ISIS MONOGRAPH SERIES 2005ISSUE NO. 1, VOL. 1Gender, Governance and Democracy:Women in Politics
Editorial TeamGuest Editor Josefa‘Gigi’FranciscoManaging Editor AnjaniAbellaCopy Editor MarilenAbesamisAssistant Copy Editor MariaMelindaAndoLay-out and Graphics Sonic303ComputerCenterGraphics AileenFamilara
VolumeContributorsEurope DrudeDahlerupAsia Josefa‘Gigi’Francisco
Published with funding support from Evangelishes Missionwerk/Church Development Service (EED – Germany) and complimentary funds from the WAGI/UP-NCPAG/UNDP Philippine Governance Portfolio Fund.
Gender,GovernanceandDemocracy:
Strategies to Enhance Women’s Political Representation in Different Electoral Systems
Drude Dahlerup
Women in Politics and Governance: Complex
Challenges from GlobalisationJosefa ‘Gigi’ Francisco
AnIsisInternational-ManilapublicationincollaborationwiththeWomenandGenderInstitute(WAGI)
Isis International-Manila is an advocate ofsharing information for free. As such, it allowsreproductionorutilisationofanyarticleorgraphicin this monograph, provided the authors, artistsandpublishersareappropriatelycited.Informationmay be reprinted upon permission from andacknowledgementofIsisInternational-Manila.
OpinionsexpressedintheIsisInternational-Manilamonograph series do not necessarily reflect theviewpointofIsis-Manila.
Isis International-Manila reserves the right to editmaterials for clarity and brevity to suit the style,designandaudienceofitsmonographseries.
Contents
Preface
Introduction
DRUDE DAHLERUP: Strategies to Enhance Women’s Political Representation in Different Electoral Systems
JOSEFA ‘GIGI’ FRANCISCO: Women in Politics and Governance: Complex Challenges from Globalisation
.............05
...........09
.......12
...34
In the year 2005, Isis International-Manila (Isis-Manila)
witnessed the consolidated shift of attention, energies and
resourcestowardtheMilleniumDevelopmentGoals(MDGs)
andtheattempttocounter,ifnot,‘manage’thefast-risingstate
ofglobal insecurity.As theworldgrapplesandtries tokeep
pace with these developments, women now fear a backlash
in the gains made toward their empowerment as women’s
participation and visibility in public spaces are gradually
beingcurtailed.The low-key reviewof the statusofwomen
followingtheadoptionof theBeijingPlatformforActiona
decadeago,wasreflectiveofanenvironmentwherewomen’s
interestsstillremainremotefromStateagenda.
Globalcapitalismiswritingitsscriptonthebodies
and livesofwomenandgirlsas it intersectswithglobalised
mediaandICTs.Spacesforwomen’sinteractionareincreasingly
shrinkingasorganisationsandnetworkswork to strengthen
trans-regionalfeministactivismandinter-movementdialogue
in challenging new and old manifestations of neo-liberal
globalisation.Thus,Isis-Manilapresents“Gender,Governance
andDemocracy”, the inaugural issueof thewe!monograph
series.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
05
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
06
Thewe!monographseriesisIsis-Manila’strans-regionalpublication
that visibly facilitates cross-border understanding and analysis on cutting-
edge issues and current affairs. Its purpose is to promote a deeper and
critical interrogation of the inter-linkages of global trends and the broader
developmentagenda.Analternativeplatformthatinterrogatesissuesfroma
feminist standpoint, thewe!monographputs forward thevoicesofwomen
scholars and activists. Further, it seeks to elevate feminist perspectives and
analysesinanattempttogenerateawarenessonourcommonsitesofstruggles
againstpatriarchy,corporatehegemonies,right-wingideologicalregimes,and
empire-building.
Inthisinauguralissue,theselectionofcross-borderexchangesbetween
AsiaandEuropeproceedsfromtheFriedrich-Ebert-StiftungPhilippines’(FES)
international conference Women Shaping Democracy: Progressive Politics
TenYearsAftertheWorldConferenceonWomeninBeijinginOctober2005,
co-organisedbytheSoutheastAsianWomen’sWatch(SEAWWatch)andIsis-
Manila. Isis-Manila extends its appreciation to colleagues in SEAWWatch,
WAGI and FES, in particular, to FES former Director, Beate Martin, and
formerFESSoutheastAsiaRegionalGenderCoordinator,AnjaKoehler.The
engagements that took place in this conference served as the bases for this
monographseries.
Isis-Manila is immenselygrateful to its long-timepartnerWomen
andGenderInstitute(WAGI),forcollaboratinginproducingthismonograph
series.Weareespeciallygrateful to theenthusiasmandcommitmentof the
Executive Director of WAGI, Josefa ‘Gigi’ Francisco who served as this
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
07
issue’s guest editor. The direction setting and production of this inaugural
issuewasmadepossiblethroughthecoordinationandleadershipofaninter-
generationaleditorialteamfromIsis-ManilaandWAGIcomprisedofAnjani
Abella, Marilen Abesamis, Maria Melinda Ando, and Aileen Familara. We
alsoextendourappreciationtothealwaysreliableandever-readySonic303
forthecoverdesignandLithwerkeforlay-outandprintingservices.
Finally,Isis-Manilaalsoextendsitsutmostthankstoallitspartners
thatcontinuetosupportandbelieveinourworkandcontributionstoward
people-centreddevelopment and social change. Inparticular, our gratitude
goestotheEvangelischesMissionwerk/ChurchDevelopmentService(EED–
Germany),withcomplimentaryfundsdrawnfromtheWAGI/UP-NCPAG
(UniversityofthePhilippines–NationalCollegeofPublicAdministrationand
Government)/UNDP(UnitedNationsDevelopmentProgram)Governance
PortfolioFund.
Thismonographseriescompilessixcriticalopinionarticlesinthree
(3) volumes, namely [1]Women in Politics; [2] Gender and International
Trade; and [3] Peace and Security. The series reflect Asian and European
perspectivesoncurrentdebatesongender,governanceanddemocracy.
Acommonthreadrunningthroughtheserichcross-borderessaysis
thecallfortheconstructionofdemocraticandgender-sensitivedifferentiated
democracieswitheconomiesbasedonsolidarityandnotonprofit.Assuch,
inthelargerdebateofre-claimingpeace,nationbuilding,andstatebuilding,
all essays call for thepromotionofgender justice andequity and re-affirm
thatrealdevelopmentwillnottakeplacewithoutthepromotionofwomen’s
empowermentandrecognitionofwomen’spro-activeparticipationinpublic
spaces.
Indeedmuchislefttobedone.
Raijeli Drodrolagi NicoleExecutive Director
Isis International-Manila
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
08
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
09The struggle of women to achieve parity with men
in leadership and decision-making within the public
institutions of states, politics and governments is an
important arena of political action and discourse for
contemporarywomen’smovements.AttheFourthWorld
ConferenceonWomen(FWCW,Beijing1995),theretook
place a global consensus around women’s advancement
in the public sphere through the institutionalisation of
nationalmachineriesforwomen,aswellas,theaffirmation
ofthegenderquotainpolicyanddecision-makingspaces.
Inresponse,asignificantnumberofwomen’sgroupsand
individualfeministsintheSouthtookupthechallengeof
morestronglyaddressingandchallengingmaledomination
in politics — a struggle earlier started by sisters in the
North.
WhathaveweachievedsincetheFourthWorld
Conference onWomen? The two essays featured in this
monographprovideaglimpseofthecontinuingreflection
and debates on women in politics and governance. The
contributionfromEuropecriticallyexaminesthecomplex
ofpossibilitiesandchallengeslinkedtoimplementingthe
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
strategyof ‘genderquotas’ indifferentiatedelectoralsystemsinreferenceto
the experiences of women in the Nordic and Scandinavian countries. The
contributionfromAsiafocusesonthecontradictedcharacterofgovernance
and politics that arises from the dynamic of globalisation, and points to
its serious implications for Asian women entering politics or occupying
governmentpositions.Whilethefirstessaybeginsbyaddressingtheproblem
of women’s under-representation in politics, the other is introduced by
flaggingthequestionofwhetherwomenshouldatallbeengagingwiththe
state. From their contrasted experiential traditions and political contexts,
together, the essays prompt women’s movements everywhere to reflect on
strategiesandtacticsintheirstruggletomakepoliticsandgovernancemore
justandaccessibletowomen.
ThefirstessayiswrittenbyDrudeDahlerup.Sheexplainsthefast
andincrementaltrackstoachievinggenderbalanceinpolitics,definingthe
formerasthe‘affirmativeaction’routeandthelatterasthelongstruggleroute
againstthecomplexitiesandlayersofdiscriminationagainstwomen.Shethen
exploresindetailtheoutcomesandissuesinimplementingthegenderquota
systemwithrespecttotheproportionalrepresentation(PR)system,plurality-
majoritysystem,andinasystemthatcombinesboth,scanningexperiences
across various countries. In ending, she reaffirms previous claims that the
increasedparticipationofwomencanneverbefullyguaranteedbythekind
of electoral system that a society practises, however, also establishes that
electoralgenderquotaisanimportantstrategyforwomen’spolitical justice
andempowermentunderthe‘rightcircumstances’.
