Show Recommended textbook solutions
Politics in States and Communities15th EditionSusan A. MacManus, Thomas R. Dye 177 solutions American Government1st EditionGlen Krutz 412 solutions Politics in States and Communities15th EditionSusan A. MacManus, Thomas R. Dye 177 solutions American Corrections11th EditionMichael D. Reisig, Todd R. Clear 160 solutions DIFFERENTIAL IMPACT OF ELECTORAL SYSTEMS |
Number of Women in the Lower or Single Houses of National Parliaments of the European Union and the type of Electoral System | ||||||
Order | Country | Last Election | Total Seats | Women | %W | Electoral System |
1 | Sweden | 09 1994 | 349 | 141 | 40.4 | Mixed (Closed lists) |
2 | Finland | 03 1995 | 200 | 67 | 33.5 | Mixed (Preferential) |
3 | Denmark | 09 1994 | 179 | 59 | 33.0 | Proportional (Preferential) |
4 | Netherlands | 05 1994 | 150 | 47 | 31.3 | Proportional (Preferential) |
5 | Austria | 12 1995 | 183 | 49 | 26.8 | Proportional (Closed lists) |
6 | Germany | 10 1994 | 672 | 176 | 26.2 | Mixed/Two (Closed lists) |
7 | Spain | 03 1996 | 350 | 86 | 24.6 | Proportional (Closed lists) |
8 | Luxembourg | 06 1994 | 60 | 12 | 20.0 | Proportional (Preferential) |
9 | Ireland | 11 1992 | 166 | 23 | 13.9 | Proportional (Multi seat) |
10 | Portugal | 10 1995 | 230 | 30 | 13.0 | Proportional (Closed list) |
11 | Belgium | 05 1995 | 150 | 18 | 12.0 | Proportional (Preferential) |
12 | Italy | 04 1996 | 630 | 70 | 11.1 | Mixed (Weak PR) |
13 | United Kingdom | 04 1992 | 651 | 62 | 9.5 * | Majoritarian (Plurality) |
14 | France | 03 1993 | 577 | 37 | 6.4 ** | Majoritarian (Two ballot) |
15 | Greece | 09 1996 | 300 | 19 | 6.3 | Mixed (Weak PR) |
Figures from Inter-Parliamentary Union (1997:90-92, 136) and Inter-Parliamentary Union "Electoral Systems: A Worldwide Comparative Study" (1993).
* Last elections: 05.1997: 18.2%
** Last elections: 06.1997: 10.92%
This correlation is reinforced with the example of Germany, which uses a double or mixed electoral system, with both single member constituencies and a proportional representation system, each of which select half of the members of the Bundestag. However, the majority of female politicians in Germany are elected through the PR list.
On a worldwide level, this pattern is repeated: of the five countries in the world who have 30% or more female parliamentarians in their single or lower house (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark and the Netherlands), three have a proportional electoral system, and two have a mixed electoral system (with none having a majoritarian system). Of the eight countries that have 29-25% female M.P.s in their lower or single house (New Zealand, Seychelles, Austria, Germany, Iceland, Argentina, Mozambique and South Africa), all have either proportional or mixed electoral systems (again, none have a majoritarian system). At the lowest worldwide level of female political representation, in those countries with 10% or less women in the lower or single house of Parliament, a far higher proportion have a majoritarian electoral system, with nearly 90% of countries that have no female parliamentarians using a majority system.
The apparent strength of proportional representation over the majoritarian system in terms of greater female political representation has been partly explained as being:
"... found in the multi-member constituencies necessitated by PR. Under a single- member constituency system, the candidate selectors might be reluctant to pick a woman as the party's
sole candidate, using the excuse, genuine or otherwise, that they believe some voters will be less likely to vote for a woman instead of a man. But when several candidates are to be chosen, it not only is possible but also positively advantageous for a ticket to include both men and women, for an all-male list of five or more candidates is likely to alienate some voters."
Gallagher, Laver and Mair quoted in Council of Europe, 1996:36.
The majoritarian system is seen to be unfair to women because with such an electoral practice, the success of the party heavily depends on the single candidate it selects. This candidate will have been selected on tightly defined criteria, as part of what makes a "successful" nominee; the selection process has been criticised for the emphasis given to "male" characteristics. Female candidacy is often questioned on the assumption that the electorate is less likely to vote for a woman. However, in proportional systems, the selection of candidates for the party list depends on other factors in addition to a candidate's personal appeal. The most important of these is the party's wish to appeal to as many voters as possible, which includes listing female candidates, as the absence or small number of women on a national electoral list could be a negative factor for some of the electorate.
Effect of party lists on female political representation
As Table 1 showed, PR is the electoral system of those member states with the highest and lowest levels of female political representation (Sweden and Greece). Therefore, proportional representation alone is not responsible for the strength of women parliamentarians in other European Union countries. An important factor within PR is the placement of female candidates in eligible positions on party lists.
Table 3: Method of Voting in a worldwide comparison of the twelve countries with 25% or more women elected to the lower or single House in 1996
Order | Country | Percentage of women elected | Electoral System |
1 | Sweden | 40.4 | Mixed (Closed lists) |
2 | Norway | 39.4 | Proportional (Closed list) |
3 | Finland | 33.5 | Mixed (Preferential) |
4 | Denmark | 33.0 | Proportional (Preferential) |
5 | Netherlands | 31.3 | Proportional (Preferential) |
6 | Seychelles | 27.3 | Mixed |
7 | Austria | 26.8 | Proportional (Closed lists) |
8 | Germany | 26.2 | Mixed (Closed Lists) |
9 | Iceland | 25.4 | Proportional (Closed lists) |
10 | Argentina | 25.3 | Proportional (Closed lists) |
11 | Mozambique | 25.2 | Proportional (Closed lists) |
12 | South Africa | 25.0 | Proportional (Closed lists) |
Figures taken from the Inter-Parliamentary Union (1997:136)
As Table 1 showed, the six member states of the European Union with the highest level of female political representation (Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Netherlands, Austria and Germany) are evenly split between those PR electoral systems with closed lists and those with preferential voting.
However, on a worldwide comparison, out of the twelve countries with a proportion of 25% or more women elected to parliament (See Table 3), eight have a system of closed lists, including the two highest ranking countries: Sweden (40.4%) and Norway (39.4%). While other factors such as the socio-political context of each country must be taken into account, it can be said that preferential systems, where the electorate is left to choose, is a potential barrier to female political representation. However, it also implies that political parties themselves have a vital role to play in terms of putting female candidates forward in eligible positions; this is especially the case with electoral systems of closed lists.
European Parliament: March 1997