Women's ministerial careers in cabinet, 1921–2010: A look at socio‐demographic traits and career experiences

Abstract

This article probes two aspects of women's ministerial careers in federal, provincial, and territorial cabinets from 1921 to December 2010. First, we examine whether the socio-demographic profile of women ministers differ from female legislators of the governing party. Logistic regression analysis shows that women holding cabinet portfolios differ from female legislators with no ministerial responsibilities with respect to education, parliamentary experience, and age when first elected. Women legislators elected in Quebec, and more so at the federal level, were less likely to become ministers than women legislators nominated in other provinces. Second, we consider what portfolios women had over time, and how many different portfolios they were assigned to. The results are sobering: women ministers are still largely concentrated in socio-cultural and socio-economic portfolios, and most only occupy one or two of these portfolios. We conclude by identifying avenues for further research.Sommaire : Cet article explore deux aspects des carrières ministérielles des femmes aux cabinets fédéraux, provinciaux et territoriaux entre 1921 et décembre 2010. Tout d'abord, nous cherchons à voir si le profil sociodémographique des ministres femmes est différent de celui des législatrices du parti au pouvoir. L'analyse de régression logistique démontre que les femmes ayant la charge d'un portefeuille ministériel diffèrent des législatrices sans responsabilités ministérielles en ce qui concerne l'éducation, l'expérience parlementaire et l'âge auquel elles ont été tout d'abord élues. Les femmes législatrices élues au Québec, et plus encore au palier fédéral, étaient moins susceptibles de devenir ministres que les législatrices nommées dans d'autres provinces. Ensuite, nous étudions de quels portefeuilles les femmes ont eu la responsabilité au fil des ans, et combien de différents portefeuilles leur ont été assignés. Les résultats donnent à réfléchir : les ministres femmes gèrent encore essentiellement des portefeuilles socioculturels et socio-économiques, et la plupart ne gèrent qu'un ou deux de ces portefeuilles. En conclusion, nous identifions des possibilités pour une recherche plus poussée.

Ministerial Politics in Southeastern Europe: Appointment and Portfolio Allocation to Female Ministers

“…Similarly, Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson (2005, 840) show that the diffusion of international norms has had a positive effect on the number of female ministers in Latin America and that "women are more likely to receive high-prestige posts now, than they were in the past." The latter finding is challenged by Tremblay and Stockemer (2013), who use a larger and newer data set to claim that the portfolios held by women remained largely restricted to the sociocultural and socioeconomic realms. Time periods are also taken into account by Claveria (2014), who argues that the effect of various political variables such as the adoption of gender quotas by the governing party or the percentage of women in governments is not uniform over time.…”

“…We expected to see women appointed to a wider range of ministries as time passes and to ministries with higher prestige. To address this question, we divided the time span of the study into three periods -an approach also adopted in Tremblay and Stockemer (2013). For Bulgaria and Romania, those are (1) 1990-96 -a time of political turmoil and economic uncertainty for both countries, dominated by the former communist elites; (2) 1997-2003 -a definitive turn toward reform and orientation toward the Euro-Atlantic structures; and (3) 2004 to the present -2004 marking the year of NATO membership for both countries and the closure of all the chapters of the EU's acquis communitaire.…”

“…The latter finding is confirmed in an interview by a well-known Bulgarian member of parliament and political scientist who commented on the leadership race for one of the major Bulgarian political parties. In relation to a female candidacy for the leadership of the Bulgarian Socialist Party, Tatyana Burudzhieva commented, “Unfortunately, politics [in Bulgaria] remains a male profession; the very fact that we are asking whether a woman can take up the leadership post is evidence for the existing inequality.” 2 Many of the extant studies of women in cabinets reiterate that when women enter high-level politics, they are indeed assigned more often to portfolios with less political importance (see Jacob, Scherpereel, and Adams 2014 for a global analysis of the effect of gender norms; Krook and O'Brien 2012; Moon and Fountain 1997; Studlar and Moncrief 1999; Tremblay and Stockemer 2013). Based on this discussion, we expect to find that female ministers are more often assigned to traditionally “women's ministries” or ministries with lower political prestige.…”

“…To address this question, we divide ministerial portfolios into high-, middle-, and low-prestige portfolios. This categorization is based on extant research (Atchison and Down 2009; Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson 2005; Tremblay and Stockemer 2013) as well as our knowledge of the region and the specific cases. There is a rich debate on the categorization of ministerial portfolios, the role of context-specific factors, and the multiple factors that need to be taken into account.…”

Local governance and the local political career in Canada: A sample dataset

“…While political careers at the federal and provincial levels have received some attention from Canadian political scientists (Docherty and , Loat and MacMillan , Tremblay and Stockemer , White ), we know almost nothing about the local political career. Beyond a few important but basic elements – such as the electoral strength of local incumbents (Kushner, Siegel, and Stanwick ), the distinction between full‐time and part‐time councillors (Sancton and Woolner ), and the representativeness of local politicians (Gidengil and Vengroff , Tremblay and Méllevec ) – we have little more than anecdotes to guide us.…”