Mind the gap: Do proportional electoral systems foster a more equal representation of women and men, poor and rich?

Abstract

Female gender and low income are two markers for groups that have been historically disadvantaged within most societies. The study explores two research questions related to their political representation: (1) ‘Are parties biased towards the ideological preferences of male and rich citizens?’; and (2) ‘Does the proportionality of the electoral system moderate the degree of under-representation of women and poor citizens in the party system?’ A multilevel analysis of survey data from 24 parliamentary democracies indicates that there is some bias against those with low income and, at a much smaller rate, women. This has systemic consequences for the quality of representation, as the preferences of the complementary groups differ. The proportionality of the electoral system influences the degree of under-representation: specifically, larger district magnitudes help in closing the considerable gap between rich and poor.

Gender and opinion–policy congruence in Europe

“…Homola (2017) shows that although the manifestos of European parties respond to shifts in the left-right positions of both genders, they seem to be more responsive to men. Yet, this does not necessarily result in unequal representation in parliament: as Bernauer, Giger and Rosset (2015) show, women tend to be more left-leaning but are not consistently further away from the most proximate parliamentary party than men.…”

“…Several explanations have been proposed for why women now tend to hold more left-wing attitudes (Campbell 2004;Gidengil et al 2003;Bernauer et al 2015) and show stronger support for left-wing parties (see also Bergh 2007). First, their lower salary and higher poverty levels, their greater reliance public services such as childcare and social care services as well as their higher degree of public sector employment might make them more supportive of the welfare state and public spending (Inglehart and Norris 2000;Knutsen 2001;Gidengil et al 2003; but see Bergh 2007).…”

“…Interestingly, neither the proportion of women in parliament nor the left-right position of the government appear to affect whether policy is congruent with the preferences of women or men, despite large literatures showing that women tend to be more left-wing (e.g. Bergh 2007;Campbell 2004;Gidengil et al 2003;Bernauer et al 2015) and that the female legislators are more likely to promote women's rights and interests (e.g. Bratton and Haynie 1999;Campbell et al 2010;Celis 2006;Swers 1998;Taylor-Robinson and Heath 2003;Thomas 1991;Vega and Firestone 1995).…”

Do young female candidates face double barriers or an outgroup advantage? The case of the European Parliament

“…In many cases, these ‘ideal’ candidates might still be middle‐aged or senior men of the dominant ethnicity (Bernauer et al. ). In contrast, ‘larger’ parties have a tendency to diversify their slates to attract as many constituents as possible .…”

“…The 'smaller' the party (in terms of national support), the more likely they are to nominate candidates with high general appeal to voters for top list positions. In many cases, these 'ideal' candidates might still be middle-aged or senior men of the dominant ethnicity (Bernauer et al 2015). In contrast, 'larger' parties have a tendency to diversify their slates to attract as many constituents as possible.…”