Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T10:00:59.083Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Women Matter: The Impact of Gender Empowerment on Abortion Regulation in 16 European Countries between 1960 and 2010

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2016

Emma Budde  and
Stephan Heichel
Emma Budde
Affiliation:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Stephan Heichel
Affiliation:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Abortion is undeniably a gender issue—even if not an exclusive one (e.g., Mazur 2002, 137–153; Warren 2000, 201–223. Due to a woman's physical reproductive capacities and, even more so, the patriarchal allocation of care work, members of the female sex bear by far the larger share of all burdens that come with pregnancy and especially unwanted pregnancy—be they physical, emotional, economic, life-course related, or other (England 2001; Tribe 1992, 106). For the longest time in history and across most societies and cultures, women were denied rights to make autonomous decisions in terms of whether and when to procreate, which is in one core aspect of bodily self-determination (Corrêa 2001; Staggenborg 2001).

Type
Research Article
Information
Politics & Gender , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , September 2017 , pp. 432 - 457
Copyright
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Achen, Christopher H. 2000. “Why Lagged Dependent Variables Can Suppress the Explanatory Power of Other Independent Variables.”, The Society for Political Methodology Working Paper, Washington University, St. Louis, MO. http://polmeth.wustl.edu/media/Paper/achen00.pdf (accessed September 25, 2015).Google Scholar
Asal, Victor, Brown, Mitchell, and Figueroa, Renee Gibson. 2008. “Structure, Empowerment and the Liberalization of Cross-National Abortion Rights.” Politics & Gender 4 (2): 265–84.Google Scholar
Barro, Robert J., and Lee, Jong Wha. 2013. “A New Data Set of Educational Attainment in the World, 1950–2010.” Journal of Development Economics 104: 184–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Nathaniel. 2001. “Time-Series-Cross-Section Data: What Have We Learned in the Past Few Years?” Annual Review of Political Science 4: 271–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Nathaniel, and Katz, Jonathan N.. 1995. “What to Do (and Not Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data.” American Political Science Review 89 (3): 634–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergman, Barbara R. 2005. The Economic Emergence of Women, 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, David, Huber, Evelyne, and Stephens, John D.. 2014. Comparative Welfare States Dataset [data file]. University of North Carolina and WZB Berlin Social Science Center. http://www.unc.edu/~jdsteph/documents/common/data/CWS_2014-02-25_data.xlsx (accessed September 25, 2015).Google Scholar
Brooks, Joel E. 1992. “Abortion Policy in Western Democracies: A Cross-National Analysis.” Governance 5 (3): 342–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calloni, Marina. 2001. “Debates and Controversies on Abortion in Italy.” In Abortion Politics, Women's Movements, and the Democratic State: A Comparative Study of State Feminism: A Comparative Study of State Feminism, ed. Stetson, Dorothy McBride. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 181–203.Google Scholar
Castles, Francis G. 1998. Comparative Public Policy: Patterns of Post-War Transformation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Celis, Karen. 2001. “The Abortion Debates in Belgium 1974–1990.” In Abortion Politics, Women's Movements, and the Democratic State: A Comparative Study of State Feminism: A Comparative Study of State Feminism, ed. Stetson, Dorothy McBride. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 39–61.Google Scholar
Celis, Karen. 2006. “Substantive Representation of Women: The Representation of Women's Interests and the Impact of Descriptive Representation in the Belgian Parliament (1900–1979).” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 28 (2): 85–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Celis, Karen. 2008. “Studying Women's Substantive Representation in Legislatures: When Representative Acts, Contexts and Women's Interests Become Important.” Representation 44 (2): 111–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, Rebecca J., Dickens, Bernard M., and Fathalla, Mahmoud F. 2003. Reproductive Health and Human Rights: Integrating Medicine, Ethics, and Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corrêa, Sonia 2001. “Reproductive Rights in Developing Nations.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, ed. Smelser, Neil J. and Baltes, Paul B.. Oxford: Elsevier, 13188–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engelhardt, Henriette, and Prskawetz, Alexia. 2004. “On the Changing Correlation between Fertility and Female Employment over Space and Time.” European Journal of Population 20 (1): 35–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeli, Isabelle, Green-Pedersen, Christoffer, and Larsen, Lars Thorup, eds. 2012. Morality Politics in Western Europe: Parties, Agendas and Policy Choices. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engeli, Isabelle, and Varone, Frédéric. 2011. “Governing Morality Issues through Procedural Policies.” Swiss Political Science Review 17 (3): 239–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