ThesecondessayiswrittenbyJosefa‘Gigi’Franciscowhopresents
a contradicted terrain of Asian politics and governance which she sees as
resulting primarily from the contesting processes of a centralising trade
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
intensificationprocessandare-democratisationmovementintheregion.As
theseprocessessimultaneouslyinteractandcontest,women’sadvancementis
alsomarkedwithpersistentandnewissues.Shetheninterrogateswomenin
politicsbyposingtwoquestions:Whoarethewomenandtowhomarethey
accountable? In theprocess, she raises the complexities facingwomenwho
engage with the state and urges the women’s movements to address more
resolutely the inter-linking of economic justice and gender justice issues
withinalternativepoliticalspaces.
Across Asia and Europe, women are asserting and entering the
halls of formal power. Through the gender quota, some feminists may be
entering undemocratic political spaces while some undemocratic women
maybebenefitingfromtheexpansionofdemocraticspaces.Andasfeminists
participateindecision-makingwithingovernmentinstitutionsandpolitical
parties, there is danger of de-politicisation but also opportunities for re-
castingpolitics.Theseareissuesthatwomen’smovementseverywhereneedto
continuallyaddressandreflecton.
Anjani Abella andJosefa ‘Gigi’ Francisco
Issue Editors
In 2005, women occupied only 16% of the
parliamentaryseats intheworld,whilemenhad
84%.Notwithstandingeffortsbywomentoclaim
seatsingovernment,politicsisstillaheavilymale-
dominated arena (Inter-Parliamentary Union
Website,RetrievedlastFebruary15,2006).Today,
however,weseetheemergenceofnewdiscourses
of women’s under-representation followed by
manyoldaswellasnewstrategiestochangethis
under-representation.
Itisawell-knownfactthatelectoralsystemsbasedonproportional
representation [PR] benefit women’s political representation. On the
average, the level of women’s representation in parliaments is higher in
systems that use PR than in plurality-majority systems1 (Matland &
Studlar,1996;Norris,2004).Iwilldiscusswhythisisthecase,andwhy
it isdifficult toconstructa systemthatwillwork inaplurality-majority
system. How can one demand, for instance, 30% women on the list in
an electoral system with only one candidate per party? Because of such
difficulties, the gap between the majority system and the PR system in
termsofwomen’s representationmight increase evenmorewith thenew
trendtouseelectoralgenderquotasatcandidatenominations.
Women’smovementstheworldoverhaveattemptedtogivelegitimacyto
thecontroversialdemandforgenderquotasbyreferringtothe landmark
documentthatistheBeijingPlatformforAction[BPFA].Weshallexamine
the varying discourses [with discourse hereby defined as interlinked
constructionsofmeanings,whichincludeperceptionsofpossibleactions,
butnotactualactions].
Firstly,theBeijingPlatformtalksabout‘discriminatoryattitudes
andpractises’ and ‘unequalpower relations’ that lead towomen’sunder-
representation in political decision-making. This may be labelled a
discourse of exclusion. Whereas previously the focus was on women’s
lack of resources or lack of will to participate in politics, attention is
now directed towards those institutional and cultural mechanisms of
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13
The Beijing Platform for Action: Legitimising Gender Quotas
exclusionthatpreventwomenfromobtaininganequalshareofpositions
inmostpoliticalinstitutions.Moreimportantly,inthisnewdiscourse,the
responsibilityforpromotingchangeisshiftedfromtheindividualwoman
totheinstitutionsthemselves,whichareexpectedtoidentifyandcorrect
thecausesofwomen’sunder-representation.
Secondly,thedemandforaminimumlevelofrepresentationfor
women is being challenged by a new discourse of equal representation,
oftenexpressedbythetermgenderbalance.TheWomen’sEnvironmentand
DevelopmentOrganization(WEDO)“50-50”campaignisagoodexample
of this new discourse.The goal is no longer described as ‘more women
in politics’ but rather as ‘equal participation’ and ‘equitable distribution
of power and decision-making at all levels’. Somewhat contradictorily,
however,theBeijingPlatformforActionalsospeaksofsecuringa‘critical
mass’, the latter often associated with figures of 20 or 30% women
(Dahlerup,1988&2005;FWCW,1995:Art.181–195).
Thirdly, affirmative action is suggested as a possible means to
women’s equal participation in political decision-making, although the
controversialword‘quota’isnotuseddirectlyintheBPFA.Forgovernmental
and public administration positions, it is recommended that the world’s
governmentsuse‘specifictargetsandimplementingmeasures…ifnecessary
throughpositiveaction’(FWCW,1995:Art.190.a).Concerningelections,
the BPFA urges governments to commit themselves to ‘take measures,
including,whereappropriate,inelectoralsystemsthatencouragepolitical
partiestointegratewomeninelectiveandnon-electivepublicpositionsin
the sameproportionandat the same levels asmen’ (FWCW,1995:Art.
190.b). Political parties should ‘consider examining party structures and
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
procedures to remove all barriers that directly or indirectly discriminate
againsttheparticipationofwomen’(FWCW,1995:Art.191.a).2
Evenifitslanguageiscautious,theBPFArepresentsonthewholea
newdiscourse,focusingonexclusionaryinstitutionalpractises,settinggender
balance as the goal, anddemanding that governments andpolitical parties
committhemselvestoaffirmativeaction.
Thispaperarguesthat ifwomenareunder-representedbecauseof
openorindirectmechanismsofexclusionanddiscrimination,theneducating
womenisnotenough,andmayevenresultinlittlechangeiftheinstitutions
are not changed simultaneously. If the problem is not women’s lack of
resources,but lackof acknowledgementof those resources and experiences
thatwomenactuallybringwiththemintothepoliticallife,thenthereisno
needtowaitforwomentobemoreeducatedorexperienced.
Inapreviousarticle,wehaveidentifiedtwotrackstogenderbalanceinpolitics
(Dahlerup & Freidenvall, 2005; Dahlerup, 2006). These current tracks
consist in different assumptions about the women’s movement’s historical
development,differentproblem identificationswith regard to thecausesof
women’sunder-representation,anddifferencesinchoiceofstrategy.
The incremental track discourse sees the primary problem as
women’s lack of political resources relative to men. While this discourse
recognisesprejudiceagainstwomen,itassumesthatprejudicewilleventually
The ‘Fast Track’ versus the ‘Incremental Track’ to Gender Balance in Politics
disappearassocietydevelops.Inherentinthisviewisanotionofgradualism,
oftenembeddedinanoptimistic,linearviewofprogress.
In contrast, the fast track discourse rejects the idea of gradual
improvementinwomen’srepresentation.Itevenassumesthatanincreasein
resourcesmaynotautomaticallyleadtoequalrepresentationbuttoabacklash.
Sinceexclusionanddiscriminationareatthecoreofthemalady,thisviewsees
the solution tobeaffirmativeaction.According to the fast trackdiscourse,
genderbalancewillnotcomeabout‘byitself.’Theresponsibilityfordealing
with the under-representation of women rests with political institutions.
It follows from the understanding of women’s under-representation, that
measures like electoral gender quotas for the recruitment and election of
femalecandidatesarenecessary.Progressforwomenwillnotcomeinevitably,
withouttheinterventionofsignificantinstitutions.
Electoralgenderquotasrepresent‘thefasttrack’toequalrepresentation
ofwomenandmeninpoliticsincontrastto‘theincrementaltrack.’Behind
thefasttrackmodelisagrowingimpatienceamongcontemporaryfeminists
withtheslowpaceofchangesinwomen’sposition.Today,feministsarenot
willingtowaitfiftytoeightyyearstoachievetheirgoals.Thenotionofthe
fast track versus the incremental track is here presented as two discourses,
butmayalsobeusedtocharacterisetwodifferenttypesofequalitypolicies,
andasanaccountoftheactualspeedofhistoricaldevelopmentinwomen’s
representation (Dahlerup & Freidenvall, 2003 & 2005). This distinction
betweenthetwotracksmayberelevantformanyotherpolicyareasbuthas
beendevelopedwithrespecttogenderandpoliticalinstitutions.TheBeijing
PlatformforActionclearlyrepresentsthefasttrackdiscourse.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
17
In1990,theUnitedNation’sEconomicandSocialCouncilendorsed
aglobaltargetof30%womenindecision-makingpositionsby1995(United
NationsCommissionontheStatusofWomen,1995).Thistargetisyettobe
met.In1995,only10percentoftheworld’sparliamentarianswerewomen,
andtodayitisonly16percent.
TheNordiccountries—Denmark,Finland,Iceland,Norwayand
Sweden — have for a long time displayed the highest number of female
politicians,consistentlyexceedingthe20percentthresholdsincethe1970s
and1980s.TherestofEurope,theAmericas,Asia,andSub-SaharanAfricaare
allclosetotheworldaverage,whilethefigureforthePacificisonly10.9%and
forArabcountries6.8%(Inter-ParliamentaryUnionWebsite,Retrievedlast
February15,2006).However,wefindconsiderablevariationswithinregions,
andtodaydevelopingcountries likeCostaRica,SouthAfrica,Rwandaand
MozambiquehaveovertakenindustrialisednationsliketheUnitedStatesand
the United Kingdom. The US House of Representatives has 15% and the
HouseofCommonsonly19%womenwithintheirrespectivebodies.Today,
we are witnessing an interesting challenge to the Nordic countries, which,
togetherwiththeNetherlands,usedtobeverymuchaloneatthetopofthe
worldrankingintermsofwomeninparliament.
