Gender, political participation and electoral systems: A cross‐national analysis

Abstract

This article investigates whether the smaller gender gaps in political engagement, found in more proportional electoral systems, translate into smaller gender differences in political participation. Using data from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems, it presents the argument that more proportional systems may send signals that multiple interests are included in the policy‐making process, which may increase women's levels of political participation and thereby reduce gender gaps. Additionally, the article tests for the possibility that a greater number of political parties and the elected representatives they provide act as barriers to political participation that have a greater impact on women's levels of participation than men's. It is argued that women's lower levels of political resources and engagement might create more difficult barriers for them than for men. Results lend little support for the first hypothesis, but a greater confirmation for the second.

Social and Psychological Factors of Political Participation according to Recent European Social Survey Data

“…The concept and phenomenon of a gender gap in political participation, frequently used in contemporary political theory and research (Beauregard, 2018), expresses the difference in the 'proportion of eligible men and eligible women engaging in a particular type of activity' (Glatte and de Vries, 2015: 2). Our results confirmed the ongoing (Coffé and Bolzendahl, 2010;Beauregard, 2014) higher general level of male political participation.…”

Left Behind? Gender Gaps in Political Engagement Over the Life Course in Twenty-Seven European Countries

“…From a political point of view, research has shown that institutions play an important role in promoting political equality between women and men (Kittilson and Schwindt-Bayer 2010). In particular, power-sharing political systems favor the involvement of underrepresented groups and therefore women (Beauregard 2014;Kittilson and Schwindt-Bayer 2010). Another explanation for cross-national gender gaps in political engagement is the presence of women in political institutions, with women being more involved in contexts where they have greater descriptive representation (Burns, Schlozman, and Verba 2001;Desposato and Norrander 2009;Reingold and Harrell 2010;Wolbrecht and Campbell 2007).…”

“…This article investigates cross-national differences in political engagement among European women and men at different stages of the life course. Previous studies have concentrated on betweencountry differences in political involvement on the one hand (Abendschön and Steinmetz 2014;Beauregard 2014;Coffè and Bolzendahl 2013;Desposato and Norrander 2009;Fraile 2014), and on within-country differences in political engagement over the life course on the other (Burns, Schlozman, and Verba 1997;Highton and Wolfinger 2001;Jennings 1979;Stoker and Jennings 1995;Voorpostel and Coffé 2010). The literature currently lacks a large-scale comparative study on the relationship between life course events and women's and men's engagement in politics that could grant us a better understanding of how gender inequalities in politics unfold over the life cycle in different institutional settings.…”

Addressing the Gender Gap

“…By contrast, a recent study finds that the adoption of quotas can in fact reduce women's political engagement (Clayton, 2015). Yet, more recent cross-national studies report that PR systems are associated with a larger gender gap compared with plurality systems (Beauregard, 2014;Nir & McClurg, 2015). Yet, more recent cross-national studies report that PR systems are associated with a larger gender gap compared with plurality systems (Beauregard, 2014;Nir & McClurg, 2015).…”