Search results

Abstract
Committee assignments continue to be gendered with men having higher chances than women to be appointed to the most visible, resourceful and influential committees. I contribute to a better understanding of this phenomenon by investigating to what extent women in parliamentary party groups push for gender parity in committee assignments. The empirical analyses build on original data from the 16 German states between 1990 and 2021. I find no indication that women as leaders of parliamentary party groups narrow sex gaps in appointment to the most prestigious committees, but higher shares of women representatives enhance women's access to these posts.

Extensive scholarly work engages with the growing number of women in legislatures around the world and highlights their role as advocates of women's interests during parliamentary decision-making processes. This article sheds light on the reactions of men MPs (members of parliament) to this trend by uncovering how women's numerical strength in party parliamentary groups shapes the issues that their men colleagues emphasize when speaking about women during plenary debates. I argue that, the higher the share of women in a party parliamentary group, the more will men representatives emphasize women's interests in the context of issues they can easily relate to—either because the issues lie in men's area of responsibility according to ideas about traditional role distributions in the society, for example, the financing of gender equality projects, or because they are part of broader patterns of societal inequality, such as poverty or health. I provide empirical evidence for this argument based on original time-series cross-sectional data from plenary debates in six German states between 2005 and 2021 using a structural topic model. These findings shed light on men's role as critical actors and have implications for gender equality and the functioning of representative democracy more broadly.

AbstractThis article investigates how the sex of party heads impacts party positions and uncovers that parties led by a woman modify their stances on sociocultural but not economic debates. I argue that this pattern is a consequence of dissimilar gender gaps in policy preferences across the two ideological dimensions at the elite level. The empirical evidence, based on data for 19 developed democracies around the world between 1995 and 2018, reveals that parties led by a woman tend to emphasise green, alternative and libertarian issues. In particular, anti‐growth, environmental protection and freedom and human rights become more prominent elements of party manifestos under women's leadership. Overall, these findings stress the importance of critical actors and the conditions under which the presence of women in political offices translates into responsiveness towards female citizens.

Abstract This article investigates how the sex of party heads impacts party positions and uncovers that parties led by a woman modify their stances on sociocultural but not economic debates. I argue that this pattern is a consequence of dissimilar gender gaps in policy preferences across the two ideological dimensions at the elite level. The empirical evidence, based on data for 19 developed democracies around the world between 1995 and 2018, reveals that parties led by a woman tend to emphasise green, alternative and libertarian issues. In particular, anti‐growth, environmental protection and freedom and human rights become more prominent elements of party manifestos under women's leadership. Overall, these findings stress the importance of critical actors and the conditions under which the presence of women in political offices translates into responsiveness towards female citizens.

AbstractA large set of research argues that policy responsiveness towards excluded societal factions such as minorities of immigrant origin improves through the presence of group members in parliaments because they bring forward different perspectives during parliamentary debates. This article challenges the straightforwardness of this relationship by demonstrating that the ability of legislators with immigrant backgrounds to shift the parliamentary agenda closer to the ideal points of citizens of foreign descent is conditional on two factors. First, representatives of immigrant origin need incentives to cultivate a personal vote, and second, their overall proportion of parliamentary seats has to remain rather marginal to influence the policy positions of the majority of representatives. The article's findings thus stress the importance of studying the contextual factors that moderate the relationship between group belonging and the capacity to promote group interests. Empirical evidence from nine European Democracies between 2002 and 2014 substantiates this argument – so that the analysis constitutes the first cross‐country comparison in a research field that has so far been dominated by single country studies. By using policy congruence as a measure for responsiveness, this article shifts the focal point from individual representatives' attempts to promote the interests of citizens with immigrant backgrounds towards effectiveness of these endeavours.

AbstractThis article is the first to show that gender shapes the degree to which legislators use formal mechanisms to oversee government activities. Extensive scholarly work has analysed the use of oversight instruments, especially regarding who monitors whom. Whether, how, and why the conformity of men and women with institutional roles differs, has not yet received scholarly attention. We hypothesise that women become more active than men in overseeing the executive when in opposition while reducing their monitoring activities even more strongly than men when in government because of different social roles ascribed to men and women as well as differences in risk aversity between sexes. We analyse panel data for three oversight tools from the GermanBundestagbetween 1949 and 2013 to test this proposition. Our findings imply that characteristics of political actors influence even a strongly institutionalised process as oversight and further clarify the gender bias in political representation.

AbstractMinisterial portfolios that promise high status, broad public visibility, and extensive financial and personnel resources continue to be men's domains. In this article, we shed light on gender inequality in ministerial selection processes by studying the duration from a minister's original appointment as a member of cabinet until he or she receives responsibility for a highly prestigious portfolio. We argue that the time it takes for ambitious politicians to prove themselves suitable for this type of cabinet position depends on their sex and the degree to which the policy area for which they are responsible reinforces stereotypical expectations about their personality traits. Empirical evidence from event history analysis of original data including detailed information on all ministerial careers in 27 European countries between 1990 to 2018 supports these propositions. These findings reveal that even highly qualified women politicians who are already members of the executive face additional barriers during their political careers.

AbstractIn this article, we introduce a unique data set containing all written communication published by the German Bundestag between 1949 and 2017. Increasing numbers of scholars make use of protocols of parliamentary speeches, parliamentary questions or the texts of legislative drafts in various fields of comparative politics including representation, responsiveness, professionalization and political careers or parliamentary agenda studies. Since preparing parliamentary documents is rather resource intensive, these studies remain limited to single points in time, types of documents and/or policy areas. The long time horizon and various types of documents covered by our new comprehensive data set will enable scholars interested in parliaments, parties and representatives to answer various innovative research questions related to legislative studies.

While the conditions under which states introduce power-sharing and autonomy rights for minorities are well researched, the reasons why they do so to varying degrees are less known. This article introduces the argument that the level of certainty about a country's future democratic development explains variation in the extent of minority rights across states. Ethnic groups assess the chance for successful democratic transition and, if they are optimistic about the prospects, they are satisfied with limited minority governing rights. In contrast, groups that are uncertain about their future position in power relations and that fear an autocratic backlash, request extensive power-sharing and autonomy rights. Democratic prospects and the extend of minority governing rights are, thus, negatively correlated. This theoretical proposition finds support in the analysis of seven former Yugoslav countries, which shows that states with more pessimistic democratic prospects at independence, introduced more extensive minority governing rights afterwards. This innovative argument contributes to the literature focusing on the preferences of a country's elites by highlighting the role of citizens' interests.

While the conditions under which states introduce power-sharing and autonomy rights for minorities are well researched, the reasons why they do so to varying degrees are less known. This article introduces the argument that the level of certainty about a country's future democratic development explains variation in the extent of minority rights across states. Ethnic groups assess the chance for successful democratic transition and, if they are optimistic about the prospects, they are satisfied with limited minority governing rights. In contrast, groups that are uncertain about their future position in power relations and that fear an autocratic backlash, request extensive power-sharing and autonomy rights. Democratic prospects and the extend of minority governing rights are, thus, negatively correlated. This theoretical proposition finds support in the analysis of seven former Yugoslav countries, which shows that states with more pessimistic democratic prospects at independence, introduced more extensive minority governing rights afterwards. This innovative argument contributes to the literature focusing on the preferences of a country's elites by highlighting the role of citizens' interests.