In Latin America, South Africa, and in many other developing
countries,theextraordinarilyhighrepresentationofwomeninScandinavian
parliamentshasbeenusedasanargumentinsupportoftheintroductionof
electoralgenderquotas.However,thisargumentismisleading,sincethereal
boominwomen’srepresentationinDenmark,Finland,Norway,andSweden
occurredinthe1970sandinIcelandinthe1980s,waybeforetheintroduction
ofquotas.Genderquotaswereintroducedwhenwomenalreadycomprised20
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
to30%seatsintheseparliaments.Moreover,intheNordiccountrieselectoral
quotashavealwaysbeenvoluntary,nevera legal requirement,andareonly
usedbysomeofthepoliticalpartiesatthecentreandattheleft(Freidenvall,
Skjeie&DahlerupinDahlerup,2006).3
Nordiccountriescomeclosetowhatwelabeltheincrementaltrack
towards equal political representation for women and men. It had taken
approximately sixty years from women’s enfranchisement for Denmark,
Norway,andSwedentocrossthe20%thresholdandseventyyearstoreach
30%. This means that the Nordic countries, in spite of the high level of
women’srepresentation,cannolongerbeconsideredthemodel,oratanyrate
theonlymodel,forincreasingwomen’srepresentationintheworldtoday.
Ithasbeenarguedthatgenderquotasonlydealwiththesymptoms
ofwomen’s under-representation,not its causes.Fromoneperspective this
seemscorrect.Genderquotasdonotremovethemanybarriersthatwomen
areconfrontedwithinsociety,betheyprejudiceagainstwomenorproblems
thatcombinework,familylife,andpoliticalobligations.However,seenfrom
anotherperspective,genderquotasdotargetexactlyonemajorproblem—
politicalparties’selectionofmalesastheircandidatesforelectiontoamuch
largerextent,overwomenbecauseoftheirownprejudiceorinanticipation
ofvoters’prejudice.Genderquotasinawayrepresentajumpoverhistorical
barriers to equality. They give the voters the option to choose women
candidates, which they may not have had before [within their preferred
party].Opponentsofgenderquotas,however,arguethatquotasviolatethe
liberalprincipleofmerit—letthebestman[sic]win!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
Toanswerthequestionofwhetherelectoralgenderquotasareinfactaformof
discriminationagainstmen,wemustlookathowpoliticalsystemsfunction.
Thegatekeeperstothepoliticalarenaareusuallythepoliticalpartiesbecause
theycontrolthenominationprocess.Theroleofvotersisoftennotasdecisive
asitisoftenbelieved.Whowillbeelectedisoftendecidedbythenomination
committeesofthepoliticalparties—firstly,byselectingthecandidatesand
secondly,byplacingthemingoodorbadconstituenciesintermsofchances
ofbeingelected.Priortothepolls, thepoliticalpartiesusuallyknowwhich
seatswillbe‘safeseats’intheelection.Thus,inallsystems,itisimportantto
examinewhoactuallycontrolsthenominationprocess.Oneofthereasonsfor
thehistoricallyhighwomen’srepresentationintheScandinaviancountriesis
thatwomen’sorganisationshaveconsistentlyaskedthequestion:Whocontrols
thenominationprocess?Subsequently,theyhavedemanded50%womenon
thenominationscommittees.
The question of whether or not to introduce gender quotas is
increasingly influenced by recommendations of international organisations.
Today, we see electoral gender quotas being introduced in nations where
womenhavebeenalmostentirelyexcludedfrompolitics,aswellasinsocieties
withalonghistoryoffemaleinvolvementinthelabourmarketandinpolitical
life,suchastheScandinaviancountries[usingvoluntarypartyquotas].
The introduction of effective quota systems represents a shift in
approach,from‘equalopportunity’to‘equalityofresults.’However,sincemost
quotasystemsspecifythenumberofwomenandmentobepresentedtovoters
Are Gender Quotas a Discrimination against Voters? Against Men?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
20
onelectorallists,andnotthegenderdistributionfollowingtheelection,one
mightprefertoseeelectoralgenderquotasratherasanexampleof‘realequal
opportunity.’Womenandmenhaveanequalchancetopresentthemselvesto
thevoters,andinopenlistPR-systemsaswellasinmajoritysystems,voters
havethechoiceofvotingforafemaleormalecandidate.
Someconsiderquotastobeaformofdiscriminationandaviolation
of the principle of fairness, while others view them as compensation for
structuralbarriers thatprevent fair competition.Some see genderquotas as
violatingtheprinciplesoffairness,meritsandindividualism,othersperceive
quotasasanefficientwayofattaining‘real’equality,thatis,‘equalityofresults’
(Dahlerup,1998).
Ifwetaketheactualexclusionofwomenasthestartingpoint,that
is,ifwerecognisethatmanybarriersexisttowomen’sentryintopolitics,then
quotasmustnotbeseenasdiscrimination[againstmen],butascompensation
foralltheobstaclesthatwomenareupagainst.Whenalloftheseimpediments
areremoved,quotaswillnolongerbenecessary,itisargued.Inthisrespect,
quotas are a temporarymeasure—although itmay takedecadesbefore all
social,culturalandpoliticalbarriers to female representationareeradicated.
Today, the very concept of a linear progressive development toward gender
equalityisevenchallengedbyactualexperiencesofbacklashandstandstillin
women’srepresentation.
Gender Quotas – A New Trend in the World Today
Mybookonelectoralgenderquotas,whichisthefirstworld-widecomparative
analysisoftheintroductionofgenderquotasinpolitics(Dahlerup,2006),seeks
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
toanalyse:1)thequotadiscourses;2)theactualquotarules[differentquota
regimes];3)theoftentroublesomeimplementationofquotas;and4)theeffects
ofquotasinbothquantitative[numbers]andqualitative[empowerment]terms.
IncooperationwithInternationalIDEAwehaveconstructedthefirstworld-
widewebsitewithinformationaboutcountriesintheworldwhichareapplying
electoralgenderquotas(seewww.quotaproject.org).
Inthelastoneandahalfdecade,50countrieshaveintroducedlegal
quotas,i.e.quotarulesinscribedinthecountry’sconstitutionorelectorallaw.
Inothercountries,majorpoliticalpartieshave introducedgenderquotas for
their list at public elections, i.e. voluntary party quotas. This is an amazing
development,whichchallengesourprevioustheoriesthatanincreaseinwomen’s
political representation follows from an improvement in women’s education
andaccesstothelabourmarket.
Today we see the world record of Scandinavian countries being
challenged by South Africa, Costa Rica, Mozambique, Argentina — not to
speakofRwanda,whichnowhasthehighestshareofwomeninparliamentin
theworld,placedat48.8%.Genderquotasarepartoftheexplanationbehind
theexceptionalhistoricalleapsinwomen’srepresentationinallthesecountries
(Dahlerup,2006).
Table 1 shows the world ranking order in terms of women’s
representation. Three main features are revealed: Firstly, the Nordic
countries,forsolongonthetopoftheworldrankingorderintermsof
women’s representation, are now being challenged by several developing
countries.Secondly,manycountrieswhichhavemore than30%women
inparliamentmakeuseofsomekindofquotas,betheylegalorvoluntary
party quotas. Thirdly, most of the countries with the highest women’s
representationelecttheirrepresentativesunderthePRsystem.
Table 1. The Top of the World Rank Order of Women in Parliament
Country Women in National Parliament (%)
Quota Type Electoral System
Rwanda 48.8(2203) Legalquotas(C) ListPR
Sweden 45.3(2002) Partyquotas ListPR
Norway 37.9(2005) Partyquotas ListPR
Finland 37.5(2002) Noquota ListPR
Denmark 36.9(2005) Noquota ListPR
The Netherlands 36.7(2003) Partyquotas ListPR
Cuba 36.0(2003) Noquota 2Rounds
Mozambique 36.0(2004) Partyquotas ListPR
Spain 36.0(2004) Partyquotas ListPR
Costa Rica 35.5(2002) Legalquotas(L) ListPR
Belgium 35.3(2003) Legalquotas(L) ListPR
Argentina 33.5(2003) Legalquotas(C) ListPR
Austria 33.3(2002) Partyquotas ListPR
South Africa 32.8(2004) Partyquotas ListPR
Germany 31.8(2005) Partyquotas MMP
Iceland 30.2(2003) Partyquotas ListPR
KeyElectoralSystem:ProportionalRepresentation:ListPR.Mixed:MMP=MixedMemberProportional.KeyQuotaType:Legalquotas:Constitutional(C)orLaw(L).
Source: International IDEA and Stockholm University (2005); official statistics. Election day data, changes after the election are not included.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
22
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
Different Types of Quota Regimes
Someconfusionexistsonwhatconstitutesquotaregimes.Inthebook,Women,
Quotas andPolitics (Dahlerup,2006),wedistinguishbetween twodifferent
dimensionsofthequotasystems:Thefirstdimensionfocusesonwhomandates
thequotasystem,whiletheseconddimensionindicatesthepartoftheselection
andnominationprocessthatthequotatargets.
