Comparative European Politics

, Volume 7, Issue 1, pp 95–113 | Cite as

Substantive Representation of Women (and Improving it): What it is and should be About?

  • Karen Celis
Original Article
First Online:

Abstract

More and more countries implement quotas and install women's policy agencies as an answer to the underrepresentation of women and gender-related interests in politics and policy. The main argument is that more women MPs and the structural presence of attention for women's interests not only contribute to just and democratic politics, but also enhance the quality of democratic decision and policy-making on a substantive level. Women MPs and women's policy agencies would foster the inclusion of women's interests and gendered perspectives. However, it remains unclear what ‘substantive representation of women’ and improving it actually mean. This paper first deals with the ‘what’ of substantive representation of women in terms of the acts and contents involved: what is it about? Next, it focuses on the improvement of the substantive representation of women: what is better substantive representation and how can it be reached? My answer to this question refers to quantitative improvements (for example, more support for women's interests by representatives) and qualitative improvements (for example, support for a broader range of women and women's interests). ‘Good’ substantive representation implies recognizing diversity and ideological conflict regarding women's interests and gendered perspectives.

Keywords

substantive representation women's interests women MPs women's policy agencies 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Beck, S.A. (2001) Acting as Women. The Effects and Limitations of Gender in Local Governance. In: S. Carroll (ed.) The Impact of Women in Public Office. Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, pp. 49–67.Google Scholar
  2. Beckwith, K. (2002) The Substantive Representation of Women: Newness, Numbers, and Models of Political Representation, Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  3. Bratton, K. (2005) Critical mass theory revisited: The behavior and success of token women in state legislatures. Gender and Politics 1 (1): 97–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bratton, K. and Ray, L. (2002) Descriptive representation, policy outcomes, and municipal day-care coverage in Norway. American Journal of Political Science 46 (2): 428–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burrell, B.C. (1994) A Woman’s Place is in the House: Campaigning for Congress in the Feminist Era. Ann Harbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Celis, K. (2006) Substantive representation of women and the impact of descriptive representation. Case: The Belgian lower house 1900–1979. Journal of Women, Politics and Policy 28 (2): 85–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Celis, K. (2008a) Studying women’s substantive representation in legislatures: When representative acts, contexts and women’s interests become important. Journal of Representative Democracy, Special issue ‘The substantive representation of women’ (guest editors Karen Celis and Sarah Childs, 44 (2): 111–124.Google Scholar
  8. Celis, K. (2008b) Representation. In: G. Goertz and A. Mazur (eds.) Politics, Gender, and Concepts: Theory and Methodology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 71–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Celis, K., Childs, S., Kantola, J. and Krook, M.L. (2008) Rethinking women’s substantive representation. Journal of Representative Democracy, Special issue ‘The substantive representation of women’ (guest editors Karen Celis and Sarah Childs, 44 (2): 99–110.Google Scholar
  10. Childs, S. and Krook, M.L. (2006) Should feminists give up on critical mass? A contingent yes. Politics and Gender 2 (4): 522–530.Google Scholar
  11. Cramer Walsh, K. (2002) Female Legislators and the Women’s Rights Agenda. In: C.S. Rosenthal (ed.) Women Transforming Congress, Congressional Studies Series 4. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, pp. 370–396.Google Scholar
  12. Dahlerup, D. (1988) From a small to a large minority: Women in Skandinavian politics. Scandinavian Political Studies 11 (4): 275–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dahlerup, D. (ed.) (2006) Women, Quotas and Politics. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Diamond, I. and Hartsock, N. (1981) Beyond interests in politics: A comment on Virginia Sapiro's ‘When are interests interesting? The problem of Political Representation of Women’. The American Political Science Review 75 (3): 717–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dodson, D. (2001) Acting for Women. Is What Legislators Say, What They Do? In: S. Carroll (ed.) The Impact of Women in Public Office. Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, pp. 225–242.Google Scholar
  16. Dodson, D. (2006) The Impact of Women in Congress. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dodson, D. and Carroll, S. (1995) Voices, Views, Votes: The Impact of Women in the 103rd Congress, The Impact of Women in Public Office. New Jersey: Rutgers.Google Scholar
  18. Dovi, S. (2002) Preferable descriptive representatives: Will just any woman, black, or Latino do? The American Political Science Review 96 (4): 729–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grey, S. (2002) Does size matter? Critical mass and New Zealand’s women MP’s. Parliamentary Affairs 55 (1): 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Htun, M. and Jones, M. (2002) Engendering the Right to Participate in Decision-Making: Electoral Quotas and Women’s Leadership in Latin America. In: N. Craske and M. Molyneux (eds.) Gender, the Politics of Rights and Democracy in Latin America. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 432–456.Google Scholar
  21. Jónasdóttir, A.G. (1988) On the Concept of Interests, Women’s Interests and the Limitation of Interest Theory. In: K.B. Jones and A.G. Jónasdóttir (eds.) The Political Interests of Gender. London: Sage Publications, pp. 33–65.Google Scholar
