What Voters Really Think About Gender Quotas: An APSA Public Scholarship Program Summary
Source: Political Science Now
What happens to citizens’ perceptions of political decisions when legislatures achieve gender balance through quotas, policies that require parties to include women as candidates? Critics have long argued that mandating women’s presence casts doubt on elected officials’ qualifications and erodes the legitimacy of the decisions they make. Examining public attitudes across 12 democracies, Amanda Clayton, Diana O’Brien, and Jennifer Piscopo find the opposite. Citizens strongly prefer gender-balanced decision-making bodies, and this preference holds even when balance is achieved through quotas. The real threat to democratic legitimacy, they argue, is not affirmative action but the continued exclusion of women from political power.
What happens to citizens’ perceptions of political decisions when legislatures achieve gender balance through quotas, policies that require parties to include women as candidates? Critics have long argued that mandating women’s presence casts doubt on elected officials’ qualifications and erodes the legitimacy of the decisions they make. Examining public attitudes across 12 democracies, Amanda Clayton, Diana O’Brien, and Jennifer Piscopo find the opposite. Citizens strongly prefer gender-balanced decision-making bodies, and this preference holds even when balance is achieved through quotas. The real threat to democratic legitimacy, they argue, is not affirmative action but the continued exclusion of women from political power.