Asforthemandate,legalgenderquotasaremandatedeitherbythe
constitution[likeinBurkinaFaso,Nepal,thePhilippinesandUganda],orby
electorallaw[asinmanypartsofLatinAmerica,aswellasinBelgium,Bosnia–
Herzegovina,SerbiaandSudan,amongothers].Butquotasmayalsobedecided
forvoluntarilyby thepoliticalparties themselves,voluntarypartyquotas. In
somecountries,suchasArgentina,Bolivia,Ecuador,Germany,Italy,Norway
andSweden,anumberofpoliticalpartieshashadsometypeofquota.Inmany
others,onlyoneortwopartieshaveoptedtousequotas.However,iftheleading
partyinacountryusesaquota,suchastheANC[AfricanNationalCongress]
inSouthAfrica,thismayhaveasignificantimpactontheoverallrateoffemale
representation.Mostpoliticalpartiesdonotemployanykindofquotaatall.
Concerningtheseconddimension,quotasmaytargetthefirststage
oftheselectionprocess,thestageoffindingaspirants,i.e.thosewhoarewilling
tobeconsideredfornomination,eitherbyaprimaryorbythenominations
committeeandotherpartsofthepartyorganisation.Genderquotasatthisstage
arerulesthatdemandacertainnumberorpercentageofwomen[oreithersex]
berepresentedinthepoolofcandidatesthatareupfordiscussion,suchasthe
controversial‘women’sshortlists’intheUK.
Thesecondstageistheactualnominationofcandidatestobeplaced
ontheballotbytheparty.Thisfrequentlyusedquotasystemimpliesthatarule
[legalorvoluntary]isinstalledaccordingtowhich20,30,40oreven50%of
thecandidatesmustbewomen.Thismayalsobeformulatedinagender-neutral
way,statingthatnosexshouldhavelessthan,forinstance,40%andnomore
than60%.
At the third stage, we find quotas as reserved seats. Here it is
decidedthatacertainpercentageornumberoftheparliamentorlocalcouncil
membershipmustbewomen.Increasingly,genderquotasarebeingintroduced
usingreservedseatsystems.
Table2showsvariationsinquotatypeswhenthesetwodimensions
arecombined,thatis,firstlythequestionofmandateandsecondlythequestion
ofwhereinthenominationprocessquotasareplaced.
Table 2. Types of Electoral Quotas
At What Level?
Mandated by Aspirants Candidates Elected
Legal quotas (Constitutional or electoral law)
n/a Candidatequotas Reservedseats
Voluntary party quotas
Aspirantquotas(Shortlists)
Candidatequotas Reservedseats(*)
(*) Informal agreements among political parties reserving a certain number of seats for women like in the case of Morocco
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
25
Now it is possible to show that certain types of quotas are more
frequentlyusedinsomepartsoftheworld,andwhyotherquotaregimesare
preferredinothercontinentsmorethaninothers(Dahlerup,2006).
Evenifconstitutionalamendmentsandnewelectorallawsongender
quotasmayseemtobepowerfulcompliancemeasures,itisnotevidentthat
thesemethodsaremoreeffectivethanpoliticalpartyquotasinincreasingthe
numberofwomeninparliament.Italldependsontheactualrulesandthe
possiblesanctionsfornon-compliance,aswellasonopportunitiesthatexist
forquotaswithinthecountry.Concerningrulesfornomination,thecrucial
issue is whether there are rules concerning the rank order on the list. A
requirementofsay40%maynotresultinanywomanelected,ifallwomen
candidates are placed at the bottom of the list. What matters is whether
thenominatedwomenareplaced inapositionwitharealchanceofbeing
elected.
‘Reserved seats’ are found on the national and regional levels in
countries likeRwanda,Pakistan, Jordan,Uganda and at the local levels in
India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and many other countries. A specific number
of seats is setaside forwomenas in theUgandancase,whereanumberof
regional seats is reserved for women. The differences between the various
systemsshouldnotbeexaggerated.Inaclosedlistsystem,quotasmay,infact,
determinewhichofthecandidateswillbeelected,butthenumberofseatsto
beawardedtoeachpartyisstillfortheelectoratetodecide.
Insomecountriesquotaspertain tominoritiesbasedonregional,
ethnic,linguisticorreligiousdivides.Almostallpoliticalsystemsutilisesome
kindofgeographicalquotatoensureaminimumlevelofrepresentationfor
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
26
adensely-populatedarea,suchasanisland.Thistypeofquotaisusuallynot
consideredascontroversialasagenderquota.
Quotasworkdifferentlyunderdifferent electoral systems.Quotas
aremoreeasilyintroducedinPRandothermulti-listsystems.Butevenina
PRsystem,becauseofthefewelectedcandidates,smallpartiesandpartiesin
smallconstituenciesexperiencedifficulties in implementingquotaswithout
interferencefromthecentralpartyorganisation.
Quotasmaybeintroducedindemocraticpoliticalsystems,inthose
withlimiteddemocraticfreedoms,oreveninnon-democraticorauthoritarian
ones.
Why Are Women Doing Better under the PR System?
Thefrequentuseofvariouselectoralsystemsdoesnotcorrespondtogeneral
socio-economicorculturalfactors.Thesameelectoralsystemmaybeinstalled
inverydifferentcountries,andverysimilarcountriesmayuseverydifferent
electoralsystems.However,researchonwomeninpoliticshastriedtoisolate
the effects of the electoral system per se for the level of women’s political
representation, and the result is unambiguous. Women are more likely to
be electedunder proportional representation thanunder plurality-majority
electoral systems. In 2000, the difference amounted to 15.4 versus 8.5%
womeninparliaments.Inmixedsystems,womenhaveontheaverageashare
of11.3%(Norris,2004,p.187).However,theaveragehidesthefactthatin
somePRcountrieswomendoworsethaninsomeplurality-majoritysystems.
Pippa Norris concludes that “although there is a strong and consistent
association,byitselfthebasictypeofelectoralsystemisneitheranecessary
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
27
norasufficientconditiontoguaranteewomen’srepresentation”(Norris,2004,
pp.187-188).However,focusingonstructuralvariations,PippaNorrisshows
that the differences between the outcomes in PR-systems versus plurality-
majoritysystemsaremuchmoredistinctin‘post-industrial’societies,whereas
the differences between these two electoral systems in terms of women’s
representationaremuchsmallerinindustrialsocietiesandminimalinpoorer
agrariansocieties(Norris,2004,p.188).
The ideal test to isolate the effect of the electoral system, is to
monitorthosecountrieswhichoperateamixedelectoralsystem,combining
thePRsystemwithconstituency listsbasedonplurality-majority.Electoral
statistics show that in these countries, women’s representation tends to be
higheramongthepartoftheparliamentelectedunderPR,thanamongthose
electedinsingle-memberdistricts.ThishasproventobethecaseinGermany
and New Zealand, while the new Scottish parliament turns out to be an
exceptiontothisrule,becauseoftheScottish“Twinningsystem”4(Lundgren,
2005).
Howcanwe explain thedifference inoutcomesbetween the two
electoral systems in highly industrialised or post-industrial societies? The
most important factor seems to be the nominating party organisations’
anticipationofvoterreactions.Whenchoosingitscandidatesforelection,the
partyorganisationtriestoapplyavote-maximisingstrategy.However,factors
suchasconsiderationfortheincumbentMP,fractions,andgeographicalunits
withinthepartyarealsoimportantintheselectionprocess.
In plurality-majority systems, the local party organisation has
only one candidate, and in anticipating the reaction of the voters of their
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
constituency,thepartyingeneralprefersa‘safe’candidate.Inmostsystems,
amalecandidateisconsideredsaferthanawoman,becauseheisbelievedto
beabletoattractmorevoters.InPR-systemsincontrast,eachpartylisthas
manynamesandconsequently,thelocalpartyorganisationwilltrytoattract
manyvotersbycomposingalistwithavarietyofcandidateprofilestoattract
all types of voters: young and old, candidates from different geographical
partsoftheconstituency,differentoccupations,andwomenaswellasmen.
However,wehave seen importantchanges in thecompositionof theparty
listsfollowingaperceptionthatdifferentcategoriesofpeopleareconsidered
anadvantage.
As Diane Sainsbury has pointed out, the electoral system in
itself cannot explain the increase in women’s political representation over
time incountries like theNordic countries,where the increase inwomen’s
representationfirst tookoff in the1970s,becauseallfiveNordiccountries
hadusedthePR-systemsallthroughoutthe20thcentury(Sainsbury,1993).
In my opinion, it is important to reformulate the thesis of the benefit for
womenofthePRsystemtoread:ThePRsystemismoreopentochangethan
theplurality-majoritysystem,becauseitcanincludenewtypesofcandidates,
such as women or immigrants, without replacing the old and well-known
politicalprofiles.
Howaretheplurality-majoritysystemsperformingduringthisnewperiodof
introductionofelectoralgenderquotas?Isthisastrategywhichcanhelpimprove
the bad record of majoritarian systems in terms of women’s parliamentary
Quotas and the Plurality-Majority System - A Difficult Equation
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
29
representation?Unfortunatelynot. It is verydifficult tofind aquota regime
thatwillmatchaplurality-majoritysystem.Theobviousreasonisthatitisnot
possibletotakeforinstance30%of1!Whenthepoliticalpartiesonlynominate
onecandidate,bothvoluntarypartyquotasandlegalquotasintheformofa
minimumpercentageofthenominated,evidentlydonotwork.