England, Paula 2001. “Gender and Feminist Studies.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, ed. Smelser, Neil J. and Baltes, Paul B.. Oxford: Elsevier, 5910–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fink, Simon. 2008. Forschungspolitik zwischen Innovation und Lebensschutz: Die Determinanten von Embryonenforschungspolitiken im internationalen Vergleich [Research Policy between Innovation and Protection of Life: Embryonic Research Policies in International Comparison]. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Fox, Jonathan. 2008. A World Survey of Religion and the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galston, William R. 2001. “Political Knowledge, Political Engagement and Civic Education.” Annual Review of Political Science 4 (2001): 217–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Githens, Marianne, and Stetson, Dorothy McBride, eds. 1996. Abortion Politics: Public Policy in Cross-Cultural Perspective. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gindulis, Edith. 2002. “Abtreibungsregime der OECD-Länder und ihre Bestimmungsfaktoren im Vergleich” [The Abortion Regimes of OECD-Countries and their Determinants]. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft 31 (3): 315–36.Google Scholar
Gindulis, Edith. 2003. Der Konflikt um die Abtreibung: Die Bestimmungsfaktoren der Gesetzgebung zum Schwangerschaftsabbruch im OECD-Ländervergleich [The Conflict of Abortion: The Determinants of Pregnancy Termination Legislation in OECD-Countries]. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glendon, Mary Anne. 1987. Abortion and Divorce in Western Law. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Halfmann, Drew. 2011. Doctors and Demonstrators: How Political Institutions Shape Abortion Law in the United States, Britain, and Canada. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heichel, Stephan, Rinscheid, Adrian, and Knill, Christoph. 2015. Classifying Political Parties beyond the OECD World: An Expanded Concept and a New Dataset on Party Family Representation (PARFAM). Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Henisz, Witold. 2002. “The Institutional Environment for Infrastructure Investment.” Industrial and Corporate Change 11 (2): 355–89.Google Scholar
Henisz, Witold. 2013. Political Constraint Index (POLCON) Dataset [data file and codebook]. https://mgmt.wharton.upenn.edu/profile/1327 (accessed September 25, 2015).Google Scholar
Heston, Alan, Summers, Robert, and Aten, Bettina. 2012. Penn World Table Version 7.1. [data file and codebook]. https://pwt.sas.upenn.edu/php_site/pwt_index.php (accessed June 1, 2015).Google Scholar
Htun, Mala. 2003. Sex and the State: Abortion, Divorce and the Family under Latin American Dictatorships and Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU). 2015. Women in National Parliaments [data file]. http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm (accessed September 25, 2015).Google Scholar
Ismail, Maimunah, Rasdi, Roziah Mohd, and Abd. Jamal, Akhmal Nadirah. 2011. “Gender Empowerment Measure in Political Achievement in Selected Developed and Developing Countries.” Gender in Management: An International Journal 26 (5): 380–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jejeebhoy, Shireen J., and Santhya, K.G.. 2014. “Women's Empowerment and Gender Equity.” In Population and Reproductive Health in India, ed. Jejeebhoy, Shireen J., Kulkarni, P. M., Santhya, K. G., and Mehrotra, Firoza. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 247–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Carol. 2001. “Gender and Feminist Studies in Political Science.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, ed. Smelser, Neil J. and Baltes, Paul B.. Oxford: Elsevier, 5933–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalist, David E. 2004. “Abortion and Female Labor Force Participation: Evidence Prior to Roe v. Wade.” Journal of Labour Research 25 (3): 503–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keele, Luke J., and Kelly, Nathan J.. 2006. “Dynamic Models for Dynamic Theories: The Ins and Outs of Lagged Dependent Variables.” Political Analysis 14 (2): 186–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knill, Christoph, Adam, Christian, and Hurka, Steffen, eds. 2015. On the Road to Permissiveness? Change and Convergence of Moral Regulation in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Köpl, Regina. 2001. “State Feminism and Policy Debates on Abortion in Austria.” In Abortion Politics, Women's Movements, and the Democratic State: A Comparative Study of State Feminism: A Comparative Study of State Feminism, ed. Stetson, Dorothy McBride. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 17–38.Google Scholar
Kreitzer, Rebecca J. 2015. “Politics and Morality in State Abortion Policy.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 15 (1): 41–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levels, Mark, Sluiter, Roderick, and Need, Adriana. 2014. “A Review of Abortion Laws in Western-European Countries. A Cross-National Comparison of Legal Developments between 1960 and 2010.” Health Policy 118 (1): 95–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lovenduski, Joni, 2001. “Women and Politics: Minority Representation or Critical Mass.” Parliamentary Affairs 54 (4): 743–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovenduski, Joni, and Outshoorn, Joyce, eds. 1986. The New Politics of Abortion. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Mackay, Fiona. 2008. “‘Thick’ Conceptions of Substantive Representation: Women, Gender and Political Institutions.” Representation 44 (2): 125–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maoz, Zeev, and Henderson, Errol A.. 2013. “The World Religion Dataset, 1945–2010: Logic, Estimates, and Trends.” International Interactions 39 (3): 265–91. Data retrieved from: http://www.correlatesofwar.org/data-sets/world-religion-data (accessed September 25, 2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazur, Amy G. 2002. Theorizing Feminist Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McBride, Dorothy E., and Mazur, Amy G.. 2010. The Politics of State Feminism: Innovation in Comparative Research. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
