–528.
3.
BenoitKLaverM (2006) Party Policy in Modern Democracies. London: Routledge.
4.
BeymeK (1985) Political Parties in Western Democracies. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.
5.
BudgeIFarlieDJ (1983) Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-Three Democracies. London: Allen & Unwin.
6.
BurdenB (2007) Personal Roots of Representation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
7.
CampbellR (2004) Gender, ideology and issue preference: is there such a thing as a political women’s interest in Britain?The British Journal of Politics and International Relations6(1): 20–44.
8.
CampbellRChildsS (2015) Conservatism, feminization and the representation of women in UK politics. British Politics10(2): 148–168.
9.
CampbellRChildsSLovenduskiJ (2010) Do women need women representatives?British Journal of Political Science40(1): 171–194.
CelisK (2012) On Substantive Representation, Diversity, and Responsiveness. Politics & Gender8(4): 524–529.
12.
CelisK (2013) Representativity in times of diversity: the political representation of women. Women’s Studies International Forum41(3): 179–186.
13.
CelisKChildsS (2012) The substantive representation of women: what to do with conservative’s claims?Political Studies60(1): 213–225.
14.
CelisKChildsS (2014) Introduction: the ‘puzzle’ of gender, conservatism and representation. In: CelisKChildsS (ed) Gender, Conservatism and Political Representation. Colchester: ECPR Press, pp. 1–20.
CelisKChildsSKantolaJ, et al. (2014) Constituting women’s interests through representative claims. Politics & Gender10: 149–174.
17.
ChildsS (2004) New Labour’s Women MPs: Women Representing Women. London and New York: Routledge.
18.
ChildsSKrookML (2008) Critical mass theory and women’s political representation. Political Studies56: 725–736.
19.
ChildsSWebbP (2012) Sex, Gender and the Conservative Party. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
20.
ConwayMMAhernDWSteuernagelGA (1997) Women & Political Participation: Cultural Change in Political Arena. Washington, D.C: Congressional Quarterly Inc.
21.
DahlerupD (2006) The story of the theory of ‘critical mass’. Politics & Gender2(4): 511–522.
22.
DassonnevilleRHoogheM (2015) Economic indicators and electoral volatility: the effect of the state of the economy on electoral volatility, 1950-2013. Comparative European Politics15(6): 919–943.
23.
DeVellisRF (1991) Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
24.
DiazMM (2002) Are Women in Parliament Representing Women? From Descriptive to Substantive Representation…And Back Again?Louvain: Université Catholique de Louvain.
25.
DoviS (2007) Theorizing women’s representation in the United States. Politics & Gender, 3: 297–319.
26.
EvansJJ (2005) Women, Partisanship, and the Congress. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
27.
FranceschetSKrookMLPiscopoJM (2012) The Impact of Gender Quotas. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28.
Giles-SimsJGreenJCLockhartC (2012) Do women legislators have a positive effect on the supportiveness of states toward older citizens?Journal of Women, Politics & Policy33(1): 38–64.
29.
GreeneZO’BrienDZ (2016) Diverse parties, diverse agendas? Female politicians and the parliamentary party’s role in platform formationEuropean Journal of Political Research55: 435–453.
30.
GuntherRDiamondL (2003) Species of political parties: a new typology. Party Politics9(2): 167–199.
31.
HerekGM (2002) Gender gaps in public opinion about lesbians and gay men. Public Opinion Quarterly66 (1): 40–66.
32.
HeidarKPedersenK (2006) Party feminism: gender gaps within Nordic political parties. Scandinavian Political Studies29(3): 192–218.
33.
HolliAM (2011) Transforming local politics? The impact of gender quotas in Finland. In: PiniBMcDonaldP (ed) Women and Representation in Local Government: International Case Studies. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 142–158.
34.
JónasdóttirAGJonesKB (2009) The Political Interests of Gender Revisited: Redoing Theory and Research with a Feminist Face. Tokyo, NY, Paris: United Nations University Press.
35.
JonesMP (1997) Legislator gender and legislator policy priorities in the argentine chamber of deputies and the United States house of representatives. Policy Studies Journal25(4): 613–629.
36.
KirchheimerO (1990) The catch-all party. In: MairP (ed), The West European Party System, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 50–60.
37.
KittilsonMC (2006) Challenging Parties, Changing Parliaments. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
38.
KittilsonMC (2008) Representing women: the adoption of family leave in comparative perspective. The Journal of Politics70(2): 323–334.
39.
LovenduskiJNorrisP (2003) Westminster women: the politics of presence. Political Studies51(1): 84–102.
40.
MacDonaldJAO’BrienEE (2011) Quasi-experimental design, constituency, and advancing women’s interests: reexamining the influence of gender on substantive representation. Political Research Quarterly64(2): 472–486.
41.
MairP (2007) Left-right orientations. In: DaltonRJKlingemannHD (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Political Behaviour. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 206–221.
42.
MairP (2013) Rulling the Void: The Hollowing of Western Democracy. London: Versobooks.
43.
MairPMuddeC (1998) The party family and its study. Annual Review of Political Science1: 211–229.
44.
MansbridgeJ (1999) Should blacks represent backs and women represent women? A contigent “yes”. The Journal of Politics61(3): 628–657.
45.
MeierP (2013) Quotas, quotas everywhere: from party regulations to gender quotas for corporate management boards. Another case of contagion. Representation49: 453–466.
46.
PatzeltWJ (2003) Party cohesion and party discipline in German parliaments. The Journal of Legislative Studies9(4): 102–115.
47.
PetrocikJR (1996) Issue ownership in presidential elections, with a 1980 case study. American Journal of Political Science40(3): 825–850.
48.
PhillipsA (1995) The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
49.
PhillipsA (ed) (1998) Feminism and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
50.
PiletJBCrossW (eds) (2014) The Selection of Political Party Leaders in Contemporary Parliamentary Democracies: A Comparative Study. London: Routledge.
51.
PitkinHF (1967) The Concept of Representation. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
52.
Schwindt-BayerL (2006) Still supermadres? Gender and the policy priorities of Latin American legislators. American Journal of Political Science50(3): 570–585.
53.
Schwindt-BayerLTaylor-RobinsonM (2011) The meaning and measurement of women’s interests. Politics & Gender7(3): 417–446.
54.
SherkatDEDe VriesKMCreekS (2010) Race, religion, and opposition to same-sex marriage. Social Science Quarterly91(1): 80–98.
55.
StudlarDTMcAllisterI (2002) Does a critical mass exist? A comparative analysis of women’s legislative representation since 1950. European Journal of Political Research41(2): 223–253.
56.
SvalerydH (2009) Women’s representation and public spending. European Journal of Political Economy25: 186–198.
57.
SwersML (2002) The Difference Women Make: The Policy Impact of Women in Congress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
58.
TremblayMPelletierR (2000) More feminists or more women? Descriptive and substantive representations of women in the 1997 Canadian federal elections. International Political Science Review21(4): 381–405.
59.
Van BiezenIMairPPoguntkeT (2012) Going, going,…gone? The decline of party membership in contemporary Europe. European Journal of Political Research51(1): 24–56.
60.
WagnerMMeyerTM (2014) Which issues do parties emphasise? Salience strategies and party organisation in multiparty systems. West European Politics37(5): 1019–1045.
61.
WängnerudL (2009) Women in parliaments: descriptive and substantive representation. Annual Review of Political Science12: 51–69.
62.
WängnerudLSundellA (2012) Do politics matter? Women in Swedish local elected assemblies 1970–2010 and gender equality in outcomes. European Political Science Review4(1): 97–120.
63.
WareA (1996) Political Parties and Party Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
64.
WeldonSL (2002) Beyond bodies: institutional sources of representation for women in democratic policymaking. The Journal of Politics64(4): 1153–1174.
65.
WillumsenDA (2017) The Acceptance of Party Unity in Parliamentary Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
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.