ConsideringthecategoriesinTable2,atwhatlevelandmandatedby
whomaregenderquotasinplurality-majoritysystemspossible?Dowefindany
exampleofquotasystemsatallinmajoritysystems?Pleasenotethatingeneral,
gender quotas are not relevant for every category inTable 2. Legal aspirant
quotas are not found, and seldom do we meet voluntary quotas in reserved
seatssystem,Morocco’s“Gentleman’sAgreement”beingatemporaryexception.
Quotacountriesarefoundinallfourremainingcategories.However,onlyafew
countriesoperatingaplurality-majoritysystemhaveintroducedgenderquotas.
Consequently,genderquotasaremuchmorefrequentinPR-systems(Matland
inDahlerup,2006).
However,wedofind somecountrieswhichhave tried to solve the
unsolvableequationofcombiningquotasandtheplurality-majorityelectoral
system.Afewsuchexamplesarecited.Itshouldbenotedthatonlythreeof
thecategoriesinTable2areusedbymajoritysystems,sincenolegalcandidate
quotasystemsexistinmajoritysystems,eveniftheyaretheoreticallypossible.
Onecould,forinstance,imaginealegalquotasystem,inwhichthepartiesmust
nominate a candidate from theunder-representedgender for every free seat,
followingthewithdrawaloftheincumbentMP.Suchquotameasuresarenotin
useinpublicelection,butareknownasanequalitymeasureinappointments
topositionsinasex-segregatedlabourmarket;however,thesearealwaysheavily
contested.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
30
Among the few examples of quotas in plurality-majority systems
onecanmentionisIndia,wherequotaprovisionsforlocalelectionsreserve
certain seats for women and, in combination, for scheduled castes. This
systemfunctionsonarotationbasis,whichmeanstheelectedwomenusually
onlyserveoneperiod,iftheydonotchoosetostandforoneofthe‘free’seats
inthefollowingelection.InBangladesh,thereservedseatsforwomencover
threeconstituencies[wards],whichdeprivetheelectedwomenaconstituency
baseoftheirown(Rai,Bari,Mahtab&MohantyinDahlerup,2006).
ForelectiontothenewScottishparliament,quotaswereintroduced
bythelabourparty.Heretheproblemofcombiningsingle-memberdistricts
andquotasweresolvedby‘twinning’twoconstituencieswhotakentogether
shouldnominateonemanandonewoman.Thissystemresultedinwomen’s
representation in the Scottish parliament overtaking the Westminster
parliament(Lundgren,2005).
Theconclusionisthatitisinfactpossibletocombinetheplurality-
majority electoral systemwith some formof gender quotas, but onlywith
somedifficulty. If thiscombination isnotdeveloped further, thedifference
betweenwomen’srepresentationinmajority-systemsversusPR-systemswill
increase,becausegenderquotasarenodoubtanequalitymeasurethatwillbe
usedmorefrequentlyinthefutureinordertosolvetheproblemofwomen’s
under-representation.
Thefocusofthispaperhasbeentheconnectionbetweenelectoral
systemsandstrategiestoenhancewomen’spoliticalrepresentation,especially
throughelectoralgenderquotas.Ingeneral,electoralgenderquotasturnout
tobepurelysymbolic,especiallyifthechosenquotasystemdoesnotmatch
theelectoralsystemofthecountry,ifnocapacity-buildingisorganisedbythe
women’smovement,andiftherearenosanctionsfornon-complianceandno
rulesabouttherankorderofcandidates.Quotasmayalsoleavetheelected
women relatively powerless, unless other factors change simultaneously.
However, electoral gender quotas can be, under the right circumstances,
an important and more efficient strategy to increase women’s political
representationinnumericalterms(Dahlerup,2006).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
31
Editor’s Note: This paper was presented at an International Conference held last 24 – 25 October, 2005 entitled: Women Shaping Democracy: Progressive Politics Ten Years After the World Conference on Women in Beijing. The conference took place in Ortigas, Philippines and was organised by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Philippine Office (FES) and Isis International-Manila (Isis-Manila) in consultation with the Southeast Asian Women’s Watch (SEAWWatch).
References
Dahlerup,D.(1988).FromaSmall toaLargeMinority:WomeninScandinavianPolitics. Scandinavian Political Studies, 11 (4):275–298.
Dahlerup,D.(1998).UsingQuotastoIncreaseWomen’sPoliticalRepresentation.InA.Karam (Ed.), Women in Parliament. Beyond Numbers (pp. 91 – 106) Stockholm: InternationalIDEA.
Dahlerup,D.(2005).Women, Quotas and Politics.London:Routledge.
Dahlerup,D.&Freidenvall,L. (2003,August).Quotas as a “Fast Track” to Equal Political Representation for Women: Why Scandinavia is No Longer the Model. PaperpresentedattheAmericanPoliticalScienceAssociation’sAnnualMeeting, Philadelphia.
Dahlerup,DandLenitaFreidenvall(2005).‘QuotasasaFastTracktoEqualRepresentationfor Women’,International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7,1:26-48.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
32
International IDEA (2003a). The Implementation of Quotas: Asian Experiences, Quota Workshop Report Series no 1,Stockholm:InternationalIDEA.
International IDEA (2003b). The Implementation of Quotas: Latin American Experiences, Quota Workshop Report Series no 2,Stockholm:InternationalIDEA.
International IDEA (2004). The Implementation of Quotas: African Experiences, Quota Workshop Report Series no 3,Stockholm:InternationalIDEA.
InternationalIDEAandStockholmUniversity(2005).Global Database of Quotas for Women. RetrievedFebruary15,2006fromwebsite:<http://www.quotaproject.org>.
Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) (2004). Women in National Parliaments. Retrieved February15,2006fromwebsite:<http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/world.htm>.
Lundgren,H.(2005).BeforetheBumsareontheSeats.Women’sRepresentationinScottish DevolutionPolitics. InTheResearchProgramonGenderQuotasatStockholm University,DepartmentofPoliticalScience,Working Paper Series, 1.
Matland,R (2006).ElectoralQuotas:Frequency andEffectiveness. InD.Dahlerup (Ed.), Women, Quota and Politics(pp.275–292).London:Routledge.Matland, R. & Studlar, D.T. (1996). The Contagion of Women Candidates in Single-Member District and Proportional Representation Electoral Systems: CanadaandNorway.The Journal of Politics,58(3):707–733.
Norris, P. (2004). Electoral Engineering. Voting Rules and Political Behaviour. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress.
Sainsbury,D.(1993).ThePoliticsofIncreasedWomen’sRepresentation:TheSwedishCase. In J.Lovenduski&P.Norris (Eds),Gender and Party Politics (pp.263–290). ThousandOaks:Sage.
Rai,S.M.,BariF.,Mahtab,N.&MohantyB.(2006).SouthAsia:GenderQuotasandthe PoliticsofEmpowerment–AcomparativeStudy.InD.Dahlerup(Ed.),Women, Quotas and Politics.London:Routledge.
United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women (FWCW) (1995). Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action Fourth World Conference on Women. Retrieved February 15, 2006 from website <http://www.unesco.org/ education/information/nfsunesco/pdf/BEIJIN_E.PDF>.
Women’s Environment & Development Organization (WeDo) (2005). 50/50 Campaign. Get the Balance Right!. Retrieved February 15, 2006 from website <http://www.wedo.org/campaigns.aspx?mode=5050main>.
Endnotes
1 The ‘plurality-majority system’ is here preferred to the more common ‘majority system,’ because within the family of the plurality-majority system, only the Two Round System and the Alternative Vote system actually try to ensure an absolute majority for the winning candidate, while in the First-Past-The Post system as in UK, India, and the US the winner only needs a plurality of votes to win the constituency.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
33
2 Some of these formulations may in fact be found in the CEDAW convention from 1979. The convention recommends for states to adopt ‘temporary special measures’ (UN 1979: Art. 4). Also, the Interparliamentary Union, IPU, and other international and regional organizations formulated early on new claims for women’s representation. However, it is the Beijing Platform that is most often referred to in the quota debate.
3 Argentina, the leading Latin American country promoting quotas, used the argument that the Nordic countries did apply quotas by law, which in fact was never the case. (Oral communication from Mariá José Lubertino, president of the Instituto Social y Politica de la Mujer. Professor of Human Rights and Guarantees at the Universidad de Buenos Aires).
4 “In the first elections to the Scottish Parliament and the National Assembly for Wales in 1999, the Labour Party used a system of selecting their candidates by “twinning” neighbouring seats. The “winnability” of the seats was taken into account, so that each pair would select one man and one woman. Under this twinning system, the members of the two constituencies come together for the purposes of selecting candidates. Party members have two votes - one for a woman and one for a man. The man and woman with the most votes is selected.” (http://www.quotaproject.org/displayCountry.cfm?CountryCode=GB, Retrieved Last March 7, 2006).
About the Author
Drude Dahlerup is a reputable author, researcher and academician on feminist
theory and thewomen’smovementwho is particularly known forherworkonwomen in
politicsandelectoralsystems.SheiscurrentlyconductingaresearchprojectwithInternational
IDEA[InstituteforDemocracyandElectoralAssistance]inSwedenon“GenderQuotasin
Politics–AKey toEquality”and isauthorof thebookWomen,QuotasandPolitics—a
groundbreakingbook thatdocuments andpresents aglobaloverviewon theuseofquotas
based on research in major regions worldwide. Drude Dahlerup is also a professor in the
PoliticalScienceDepartmentoftheUniversityofStockholminSweden.
Women’sexclusionfromthestateascitizens
andaspoliticalagentshasbeenalongrunningissue
withinwomen’smovementseverywhere.Several
feministsfromtheSouthhavecharacterisedthe
relationshipofthewomen’smovementswiththe
patriarchal state as ambivalent (Taylor, 2000),
ambiguous (Shaheed, 1997), complex and
contradictory(Vargas,2000).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
Thisrelationshipisparticularlyperplexing,tosaytheleastfor“…whilethe
stateiscorrectlyseenaspatriarchalandclearlybiasedagainstwomen,much
of themovement’s activism is, in fact, addressed to the state andcarries a
definite, albeit unarticulated expectation that the state will, or should, or
must, support women’s rights and equality” (Shaheed, 1997). Worse, the
relationship sometimes shows adangerous trend towardsde-politicisation:
“Thequestioniswhetherwehavethiscritiqueanylonger–ofpatriarchy,the
stateortheUN–orwhetherweareonlyinterestedinbeingincludedinthe
system”(KhancitedinAntrobus,2004).
Butthereisnothingambivalent,ambiguousorcontradictoryinthe
consensusreachedby189countriesinBeijingwhentheypledgedtopromote
the equality of women in decision-making and in strengthening national
machineries for enabling women’s co-equal governance with men. Section
G on “women and power and decision-making” of the Beijing Platform
for Action [BPFA] supports the advancement of women’s participation in
public leadershipandgovernance.Central to this commitment is thegoal
ofachievinggenderbalanceinpoliticalrepresentationanddecision-making
[seeDahlerupinthisseries].Theresponsesfromthewomen’smovementsare
widespreadandvaried.Women’sactionsinmanypartsoftheSouthexpand
intoissuesrelatingtowomen’scitizenshipandissuesofdemocratisingpower
relationsatalllevels(Vargas,2000).Someofthemoreprominentresponses
includedthefollowing:monitoringprojectspressuringgovernmentstokeep
their promises in Beijing; women’s participation in electoral politics and
entryintopoliticalpartiesaswellasassumptiontoappointivegovernment
positions; lobbying for lawsprotectingwomen fromall formsofviolence;
strengthening of national machineries for promoting women’s equality in
governance;andthepromotionofvariousgendermainstreamingstrategies
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
36
particularly in development and anti-poverty programmes. Putting these
responsesinaperspective,Antrobuswrites:
There is also no gain saying the fact that women need the state. This is especially true for women in the South. The dilemma for women’s movements in the South in relation to the state is that on the one hand, the majority of women lack resources and therefore must depend on the state to provide the basic services essential to women’s multiple roles; on the other hand, women must be careful that these dependencies are not used to reinforce traditional roles within the family. (Antrobus, 2004)
TenyearsafterBeijing,theoverallsensecomingoutofseveralstudies
intheAsianregionisthatthegoalofstatetransformationthroughwomen’s
equality indecision-making is far frombeingachieved.Doubtshavebeen
evenraisedonwhethertherehasbeenarealmovement.Worse,abacklashand
areversalofearliergainshavebeennoted,linkingthemwiththeemergence
ofamoredifficultpoliticalclimateandchallengingeconomicenvironment.
Theseputintoquestioncurrentnotionsandstrategiesforwomen’sentryinto
politicsandgovernance(APWW,2005;FES&SEAWWATCH,2005;ISIS
International-Manila,FESandSEAWWATCH2005).
In the past “politics and governance” was understood in relation to the
sovereign state. However, globalisation [by which is meant the rapid
integration of global production and markets in recent years] has altered
not only the conventional functions of national governments but more
fundamentally the nature of the nation-state or what it is all about.
Nowadays, governance has expanded to include global, regional and sub-
nationalspheres.Despiteclaimstothecontraryandthehypeaboutthe“free
Strange Bed Partners: Trade Intensification and Democratic Politics
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
37
market juggernaut” (Sen, 2005), national governance is alive and strong.
InAsia,somestatesmaybepoliticallybeleaguered,publicadministrations
weakbuttherearestatesthatrefusetowitheraway.SomeAsianstateswith
authoritariangovernmentshadbeentheprimemoversofmodernisationin
the70s and80swhich enabledNewly IndustrialisedCountries [NICs] to
emerge(FranciscoandFong,1999).SomeAsiangovernmentsmayhavelost
muchofthecharismaandpowerthattheirpastdictatorsenjoyedbutthese
governments,nevertheless,continuetoplayacentralroleinre-structuring
theireconomiesandsocietiesalongtradeintensificationthusgivingcredence
towhatsomehaveclaimedthatstates[andtherefore,nationalgovernments]
remain relevant in globalisation although their primacy and [their] actual
capacityas [actors] isbeingaltered (HeldandMGrew[2000] inEncinas-
Franco,2006).
Today Asian states govern within a context in which global and
regional institutions foremost of which are theWorldTrade Organization
(WTO) and International Financial Institutions (IFIs) wield tremendous
influence in thedomestic sphere.These global institutionsdo sowithin a
formal global agreement meant to coordinate policy direction and negate
inconsistent advise given to governments (Floro and Hoppe, 2005).Two
decadesearlier,theIFIsmanagedentryintodomesticpolicyandprogramme
formulationthroughtheirstructuraladjustmentprogrammes.Butitwasthe
trade-financelinkage,ormorespecifically,theneedforregulatoryframeworks
thatcouldprovidemarketstabilityandpredictabilityforcapital’sexpansion,
andespeciallytoavertmarketfailuressuchasthedevastatingAsianFinancial
Crisis in 1997, that finally led to the agenda of ‘good governance’ in the
reformanddevelopmentpackagesoftheIFIs,theUnitedNations,andthe
donorcommunity(Encinas-Franco,2006;BakkerandGill,2003).1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
38
In this period of trade intensification, governments now rarely
speak of ‘import substitution,’ or ‘government owned corporations,’ or
‘local content and equity.’ Rather they speak enthusiastically of the need
to ‘liberalise the economies,’ ‘remove barriers to trade,’ ‘attract foreign
investors,’or‘exporthumanresources.’Governmentsarenotonlychanging
their language, they are also changing laws and codified regulations.Even
Constitutionsarebeingre-negotiatedto‘harmonise’themwithnewglobal
trade rules. Legal guarantees of patrimony, self-sufficiency or the social
functionofpropertyarenowsupersededbyterminologiessuchas‘national
treatment,’ ‘most favoured nation,’ or ‘right of ownership for foreign
individuals or corporations.’ One socially progressive provision found in
the Philippine Constitution, among others, is expected to be amended
in ongoing efforts by the current administration at charter change.2 The
provisionispremisedonthestate’sdutytopromotejusticeandhasbeenthe
resultoflongyearsofstruggle.Toquote:“Theuseofpropertybearsasocial
function, and all economic agents shall contribute to the common good.
Individuals and private groups, including corporations, cooperatives, and
similar collectiveorganisations, shallhave the right toown, establish, and
operate economic enterprises, subject to thedutyof theState topromote
distributive justiceandto intervenewhenthecommongoodsodemands”
(PhilippineConstitutionArticleXII,Section6).
Moreover, governments are re-structuring through strategies of
right-sizing,out-sourcing,devolution, andprivatisationofpublicutilities.
Povertyreductionstrategiesnolongertalkof‘people’butof‘humancapital.’
Governmentsubsidisedprogrammesarebeingovertakenbyincometransfer
strategies while long-term social protection, instead of being treated as a
stateobligationisnowwidelyviewedingovernmentas“directconsumption
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
39
andthereforeunproductive”(Cook,Kabeer,andSavannarat,2003).Finally,
governancereformsrelatedtotradeandfinancemanagementhaveprivileged
the executive branch of government and created a special place within it
for technocrats, often without adequate political check and balance from
the legislativeandjudicialbranches.DAWNcalls thisphenomenonasthe
“marketisationofgovernance”(Taylor,2000).
This ‘marketisation’ or the hyper-consolidation of governance
around intensified trade began at a time when Asian women were also
actively seeking entry into politics and governance, buoyed by strong
women’smovementslinkedtotheresurgenceofdemocraticmovementsand
re-democratisationprocessesfollowingthefallofdictatorialregimes.3Onthe
onehand,acrossAsiaandotherregionsintheSouth,formsandinstitutionsof
governancepatternedaftercapitalist-baseddemocraticpractisesincoloniser
countries were easily accommodated by trade intensification that was also
aglobalpoliticalandeconomicprojectof these formercolonisers.Onthe
other hand, democratic demands by social movements that were honed
in struggles against colonialism, dictatorships and ‘elite democracy’ were
takingadvantageofrestricteddemocraticspacestocreate‘counterpublics’
(Frazer,1997)toraiseissuesofrights,socialjusticeandsubstantivepolitical
participation. Among the democratic demands of women’s movements
aregender equality in all spheresof thepublic and theprivate, an end to
discriminationandviolenceagainstwomen,sexualandreproductivehealth
andrights,personalautonomyandfreedoms.Thephenomenonof“people
power”inthePhilippines,ThailandandIndonesiawasanexpressionofthe
newdemocraticandprogressiveforcesthatemergedinthe1980sand1990s.