  22. Kanter, R.M. (1977) Some effects of proportions on group life. American Journal of Sociology 82 (5): 965–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kathlene, L. (2001) Words That Matter. Women’s Voice and Institutional Bias in Public Policy Formation. In: S. Carroll (ed.) The Impact of Women in Public Office. Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, pp. 22–48.Google Scholar
  24. Lister, R. (1997) Citizenship: Feminist Perspectives. Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lovenduski, J. (2005) Feminizing Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  26. Lovenduski, J., Baudino, C., Guadagnini, M., Meier, P. and Sainsbury, D. (eds.) (2005) State Feminism and Political Representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mazur, A. (ed.) (2001) State Feminism, Women’s Movements and Job Training: Making Democracies Work in the Global Economy. New York, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Mazur, A.G. (2002) Theorizing Feminist Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McBride Stetson, D. (2001) Abortion Politics, Women’s Movements and the Democratic State: A Comparative Study of State Feminism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McBride Stetson, D. and Mazur, A. (2000) Women's movements and the state: Job training policy in France and the US. Political Research Quarterly 53 (3): 597–623.Google Scholar
  31. Molyneux, M. (1985) Mobilization without emancipation? Women’s interests, the state, and revolution in Nicaragua. Feminist Studies 11 (2): 227–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Norton, N. (2002) Transforming Policy from the Inside. Participating in Committee. In: C.S. Rosenthal (ed.) Women Transforming Congress, Congressional Studies Series 4. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, pp. 316–340.Google Scholar
  33. Offen, K. (2000) European Feminisms 1700–1950: A Political History. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. O’Regan, V. (2000) Gender Matters. Female Policymakers’ Influence in Industrialized Nations. Westport, London: Praeger.Google Scholar
  35. Outshoorn, J. (2004) Introduction: Prostitution, Women’s Movements and Democratic Politics. In: J. Outshoorn (ed.) The Politics of Prostitution: Women’s Movements, Democratic States and the Globalisation of Sex Commerce. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Outshoorn, J. and Kantola, J. (eds.) (2007) Changing State Feminism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Phillips, A. (1995) The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  38. Phillips, A. (1998) Democracy and Representation: Or, Why Should It Matter Who Our Representatives Are? In: A. Phillips (ed.) Feminism and Politics. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 224–240.Google Scholar
  39. Pitkin, H.F. (1972) The Concept of Representation. Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  40. Reingold, B. (2000) Representing Women: Sex, Gender and Legislative Behavior in Arizona and California. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  41. Sainsbury, D. (1996) Gender, Equality, and Welfare States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sapiro, V. (1981) When are interests interesting? The problem of political representation of women. The American Political Science Review 75 (3): 701–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Stokes, W. (2005) Women in Contemporary Politics. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  44. Swers, M.L. (1998) Are women more likely to vote for women's issue bills than their male colleagues? Legislative Studies Quarterly 23 (3): 435–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Swers, M.L. (2002) The Difference Women Make. The Policy Impact of Women in Congress. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  46. Tamerius, K. (1995) Sex, Gender, and Leadership in the Representation of Women. In: G. Duerst-Lahti and R.M. Kelly (eds.) Gender Power and Leadership, and Governance. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, pp. 93–112.Google Scholar
  47. Taylor-Robinson, M.M. and Heath, R.M. (2003) Do women legislators have different policy priorities than their male colleagues? A critical case test. Women and Politics 24 (4): 77–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tremblay, M. (1998) Do female MPs substantively represent women? A study of legislative behaviour in Canada’s 35th Parliament. Canadian Journal of Political Science 31 (3): 435–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Trimble, L. (1997) Feminist Policies in the Alberta Legislature, 1972–1994. In: J. Arscott and L. Trimble (eds.) In the Presence of Women: Representation and Canadian Governments. Toronto: Harcourt Brace, pp. 128–154.Google Scholar
  50. Wängnerud, L. (2000) Testing the politics of presence: Women’s representation in the Swedish Riksdag. Scandinavian Political Studies 23 (1): 67–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Weldon, L.S. (2002) Beyond bodies: Institutional sources of representation for women in democratic policymaking. Journal of Politics 64 (4): 1153–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Williams, M. (1998) Voice, Trust, and Memory. The Failings of Liberal Representation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Wolbrecht, C. (2002) Female Legislators and the Women’s Rights Agenda. In: C.S. Rosenthal (ed.) Women Transforming Congress, Congressional Studies Series 4. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, pp. 170–194.Google Scholar
  54. Young, I.M. (1997) Deferring Group Representation. In: I. Shapiro and W. Kymlicka (eds.) Ethnicity and Group Rights, Nomos 39, Yearbook of the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy. New York: New York University Press, pp. 349–376.Google Scholar
  55. Young, I.M. (2000) Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karen Celis
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Business Studies and Public AdministrationUniversity College Ghent – Ghent UniversityGhentBelgium

Personalised recommendations