Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:39:55.990Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

All Politics Is Local: Studying Women’s Representation in Local Politics in Authoritarian Regimes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 March 2023

Carolyn Barnett*
Affiliation:
University of Arizona, USA
Marwa Shalaby
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin–Madison, USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The past decade has witnessed a significant increase in women’s presence in local politics. According to the newly published United Nations (UN) Women in Local Government data set, women constitute 36% of local deliberative bodies worldwide compared to merely 25% in national parliaments.1 Much of this increase is the result of gender quotas: the Gender Quotas Database (International IDEA 2022) shows that as of 2021, 75 countries had some form of gender quota on the local level, 24 of which were authoritarian regimes. Yet, extant work on gender politics in authoritarian regimes tends to focus on the national level, given the highly centralized decision-making processes in such contexts. We contend that the study of women’s engagement and representation in local politics can help scholars better understand not only gender and politics, but also authoritarian politics more generally.

Type
Critical Perspectives Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Women, Gender, and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association

The past decade has witnessed a significant increase in women’s presence in local politics. According to the newly published United Nations (UN) Women in Local Government data set, women constitute 36% of local deliberative bodies worldwide compared to merely 25% in national parliaments.Footnote 1 Much of this increase is the result of gender quotas: the Gender Quotas Database (International IDEA 2022) shows that as of 2021, 75 countries had some form of gender quota on the local level, 24 of which were authoritarian regimes. Yet, extant work on gender politics in authoritarian regimes tends to focus on the national level, given the highly centralized decision-making processes in such contexts. We contend that the study of women’s engagement and representation in local politics can help scholars better understand not only gender and politics, but also authoritarian politics more generally.

Why Go Local?

In theory, local governance should shift power from the central government to local politicians and institutions. Because of their physical proximity to their constituents, local officials should be more accessible to reach, to monitor, and to have greater knowledge about the problems and concerns of their locales (Choudhry and Stacey Reference Choudhry and Stacey2014). Citizens often lack knowledge of formal politics, yet most citizens have some awareness of and experience with governance in their interactions with the bureaucrats and officials who enforce the law, manage local infrastructure such as road construction and maintenance, and ensure the provision of services like running water, electricity, and trash collection. This is particularly true for women who tend to be more involved in community-oriented and local issues (Coffé Reference Coffé2013). Shifting focus to the local level offers an opportunity to examine a site of politics where ordinary citizens interact extensively with officials to shape outcomes even in authoritarian contexts, and where women frequently engage in politics.

Moreover, paying closer attention to women as representatives in local politics in nondemocracies will advance our understanding of gender and autocratic politics. There are significant within- and cross-country variations in women’s local representation that remain unexplored in nondemocracies. For instance, women’s local representation in the Russian regions fluctuates between 10% and 25% (Vishevsky Reference Vishnevsky2021). Women constitute 31% of Uganda’s national parliament but 46% of local seats; in Cuba, in contrast, women constitute 53% of the national parliament but hold only 35% of local seats.Footnote 2 Furthermore, in some autocracies, women are only elected to local councils because of the absence of an elected national legislature (e.g., Saudi Arabia and Qatar until 2021) or its suspension as a result of ongoing conflict (e.g., Palestine since 2006).

Importantly, existing work from democracies has demonstrated that the nature and consequences of women’s representation may be different at the local level compared with the national level (Pini Reference Pini2013; Sanbonmatsu Reference Sanbonmatsu2002; Sundström and Stockemer Reference Sundström and Stockemer2015). For example, Ruf (Reference Ruf2021) shows that the share of women on party tickets at the local level in Germany results from parties’ regional-level nonquota strategies for recruiting women, which vary within parties. Other studies of democratic contexts explore how electoral institutions (e.g., Pereira Reference Pereira2021; Trounstine and Valdini Reference Trounstine and Valdini2008), ideology (e.g., Santana and Aguilar Reference Santana and Aguilar2019), party strategy and recruitment (e.g., Wylie and dos Santos Reference Wylie and dos Santos2016), and social networks (e.g., Dewi Reference Dewi2014) affect patterns of women’s representation at the local and regional level within countries.

To date, we lack well-developed theories of how these dynamics play out in authoritarian regimes. It does seem clear, however, that local politics in autocracies have distinct features, such as the concentration of power in the hands of the regime and its close allies, the fragmentation or weak presence of nonregime and opposition parties in local politics, and the predominance of local client politics. An emerging literature on authoritarian contexts has uncovered important within-case variations across different levels and units of governance in regard to voters’ evaluations of women in local office (Avdeyeva and Matland Reference Avdeyeva and Matland2021) as well as in how political parties’ organizational capacities (Belschner Reference Belschner2022) and strategies (Clark, Blackman, and Sasmaz Reference Clark, Blackman and Sasmaz2022; Marschall and Shalaby Reference Marschall and Shalaby2021) affect female representation. All these factors mean that how gender intersects with political representation at the local level is not likely to be merely a small-scale reenactment of what these dynamics look like at the national level.