Many of these groups and networks have grown in strength and actively
pushed for the expansion of the democratic space within their countries.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
40
Theycontributetothecreationofmoreparticipatoryandinclusivepolitical
ethos and practises, and continue to be a part of new regional networks
ofresistanceagainstcorporate-ledglobalisationandtheirpushforstatesto
followmoresociallyorientedpathsofdevelopment.4
The tensions rising from the interaction of forces between, on
the one hand, state-led integration of domestic economies into a single
global market economy and, on the other hand, the democratic mass
movementresistancestosuchconsolidation,markanimportantcontextfor
understandingtheterraininwhichAsianwomeninpoliticsandgovernance
findthemselves.Thebroaderscenarioalsoincludesdisturbingindicationson
theoverallstatusofwomenintheAsianregion.Thepersistenceofpoverty
amongwomen isakey issueand includes aswell thewidespreadpractise
ofsexselectiveabortioninIndiaandChina,theemergenceofa‘newpoor’
amongwomen(andmen)inEastAsia,increasedtraffickinginwomen,the
persistenthigh incidenceofmaternalmortalityandwomen’s illiteracyand
malnutrition in some countries, the increasing number of ‘losers’ among
womenproducersfromtradeliberalisation,theincreasedworkloadofwomen
asaresultofstatewithdrawalofsocialsupport,andthebacklashreactionto
Asianwomen’snewlyguaranteedrightsandtheirsocialassertions,including
therapingofwomenincommunalconflictsandwithdrawalofreproductive
healthservices.
Re-examining Women in Politics and Governance
Themovement forwomen’s equality indecision-making andpolitics aims
atthere-distributionofformalpoweranddecision-makingbetweenwomen
and men. The target of raising the proportion of Asian women decision-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
41
makers to at least 30% is a benchmarkusedby lobbyists that call for the
institution of quota systems or allocated seats for women in institutional
bodies,suchas,politicalparties,parliaments,nationalgovernmentalagencies
or ministries, local government units, and courts. Passing legislation that
allocates seats for women called gender quotas, and engaging in electoral
politicsaretheleadingmodesforreachingthequantitativegoal.Tenyears
after Beijing, the quantitative target remains elusive as ever, with results
showingnoprogressbutinsteadreflectingerraticbehaviourifnotstagnation
and regression (FES and SEAWWATCH, 2005). The exception is South
Asiawhereordinarywomenhavemanagedtocaptureseatsinthepanchayat
[villagelevel]winningasmuchas80%buteveninsuchsituations,women’s
participationinhigherlevelpoliticsechothetrendfoundinSoutheastAsia
(ISIS,FESandSEAWWATCH,2005).
Given the broad context just presented in the previous section,
twokey issuesare raisedwithregard toAsianwomen’sentry intopolitics.
Thefirstisthequestionof:“Whoarethesewomen?”Exceptforgrassroots
womenwhohavebeenelectedtovillagecouncilsinSouthAsia,byandlarge,
womeninpoliticalpartiesandnationalgovernancearemiddle-classeducated
women. Political and ideological differences exist among them. Some of
thesewomenreflectaclass-basedelitedemocracyorientationandareoften
reluctanttopushforchangewhileothers,particularlythosewhohavebeen
involvedindemocracystrugglesandhumanrightsissuesintheircountries
showmoreprogressivepoliticalideas.Thedivideis,however,notasstraight-
forwardasitmightseem.InSoutheastAsia,somewomenpoliticiansfrom
traditional elite-controlled political parties who do not question unequal
economic relations have been instrumental in pushing for legislation
that address various forms of violence against women as well as women’s
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
42
access to reproductive health services. On the other hand, a few women
parliamentarians who radically challenge class and ethnic-based injustices
committedbythestateseemless interestedonanti-VAW[violenceagainst
women] and reproductive and sexual rights legislation. In thePhilippines,
womenparliamentariansassociatedwiththenewsmallerpartieshavedone
muchtomoveademocraticandsocialequalityagendathatsimultaneously
address“economicandgenderjustice”(Sen,2005)issueswithintheirparties
andinthebroaderrealmofpoliticsandgovernance.5WomeninLeftparties
in South Asia have similarly done so (Basu, 2005). Further contesting in
politicsareemergingwomenleadersfrombroad-basedpoliticalpartiessuch
asthoseassociatedwithreligious-basedpartiesandwithinsomepatriarchal-
nationalistmovementswhopromotesociallyprogressiveeconomicagendas
tainted with ultra-conservative views on women and gender relations that
comeeitherfromreligiouslyandpoliticallydefinedcommunitariandogma.
Thesecondkeyquestionisthatofaccountability.AsBasu(2005)
hasqueried:“Towhomarethesewomenaccountable?”Withintheregion,
therearehardlyfeministorwomen’spoliticalpartiesexceptinthePhilippines
wheretwosmallwomen’spartieshaveemerged.Thereisnounifiedregional
women’smovementbutinsteadatapestryofdiversewomen’smovements.6
Nationalwomen’sgroupsaredividedalongclass,ethnic,andideologicallines
and locked in contesting claims for recognition and positions within the
publicsphere.Sometimes,theyareincapableofworkingtogether.
Meanwhile, individualwomenwhobecomemembersofpolitical
partiesareexpectedto“toethepartyline”andthosewhoareappointedto
governmentpositionsincludingseats inthenationalwomen’smachineries,
havetoact“consistentwiththenationalpolicy.”Beingwiththemainstreamof
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
43
governance,womeninpoliticsbecomevocalproponentsof‘soft’development
andwelfareissuesframedbytheprinciplesof‘temporaryspecialmeasures,’
‘affirmativeaction’andothercatchphraseswithinthemainstreamtheyhave
learnedtoflowwith.
Itisraretofindwomenpoliticiansandappointedwomenofficials
criticallyengagingwiththestateonthelinkageofwomen’sissueswith‘hard’
developmentissues,suchas,policiesandprogrammesonfinance,monetary
andtrademanagement.Withthespateofcapacitybuildingprogrammesin
theregion,attentionhasshiftedfocusongainingskillsinthetechnicalaspects
ofgendermainstreamingaimedatensuringthatwomenparticipateinand
benefitfromgrowth-orientednationaldevelopmentprogrammesthatdonot
addressunequalwealthandpowerarrangements.Thesewomenpoliticians
haveturnedtheirattentionawayfromtheclamourofwomen’smovements
forthestatetoaddressmoredirectlyissuesarisingfromtheimpactoftrade
intensificationpoliciesonthepoor.Andwhentheylisten,theyrelyonthe
languageoftechnicallyorientedadvocateswhotranslate‘political’demands
into ‘technical’ inputs, processes, and outcomes. The ‘technicalisation’ of
women’s equality, empowerment and gender justice issues has become a
familiar terrain for women. Economics and hard development issues now
lookevenmoredistantandevenmoreincomprehensible.
Givenalltheseconsiderations,womeninpoliticsandgovernance
by a combination of both historical and social circumstances and default
aresimultaneouslyburdenedwithcompetingaccountabilityclaims—from
multilateralagenciesthatexpectthemtoproducesoundsurveillanceoftheir
government’s national development and anti-poverty plans, the party in
powerwhichappointsthemtoofficialpositions,thepoliticalpartieswhere
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
44
theybelong, to thewomen’snetworkswith theirmultiple demands.How
havewomeninpoliticsandgovernancerespondedtothesecompetingclaims
astheydeterminewhichgenderjusticeandeconomicjusticeissuestosupport
ornottosupport?Thisessayarguesthatthequestionsposedinrelationto
women’sparticipation inpoliticsandgovernanceneedtobemoredirectly
addressed by women’s movements. Clearly the issues are complex, their
interrogation requiring a situatedness within a diverse set of political and
culturalrealities,andasarguedbythispaper,improvedcognisanceisrequired
ofthechangingandcontradictedsocio-politicalterrain.Onequestionworth
asking is:Howdowomen inpoliticsandgovernancenegotiate forgender
and economic justice throughgovernance institutions that “emphasise the
technicalandquantitativeoverthesocialandhumancomponents”(Bakker
andGill,2003).
