Suchergebnisse

Feminist scholars have developed a solid research agenda on gender equality in politics. This scholarship is built on the conviction that equitable representation of men and women is fundamental to the functioning of representative democracies (Mansbridge 1999; Norris and Lovenduski 1995). In order to comply with the intersectional research paradigm, gender and politics scholars have increasingly focused on other discriminatory mechanisms and how these relate to gender. Marginalized or privileged positions based on gender, ethnicity, race, class, or age are conceived not as "swinging free" from each other, but as interacting (Hancock 2007). Consequently, a group can be privileged in one context but disadvantaged in another depending on historical structures and contexts. Such an intersectional approach raises new questions about the meaning of political equality (Mügge 2013; Mügge and De Jong 2013). For instance, to what extent is women's sheer numerical presence an indicator for political equality if that presence is a marker of inclusion as well as exclusion? This contribution focuses on political recruitment and the question of whether inclusion fosters equality. Drawing on our ongoing research on Belgium and the Netherlands, we argue that an intersectional analysis of recruitment is indispensable to capture the nature of inclusion and exclusion and therefore to the understanding of political equality.

This article analyzes the impact of restructuring processes on the organizational structure and lobbying strategies of women's movement organizations (WMOs) in Belgium (Flanders) and the UK (Scotland). We argue that devolution/federalization and the resultant creation of new, intermediary levels of governance offers a devolution/federalism advantage to WMOs. Multilevel governance multiplies access points, allowing for accumulation of funds, limited forms of venue shopping, and avoidance of veto players. Nevertheless, a set of push and pull factors draws WMOs towards the regional level thereby "abandoning the center." These changes are driven by centrifugal dynamics that characterize the processes of devolution and federalization in these cases. In the long run, these may erase the devolution/federalism advantage, and also pose questions about state-wide women's citizenship and gender solidarity. Adapted from the source document.

Recently, scholars have propagated a 'claim-based' approach towards the study of women's substantive representation. In this article, we challenge the relativism of such a 'claim-based' approach and explore the relevance of the concept of 'responsiveness' as a democratic criterion. We do so, more specifically, through a study of Muslim women's substantive representation in the Flemish headscarf debate. We identify claims to speak for Muslim women formulated by (1) political parties and (2) Muslim women and (minority) women's associations and examine the congruence between their respective claims. The important incongruence found between the claims formulated by right-wing and liberal parties and those of Muslim women/women's associations provides empirical backing to the acclaimed relevance of a relational evaluation of women's substantive representation. We conclude that the criterion of responsiveness is invaluable because it allows us to evaluate if actors' claims to speak for women account for women's capacity to speak for themselves. Adapted from the source document.