Going Local: New Opportunities for Gender Politics and Authoritarianism Research

Studying women’s representation at the local level can provide invaluable insights into the study of authoritarian politics. Examining parties’ behavior and strategies regarding female recruitment and nomination in local politics can enrich our understanding of how parties perform their role in local politics in relation to their existing ties with the incumbent autocrat. Barnett and Shalaby’s (Reference Barnett and Shalaby2021) study of women’s electoral success in Morocco’s municipal elections highlights, for example, that municipalities with tighter clientelist linkages to the regime were less likely to have women elected beyond the mandated gender quota. They argue that this outcome reflects voters’ perceptions that women are less likely to be capable clientelist service providers, and anticipation that their poor performance would undermine parties’ role as intermediaries between the regime and local publics. An investigation of local-level female representation thus provides new evidence as to how political parties understand their role in the authoritarian political system, especially as it relates to regime survival and stability. Their finding also contrasts with Aili Mari Tripp’s (Reference Tripp2023) argument in this Critical Perspectives section that, cross-nationally, greater regime entrenchment and institutionalization are associated with increased representation of women. Investigating voter behavior and preferences vis-à-vis female candidates at the local level would also help us better understand the benefits—whether clientelistic or programmatic—that citizens anticipate from interacting with local political institutions and parties in authoritarian regimes (and whether they think female representation will enhance or undermine those benefits).

Furthermore, scrutinizing the adoption and implementation of local gender quotas in autocracies may provide scholars with important information on the dynamics of autocratic rule. As maintained by Sarah Sunn Bush and Pär Zetterberg (Reference Bush and Zetterberg2023) in the introduction to this Critical Perspectives series, autocrats often adopt gender equality policies to appeal to international actors and bolster their international reputation. Introducing national-level quota policies is particularly beneficial for the regime as they signal modernity and reform. However, these motivations may not fully explain autocrats’ decisions to adopt local gender quotas that tend to be less visible. Surveying public opinion toward regime-mandated gender reforms such as local gender quotas may also shed important light on regimes’ local bases of support in autocracies. As maintained by Yuree Noh (Reference Noh2023) in this section, it is imperative to consider how citizens’ disposition toward the regime may shape their support for or opposition to gender reforms.

Methodologically, analyzing gender and political representation at the local level provides authoritarianism scholars opportunities to conduct novel research, ranging from in-depth qualitative studies to large-n quantitative research. For qualitative scholars, the adoption and implementation of gender quotas create many new potential sites for in-depth ethnographic or interview-based research. The study of lower-level governing units also allows researchers to “increase the n” (Snyder Reference Snyder2001) and leverage research designs that rely for inference on comparisons of many comparable units that vary in systematic ways—for example, by the type of electoral system or gender quota in place. In their work examining the determinants of women’s success beyond gender quotas in local elections, Barnett and Shalaby (Reference Barnett and Shalaby2021) compare performance in the single-member district versus proportional representation electoral systems across Morocco’s municipalities. However, researchers should carefully consider in their analyses how the phenomena they care about may operate distinctly not only at the local versus national level but also across local-level units.

Finally, new data collection efforts can make a substantial contribution by expanding the coverage, granularity, and comparability of local-level data. Recent efforts that have prioritized standardized and systematic data collection on women in local governments are a valuable first step (Berevoescu and Ballington Reference Berevoescu and Ballington2021), but these efforts have so far focused mostly on democracies. Researchers working in authoritarian contexts could advance the field by joining efforts to collect original data on female candidates and winners, explore the dynamics of citizens’ support of local- versus national-level gender quotas, and expand available data on the socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of lower-level governing units (such as female labor force participation rates). Furthermore, both qualitative and quantitative information on the strategies of political parties’ nomination and selection of female candidates in local politics is much needed to better understand variations in women’s political representation across different levels of governance.

Conclusion

The study of gender and politics in authoritarian regimes should pay closer attention to local politics. Attention to the local level offers opportunities for scholars to better understand gender politics in nondemocracies and how authoritarianism works. The proliferation of subnational gender quotas in authoritarian regimes in recent years makes the study of female representation at the local level under autocracy newly relevant and feasible in qualitative or quantitative investigations of gender and political representation. Considering why local gender quotas are adopted, local party strategies, and the attitudes and behavior of voters toward quotas and local female representatives can illuminate regime logics, party functions, and the expectations and behaviors of individual citizens living in authoritarian political systems. This is an area ripe for significant theoretical and empirical contributions.

Footnotes

1. In this piece, we rely on UN Women’s definition of local government as “institutional units whose fiscal, legislative and executive authority extends over the smallest geographical areas distinguished for administrative and political purposes.” See Sustainable Development Goal indicator 5.5.1b, https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/files/Metadata-05-05-01b.pdf.