McBride, Dorothy E., and Mazur, Amy G.. 2011. Women's Movements and Women's Policy Offices in Western Postindustrial Democracies, 1970–2001 [data file and codebook] (ICPSR 30681). Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) [Distributor]. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR30681.v1 (accessed June, 1 2015).Google Scholar
McBride Stetson, Dorothy, ed. 2001. Abortion Politics, Women's Movements, and the Democratic State: A Comparative Study of State Feminism: A Comparative Study of State Feminism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Minkenberg, Michael. 2002. “Religion and Public Policy: Institutional, Cultural, and Political Impact on the Shaping of Abortion Policies in Western Democracies.” Comparative Political Studies 35 (2): 221–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkenberg, Michael. 2003. “The Policy Impact of Church–State Relations: Family Policy and Abortion in Britain, France, and Germany.” West European Politics 26 (1): 195–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nossif, Rosemary. 2007. “Gendered Citizenship: Women, Equality, and Abortion Policy.” New Political Science 29 (1): 61–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD Statistics. 2015. Dataset: LFS by Sex and Age—Indicators [data file]. http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=LFS_SEXAGE_I_R (accessed September 25, 2015).Google Scholar
Outshoorn, Joyce. 1996. “The Stability of Compromise: Abortion Politics in Western Europe.” In Abortion Politics: Public Policy in Cross-Cultural Perspective, ed. Githens, Marianne and Stetson, Dorothy McBride. New York and London: Routledge, 145–64.Google Scholar
Petchesky, Rosalind P. 1990. Abortion and Woman's Choice: The State, Sexuality, and Reproductive Freedom. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
Plümper, Thomas, and Troeger, Vera E.. 2007. “Efficient Estimation of Time-invariant and Rarely Changing Variables in Finite Sample Panel Analyses with Unit Fixed Effects.” Political Analysis 15 (2): 124–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plümper, Thomas, Troeger, Vera E., and Manow, Philipp. 2005. “Panel Data Analysis in Comparative Politics: Linking Method to Theory.” European Journal of Political Research 44 (2): 327–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Podestà, Frederico. 2002. Recent Developments in Quantitative Comparative Methodology. The Case of Pooled Time Series Cross-Section Analysis. Discussion paper, University of Brescia.Google Scholar
Rau, William, and Wazienski, Robert. 1999. “Industrialization, Female Labor Force Participation, and the Modern Division of Labor by Sex.” Industrial Relations 38 (4): 504–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rolston, Bill, and Eggert, Anna. 1994. Abortion in the New Europe: A Comparative Handbook. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Saward, Michael. 2008. “The Subject of Representation.” Representation 44 (2): 93–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, Manfred G. 2002. “The Impact of Political Parties, Constitutional Structures and Veto Players on Public Policy.” In Comparative Democratic Politics: A Guide to Contemporary Theory and Research, ed. Keman, Hans. London: Sage, 166–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulze, Corina. 2013. “Women, Earmarks, and Substantive Representation.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 34 (2): 138–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swiss, Liam, Fallon, Kathleen M., and Burgos, Giovani. 2012. “Does Critical Mass Matter? Women's Political Representation and Child Health in Developing Countries.” Social Forces 91 (2): 531–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staggenborg, Suzanne 2001. “Reproductive Rights in Affluent Nations.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, ed. Smelser, Neil J. and Baltes, Paul B.. Oxford: Elsevier, 3184–88.Google Scholar
Superson, Anita M. 2014. “The Right to Bodily Autonomy and the Abortion Controversy.” In Autonomy, Oppression, and Gender, ed. Veltman, Andrea and Piper, Mark. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 301–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The World Bank. 2015. World Development Indicators: Women in Development [data file]. http://wdi.worldbank.org/table/1.5 (accessed September 25, 2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tong, Rosemarie. 2001. “Feminist Theory.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, ed. Smelser, Neil J. and Baltes, Paul B.. Oxford: Elsevier, 5484–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tribe, Laurence H. 1992. Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
UN Data. 2015. Seats Held by Women in National Parliament, Percentage. http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=MDG&f=seriesRowID%3A557 (accessed September 25, 2015).Google Scholar
Warren, Mary Anne. 2000. Moral Status: Obligations to Persons and Other Living Things, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenzelburger, Georg, Jäckle, Sebastian, and König, Pascal. 2014. Weiterführende statistische Methoden für Politikwissenschaftler: Eine anwendungsbezogene Einführung mit Stata [Advanced Statistical Methods for Political Scientists: An Applied Introduction for Stata]. München: De Gruyter Oldenbourg.Google Scholar
Woliver, Laura R. 2002. The Political Geographies of Pregnancy. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Budde and Heichel supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Budde and Heichel supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 485.7 KB