Democracy and gender equality

 

This briefing paper addresses the ‘gender’ dimension of democracy and focuses on the democratic representation and participation of women. Beyond this primary focus, paper examines the language of gender and questions of identity, theories of gender and how women are understood in society in general, and the role of women in democracy. The paper shows that as of 2010, women still only make up a little over 19% of all parliaments around the world, but this average conceals a range from a high of over 55% in Rwanda to a low of 16% in the United States. In light of this variation, the paper discusses the arguments and mechanisms for increased participation of women, as well as the empirical findings about women’s participation that will be of interests to policy makers and practitioners interested in the gendered dimensions of democracy.Introduction and Background Both theoretical and practical interest in the relationship between gender and democracy have surged, first with ‘second-wave’ feminism from the 1960s and then with ‘third wave’ democratisation from the 1970s. The relationship between gender and democracy can be explored from many different angles, both empirical and theoretical – does democracy require gender equality for instance? Does democracy increase prospects for gender equality? However within this broad field there has long been a particular focus on the issue of women’s political representation. The comparatively low levels of women’s representation have been extensively documented; arguments have been developed – and contested – for why women’s representation should be increased and there has been much discussion about the main practical obstacles to increasing their representation and the best means of overcoming this. 

The scholarly literature on this subject has grown exponentially, in Britain, the United States and further afield. This has been in tandem with extensive political campaigning around the issue of women’s representation. For instance in Britain during the 1980s the Labour Women’s Action Committee (LWAC) helped to trigger change within the Labour Party and other countries, for instance in Northern Ireland, albeit with some notable exceptions. But rates of women’s political representation have not changed so dramatically. Even in Britain, supposedly a relatively advanced democracy, following the 2010 General Election women still only constituted 22% of the membership of the House of CommonsThis paper begins with a brief consideration of the concept of gender, an account of the way in which issues in the field of gender and democracy have emerged, and identification of the specific questions concerning women’s political representation which have come to the fore. The following section looks more closely at the way these questions have been taken up, through a combination of more normative arguments and empirical investigation. 

Key conceptual issues an

problem areas This briefing paper is concerned with the ‘gender’ dimension of democracy. Readers probably have an everyday understanding of ‘gender’ as in practice 

referring to women and indeed the main focus here will be on the democratic representation and participation of women, as opposed to men. However there is more to the issue of gender and democracy than that and it is accordingly necessary to say something about the 

language of gender, and its implications. The use of this language, rather than just talking about women and men, or the sexes, originated with Marxist-feminists, and has signified first of all that our identities as men or women 

are to a significant extent ‘socially constructed’ rather than innate. This further means that these identities are not fixed but culturally and historically variable. Going one 

step further still, the implication is that the identities of different women within the same society vary one from another, for instance according to social class or race. 

The language of gender has the obvious virtue of undermining essentialist and potentially conservative arguments about women’s nature that have been used to justify women’s political exclusion. It is also much more 

realistic. However this language does also open up the possibility that women are too differentiated as a category for meaningful political claims to be advanced in their 

common name. Taken to its post-structuralist extreme, this languagethis language threatens to deconstruct and problematise threatens to deconstruct and problematisethis language threatens to deconstruct and problematise

be much higher. Some of these arguments are primarily normative, invoking for instance notions of social justice 

or fairness, but others refer to the likely consequences of women’s increased representation in ways that are more 

open to empirical verification. In different forms the question is asked as to whether and how ‘women make a difference’? Do they bring particular distinct and desirable 

qualities into the political process? Are they perhaps more inclined to be peace-makers than men? Are they less likely to be corrupt? Feminist writers in particular have invoked political theorist Hanna Pitkin’s distinction(1967) between descriptive and substantive 

representation. Pitkin originally argued that descriptive, or mirror representation, in which the representative resembles those being represented in some key attribute 

such as gender, does not necessarily increase the likelihood of substantive representation, in which the representative stands for the views or objective interests of those being represented. Feminists have sought to demonstrate either in theoretical terms or more empirically that increased levels of women’s (descriptive) 

representation do lead to greater substantive 

representation of women. 

Thirdly, to the extent that it is believed that women’s representation continues to be too low, there is further empirical interest in ascertaining why this is so and in identifying the principal barriers. Sometimes this is discussed in terms of the intersection of demand and 

supply, although clearly these are not always easy to separate out. Related to this there is considerable discussion concerning the most efficacious means of increasing women’s presence. In particular such discussion has touched on three areas. One is campaign 

finance. Do women candidates have equal access to such funding and if not how can this be remedied? Another is the electoral system : do particular types of electoral system, other things being equal, improve women’s chances of being selected as candidates and being elected? There is widespread agreement that the 

First Past the Post (FPTP) system found in many countries including Britain has been disadvantageous for women. Another much debated issue concerns adoption of gender quotas, either by political parties themselves or 

through reserving legislative seats for women. Questions to be asked include: how and when are such quotaspowerful than national institutions – an instance of a 

wider maxim that women’s presence was in inverse proportion to the presence of power. But patterns vary from country to country. Certainly a very striking and well known case is that of the assemblies established in Wales and Scotland in 1999 as part of the New Labour 

government’s devolution policy. In Wales 40% of seats in the new assembly went to women AMs (Assembly 

Members); following the second Welsh Assembly election 

in 2003 the figure rose to 50% though it fell to 47% after 

the third election in 2007. However one reason for this 

exceptional pattern is that these were brand new 

assembles, so women were not in competition with male 

incumbents. The Labour Party also used positive 

measures to promote women’s representation, as 

discussed further below. 

At any rate it is clear that in global terms the level of 

women’s representation has grown over time. In 1945, 

within the 26 national parliaments which then existed, 

women constituted only 3% of members. By now we have 

seen that the average percentage is 19.3%, an increase 

of 16.3%. This is still less than one fifth, however, and 

has taken 65 years to achieve!

Arguments for enhancing women’s political 

representation

Women’s level of political representation typically remains 

low and is rising only very gradually. Does this matter? 

We have seen that a number of arguments have been 

advanced for increasing women’s representation. 

Sometimes it is presented simply as an issue of fairness 

or social justice. Alternatively it is argued that women’s 

visible presence in representative political roles is 

important symbolically; it signifies women’s equal political 

status and capabilities with men and encourages other 

women and girls to believe this could be a realistic aspiration for themselves.