2. National parliament data from International IDEA (2022); local representation data from Berevoescu and Ballington (Reference Berevoescu and Ballington2021).

References

Avdeyeva, Olga A., and Matland, Richard E.. 2021. “Gender-Trait and Ethnic Biases in Russian Regions: Ethnic Integration, Regional Economies, and Women in Local Politics.” Politics & Gender 17 (4): 720–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, Carolyn, and Shalaby, Marwa. 2021. “Success beyond Gender Quotas: Gender, Local Politics, and Clientelism in Morocco.” Working Paper 48, Program on Governance and Local Development, University of Gothenburg. http://gld.gu.se/media/2303/gld-working-paper48.pdf (accessed October 27, 2022).Google Scholar
Belschner, Jana. 2022. “Electoral Engineering in New Democracies: Strong Quotas and Weak Parties in Tunisia.” Government and Opposition 57 (1): 108–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berevoescu, Ionica, and Ballington, Julie. 2021. Women’s Representation in Local Government: A Global Analysis. New York: UN Women.Google Scholar
Bush, Sarah Sunn, and Zetterberg, Pär. 2023. “Gender Equality and Authoritarian Regimes: New Directions for Research.” Politics & Gender, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X22000460.Google Scholar
Choudhry, Sujit, and Stacey, Richard. 2014. “Decentralization in Unitary States: Constitutional Frameworks for the Middle East and North Africa.” Center for Constitutional Transitions, International IDEA and United Nations Development Programme. https://www.idea.int/publications/catalogue/decentralization-unitary-states-constitutional-frameworks-middle-east-and (accessed October 27, 2022).Google Scholar
Clark, Julia Michal, Blackman, Alexandra Domike, and Sasmaz, Aytug. 2022. “What Men Want: Politicians’ Strategic Response to Gender Quotas.” Working paper.Google Scholar
Coffé, Hilde. 2013. “Women Stay Local, Men Go National and Global? Gender Differences in Political Interest.” Sex Roles 69 (5–6): 323–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewi, Kurniawati Hastuti. 2014. Indonesian Women and Local Politics: Islam, Gender, and Networks in Post-Suharto Indonesia. Singapore: NUS Press in association with Kyoto University Press.Google Scholar
International IDEA (Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance). 2022. “Gender Quotas Database.” https://www.idea.int/data-tools/data/gender-quotas (accessed January 8, 2022).Google Scholar
Marschall, Melissa, and Shalaby, Marwa. 2021. “The Supply and Success of Female Candidates in Turkish Local Politics: Party Ideology, Institutional Mechanisms or Both?” Working paper.Google Scholar
Noh, Yuree. 2023. “Public Opinion and Women’s Rights in Autocracies.” Politics & Gender, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X22000514.Google Scholar
Pereira, Frederico Batista. 2021. “Prejudice, Information, and the Vote for Women in Personalized PR Systems: Evidence from Brazil.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 42 (4): 297313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pini, Barbara, ed. 2013. Women and Representation in Local Government: International Case Studies. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruf, Florian. 2021. “Does Non-quota Strategy Matter? A Comparative Study on Candidate Selection and Women’s Representation at the Local Level in Germany.” Politics & Gender 17 (1): 74103.Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2002. “Political Parties and the Recruitment of Women to State Legislatures.” Journal of Politics 64 (3): 791809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santana, Andrés, and Aguilar, Susana. 2019. “Bringing Party Ideology Back In: Do Left-Wing Parties Enhance the Share of Women MPs?Politics & Gender 15 (3): 547–71.Google Scholar
Snyder, Richard. 2001. “Scaling Down: The Subnational Comparative Method.” Studies in Comparative International Development 36 (1): 93110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundström, Aksel, and Stockemer, Daniel. 2015. “What Determines Women’s Political Representation at the Local Level? A Fine-Grained Analysis of the European Regions.” International Journal of Comparative Sociology 56 (3–4): 254–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tripp, Aili Mari. 2023. “How African Autocracies Instrumentalize Women Leaders.” Politics & Gender, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X22000484.Google Scholar
Trounstine, Jessica, and Valdini, Melody E.. 2008. “The Context Matters: The Effects of Single-Member versus At-Large Districts on City Council Diversity.” American Journal of Political Science 52 (3): 554–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vishnevsky, Maria. 2021. “Exploring the Far North: Variations in Gender Representation Across Russia’s Regions.” Master’s thesis, University of Wisconsin–Madison.Google Scholar
Wylie, Kristin, and dos Santos, Pedro. 2016. “A Law on Paper Only: Electoral Rules, Parties, and the Persistent Underrepresentation of Women in Brazilian Legislatures.” Politics & Gender 12 (3): 415–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar