Promoting Gender Equality through Party Funding: Symbolic Policies at Work in Italy

Abstract

Given the growing importance of state subsidies as a source of party income, several countries have introduced policies that link the provision of party funding to the promotion of gender equality in political representation. Variations in the assignment of public funding—that is, financial incentives and cuts—are increasingly employed to promote equal gender participation in intraparty politics and in public office. However, we know little about why and how these equality promotion policies have been adopted in different countries, how they work in practice, and, most importantly, what effects they have on women's representation. To contribute to this debate, after embedding gender-targeted public funding regulations in the broader set of political representation policies and presenting a comparative overview of existing rules in the European Union, the article concentrates on the Italian case. We examine the evolution of Italian regulation of gender electoral financing and the extent to which the Italian parties have complied with the rules over time. The results show that this set of policy instruments, when poorly designed, is nothing more than symbolic policy. The lack of appropriate mechanisms for sanctions and rewards, which can induce parties to change their behavior, has hampered the effectiveness of these policy measures.

Follow the Money: Gender, Incumbency, and Campaign Funding in Chile

“…Our findings support scholars’ conclusions that gendered electoral financing schemes operate symbolically (Feo & Piccio, 2019). Our interviewees likewise doubted that the incentives would truly inspire funders to support women candidates.…”

“…Instead, gendered electoral financing schemes are increasingly popular policy tools. Measures throughout Latin America and elsewhere require parties to spend money on initiatives that boost women’s leadership, such as women’s candidate training (Feo & Piccio, 2019; Hinojosa & Vázquez Correa, 2018). Schemes also fine parties for failing to fill statutory gender quotas, as in Ireland and France (Achin et al, 2020; Buckley & Gregory, 2020).…”

“…Even where gendered electoral financing schemes have pursued the latter—as with Ghana’s reduced filing fees for women candidates—researchers remain skeptical about their effectiveness (Bauer & Darkwah, 2020). More broadly, researchers doubt that such schemes can overcome party leaders’ bias against women (Feo & Piccio, 2020; Kayuni & Muriaas, 2014; Muriaas et al, 2020). The comparative research overall indicates that women outside the US continue to have fewer campaign resources relative to men, given gendered processes that shape who is—and is not—seen as a “good” candidate.…”

“…International organizations such as UN Women, the International Foundation for Electoral Systems, and the National Democratic Institute increasingly encourage governments to consider what Muriaas et al (2020) call “gendered electoral financing schemes.” Financing measures have included establishing state funds to reward parties that elect women, as in Ireland and South Korea, or discounting filing fees for women candidates, as in Ghana. Such schemes have been implemented in dozens of Global North and Global South countries (Ballington & Kahane, 2014), often alongside reforms that strengthened gender quota laws, as legislators sought additional mechanisms to address women’s political underrepresentation (Feo & Piccio, 2019; Hinojosa & Vázquez Correa, 2018; Wang et al, 2020).…”

Payments and Penalties for Democracy: Gendered Electoral Financing in Action Worldwide

“…GEF initiatives, at “the crossroads of gender representation and political party finance regulation” (Feo and Piccio 2020a, 904), have received minimal attention, mostly through single-country studies that lack uniform measurements. This article focuses on national legislative elections in democracies as a first step.…”