It isof strategicvalue toanchor such interrogationofwomen in
politics and governance within the discourse and politics of the women’s
movements.After all,placingwomen inpoliticalpositions and leadership
in governance constitutes but a piece of what is political. Politics and
governancearenot justabout ‘governments,’ ‘states,’and ‘elections.’These
encompass broader questions of ‘voices,’ ‘identities,’ ‘parity,’ ‘justice’ and
‘socialchange.’Thepublicspace isnot justthegovernmentalorthe inter-
governmentalspacesbutincludesseveral“subalterncounterpublics”(Frazer,
1997).Democracyafterallisaboutthecontestsofpoliticalideasandutopian
visionsbysocialgroupsthatengagewithoneanotherinopenandenlarging
spaces.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
45
Conclusion
Theessayhaspresentedabriefcriticalreflectiononwomeninpoliticsand
governancewithincomplexpoliticalandgovernanceterrainsinAsiawhere
thedynamicsof trade intensificationandre-democratisationconvergeand
contest.Ithastouchedonanumberofissuesthatwomen’smovementsneed
totakeafullerunderstandingof,suchas,thepoliticalsignificance,potentials
andrisksofdiversegroupsofwomenenteringpoliticsandgovernance;the
riseofnewpoliticalpartiesandmovementsandtheirrelationshipwithissues
ofdemocracy,genderjustice,andeconomicjusticeissues;thetechnicalisation
of gender mainstreaming; the persistence of women’s issues of women’s
poverty and discrimination; the backlash reaction against women’s visible
social assertions.The essaybeginswith the re-articulationof thedilemma
of women’s movements and feminists in their engagement with the state
and ends with a call for progressive women’s movements and feminists
in the region to re-claim and re-position the discourse on women’s entry
into governance and politics within the broad-based women’s movements
struggle for both economic and gender justice. The essay reiterates what
DAWNhas repeatedlyarticulated:“Ourengagementwith the state isone
thatissimultaneouslyanactofcooperationbutalsoofmaintainingcritical
distance.”Itisadifficultbutnecessarybalancingact.(Taylor,2000andSen,
2005).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
46
Editor’s Notes: Parts of this essay were read in a speech entitled “Challenge of Trade Intensification to Women Recasting Governance” that was presented at the 6th Congress of the Asia Pacific Women in Politics, Asian Institute of Management, 11 February, 2006.
References
Antrobus,P. (2004).The Global Women’s Movements: Origins, Issues and Strategies.London: ZedBooks.
AsiaPacificWomen’sWatch(2004).Women’s Voices: Proceedings of the Asia Pacific NGO Forum. Manila:WomenandGenderInstitute.
Bakker, I. and Gill, S. (2003). Power, Reproduction and Social Reproduction. New York: Palgrave-MacMillan.
Basu,A.(2005).WomenPoliticalPartiesandSocialMovementsinSouthAsia.United Nations Research Institute for Social Development in Geneva Occasional Paper,5.
Beneria, L. (2003). Gender, Development, and Globalisation Economics As If All People Mattered.NewYorkandLondon:Routledge.
Cook, S., Kabeer, N., and Suwannarat, G. (2003). Social Protection in Asia. New Delhi: HarAnandPublicationsandtheFordFoundation
Durano, M., and Francisco, J., (2006) Gender Issues in International Trade in the Asia- Pacific. InternationalGenderandTradeNetworkPapersubmittedtoUNIFEM- NewYork.
Encinas-Franco,J.(forthcoming)Report on Mainstreaming Women’s Rights and Gender Equality in Selected Governance Reform Initiatives in the Philippines: An Indicative Study. Manuscript.Manila:WomenandGenderInstitute.
Floro,M.,andHoppe,H.(2005).EngenderingPolicyCoherenceforDevelopment.Friedrich Ebert Stiftung – Berlin Office Occasional Papers, 17.
Francisco, J., and Fong S. (1999). Political Restructuring and Social Transformation: Critical Feminist Perspectives in Southeast Asia. Manila: Development Alternatives with WomenforANewEra.
Frazer, N. (1997). Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the “Post Socialist” Conditions. NewYorkandLondon:Routledge.
FriedrichEbertStiftungandSouthEastAsiaWatch.(2005)Gaining Ground: Ten Years After Beijing.Manila:FESandSEAWWATCH.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
47
ISIS International-Manila. (2005). Narrative Report on Women Shaping Democracy: Progressive Politics Ten Years After the World Conference on Women in Beijing: A Manuscript. Conference co-sponsored by Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, IsisInternational-ManilaandEAWATCH.Manila,October24–25,2005.
Sen,G.(2005).Neolibs,NeoconsandGenderJustice:LessonsfromGlobalNegotiations.United Nations Research Institute for Social Development in Geneva Occasional Paper, 9.
Taylor, V. (2000). The Marketization of Governance. Fiji: Development Alternatives with WomenforaNewEra.
Shaheed,F.(1997)Women,StateandPower:TheDynamicsofVariationandConvergenceAcross EastandWest.InN.Hussain,S.MumtazandR.Saigol(Eds.),Engendering the Nation-State.Lahore:SimorghPublications.
Vargas,V. (2000).Democratic InstitutionalityandFeministStrategiesduring theNineties. InAbout Women’s Powers and Vision.Montevideo:DAWNandREPEM.
Endnotes
1 The UNDP has twice broadened its governance discourse from a narrow focus on ‘sound economic management’ to encompass citizens’ rights and participation (Jayal [2003] in En-cinas-Franco, 2006). However, Bakker and Gill (2003) see this as a limited and weak attempt at democratisation.
2 The administration of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has formed a Constitu-tional Committee to begin drafting a new charter for the country. The idea of a charter change was first envisioned under the presidency of Fidel Ramos [1991-1997] whose government fast-tracked the liberalisation of the Philippine economy.
3 For specific contexts and strategies related to Asian women’s engagement in politics and governance, two readings are informative: Basu, Amrita (July 2005)”Women, Political Parties and Social Movements in South Asia”, UNRISD Occasional Paper Number 5. Geneva; Friedrich Ebert Stiftung & South East Asia Women’s Watch (2005) Gaining Ground: Ten Years Afte Beijing. Manila: FES and SEAWWATCH. Also, the collection of papers presented at the Women Shaping Democracy: Progressive Politics Ten Years After the World Conference on Women in Beijing. Con-ference co-sponsored by Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Isis International-Manila and SEAWWATCH. Manila, October 24 – 25, 2005.
4 In the World Social Forum, Asian activist networks are one of the most prominent. There are several region-wide networks, including the Asian Social Movements, Asian Social Forum, and Asian anti-war movements.
5 In post-dictatorship Philippines, there is an existing party list system that led to re-served seats in the lower house of Congress for marginalised groups, women included. In Thailand and Indonesia, newer forms of political parties have also emerged similarly challenging the age-old control of politics by elite-dominated parties.
6 The diversity of women’s movements was recognised by Peggy Antrobus who neverthe-less adopted the singular global women’s movement for the title of her book. She writes in her in-troduction: “I welcome this opportunity … to write about the process through which the movement has been transformed over forty years from a rich diversity of local movements into an international women’s movement and finally into a trans-national or global movement” (Antrobus, 2005, p. 1).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
48
About the Author
Josefa‘Gigi’FranciscoisSoutheastAsianRegionalCoordinatoroftheDevelopment
AlternativeswithWomenfor theNewEra(DAWN)—anetworkofwomenscholarsand
activistsfromtheeconomicsouthwhoengageinfeministresearch,analysesanddiscourseon
theglobalenvironment.SheisCoordinatoroftheAsiaGenderandTradeNetwork(AGTN)
andisExecutiveDirectoroftheWomenandGenderInstitute(WAGI)inMiriamCollege,an
all-women’scollegewheresheisalsoafacultymemberofitsInternationalStudiesDepartment.
FormerlyamemberoftheboardofIsisInternational-Manila,GigiFranciscoisGuestIssue
EditorofIsis’firstmonographseriesongender,governanceanddemocracy.
In line with Isis International-Manila’s commitment tounderstandingand‘reinterpretingnotionsofpower’,itsvideo,“WOMENTALK: Challenges to Masculinist Politics,” captures the salient point ofthe in-depth studies of five Southeast Asian Countries on the issue ofpoliticaljusticeforwomen.Thestudiesarefeaturedinaresearchprojectandarepresentedinthebook“GainingGround?SoutheastAsianWomenin Politics and Decision-Making,Ten Years after Beijing.” The researchproject and book are collaborated on by the Southeast Asian Women’sWatch(SEAWWatch)andFriedrichEbertStiftung(FES).
Both the video and the book highlight the need for creativestrategies in the light of the strong resemblances that run through theproject’scountrystudies,andthatdespitethedifferencesincontextsamongcountries,theemergingregionalscenarioisnotencouragingand,infact,pointtoveryrealandseriousconcerns.
Forinquiries,writeto:Isis-ManilaEditorialTeam
[Gender,GovernanceandDemocracy]IsisInternational-Manila
P.O.Box1837,QuezonCityMainQuezonCity1100,Philippines
ISIS AD
Isis International-Manila is a feminist NGO dedicated to women’s information and communication needs that advances women’s rights, leadership and empowerment throughout Asia and the Pacific. It is committed to empowering women with adequate information, communication tools and networks that enable pro-active participation in global, regional and national development processes.
Isis-Manila promotes South-South and North-South dialogues to enhance diversity and collaborations within the global women’s movement. Further, it aims to contribute to the growing social justice movement globally by challenging inequities, stereotypes and cultural and political homogenisation furthered by globalised media and ICTs. Through its programmes and services, Isis-Manila offers spaces and channels to communicate, share information, exchange ideas and experiences and build networks for support and collective action.
Write To: Isis-Manila Editorial Team [Gender, Governance & Democracy]Isis International – ManilaP.O. Box 1837, Quezon City MainQuezon City 1100, [email protected]