A Formal Analysis of Legislative Turnover: Women Candidates and Legislative Representation

Las parlamentarias regionales en España: masa crítica, experiencia parlamentaria e infl uencia política

“…However, in substantive terms the difference is small: it ranges from a maximum of 3.9% and a minimum of less than 2.8%, and the simple average along the seven periods is 1.1%. These results do not substantially differ from the studies on incumbency that conclude that no gender bias exists (Lawless and Pearson, 2008;Studlar and Matland,1994;Norris and Lovenduski, 1993;Darcy and Choike, 1986).…”

“…In countries with majority electoral systems, the experience has been dealt with in terms of the impact of the "incumbency" factor on the entry of new representatives into the lower chambers. Darcy and Choike (1986) emphasised that the process by which political systems transfer the candidacy of a group [women] into legislative representation needs to be better understood, and also shared the view held by different authors (Norris and Lovenduski, 1993;Studlar and Matland,1994;Lawless and Pearson, 2008) that the representatives chosen for a particular district, regardless of whether they are men or women, have a higher chance of being re-elected compared to new candidates.…”

“…Various studies on incumbency have not been able to prove that women are discriminated against politically; for example, although there is an under-representation of women in American politics, research has been incapable of demonstrating that gender entails negative consequences in different areas of electoral competition (Darcy and Choike, 1986). For the 1958-2006 period in the United States, Lawless and Pearson (2008) also found that, once controlled for the incumbency effect and a number of district demographics, women did not face a systematic bias in the elections 13 .…”

The Primary Reason for Women's Underrepresentation? Reevaluating the Conventional Wisdom

“…When party and incumbency status are taken into account, the evidence is clear that women win races as often as men" (Thomas and Wilcox 1998, 3). Based on her analysis of a series of public opinion polls and election results, Dolan (2004, 50) Not surprisingly, the contemporary literature on women in politics suggests that the main barriers to increasing the number of women in electoral office are related to limits in political opportunities (Carroll 1994;Darcy and Choike 1986;Darcy, Welch, and Clark 1994;Smith and Fox 2001;Thomas andWilcox 1998, but see Bledsoe andHerring 1990). Carroll's (1994) landmark study of female candidates running for congressional, statewide, and state legislative office in 1976 concluded that the scarcity of women in electoral office could largely be explained by limitations in "political opportunity variables," incumbency advantages in particular.…”

Towards a Gender-Equal Bundestag? The Impact of Electoral Rules on Women’s Representation

“…Given that the majority of candidates are men, incumbency represents a considerable disadvantage for women (Darcy et al 1994;Gaddie and Bullock III 1997;Rule 1987;Schwindt-Bayer 2005;Skard and Haavio-Mannila 1985;Welch and Studlar 1990). Several studies have already associated high incumbency rates with small proportions of women holding office especially in countries using SMD, as, for instance, in the United States (Andersen and Thorson 1984;Darcy and Choike 1986;Thompson and Moncrief 1993), Great Britain (Norris 1993;Norris et al 1992) and Canada (Young 1991).…”