Gender quotas in elections typically require a certain share of candidates to be women, while gender parity rules require parties to nominate men and women equally. But is there a difference in public support for quota and parity systems? Hilde Coffé, Sparsha Saha and Ana Catalano Weeks find voters in France and the UK give a mixed response when asked which system they prefer. However, support for positive action in both countries is higher than might be expected and there is little evidence voters punish women candidates under either quotas or parity rules.
Positive action measures like gender quotas or parity laws are incredibly popular in politics. These rules require a certain share of candidates to be women (quotas) or require parties to nominate men and women equally (parity). Over 130 countries have now put in place quota or parity policies at the national or political party level. These policies work to increase diversity in politics, and yet they are nearly always controversial when first introduced.
For example, in recent years the Welsh Assembly has been debating adopting a gender quota provision for their legislature. In the debate about the quota (a bill which has now been withdrawn), politicians opposing the bill argued that candidates should be elected “on the basis of merit” rather than gender, and that “the people of Wales need to be convinced that [legislators] aren’t merely here because they tick all the boxes or fulfil some artificial quota”.
This critique, that gender quotas mean (women) candidates are selected not due to merit but because of an artificially imposed rule, is commonly seen in other countries as well. It suggests that the word “quota” especially has negative connotations because it implies discrimination in favour of women and against men. In response to this, many advocates of positive action measures now push for “parity” laws instead.
While both gender quotas and parity laws aim to increase women’s representation, parity is gender-neutral and does not imply preferential treatment for women. Instead, because women are half of the population everywhere, the notion of parity implies a goal of equal participation of men and women in politics. So, do these differences in the rhetoric and framing of laws matter? Are the public more likely to support, or less likely to resent, gender parity laws compared with quotas?
An empirical test
In a recent study, we investigate this question using a survey experiment fielded to a representative sample of citizens in the UK (which has no national parity or quota law) and France (which has had a gender parity law in place for over twenty years).
In the experiment, we randomly manipulated whether respondents are asked about support for a “quota” intended to reduce the underrepresentation of women in parliaments versus a “parity” law intended to promote equal gender balance in parliaments. We also randomly presented respondents with two common arguments for the measure, and two common arguments against, mirroring the lively debate that we see about such provisions in real life.
Figure 1: Distribution of support for quotas and parity by country
Note: For more information, see the authors’ accompanying paper in the Journal of European Public Policy
We found that the expected stronger support for parity (compared with quotas) emerged in France – which, after all, has had a parity law in place for many years – but not in the UK. In the UK, respondents were no more or less likely to support parity than a quota law.
We also found higher overall levels of support for positive action than one might expect. Overall, a plurality of 39% support in the UK (slightly more than the 37% who oppose) and an even higher 57% support these measures in France. Like other studies, we found strong gender differences in opinion – women are significantly more likely to support positive action compared with men, especially those men who identified as highly masculine in our study.
Figure 2: Mean levels of support for positive action measures by country
Note: The figure shows mean levels of support by treatment for the UK (top) and France (bottom). Error bars (dotted for Quota, solid for Parity) show 95% confidence intervals. For more information, see the authors’ accompanying paper in the Journal of European Public Policy.
Last, we considered whether positive action measures, and “quotas” in particular, could cause a backlash against the women running for office under these rules. In this part of the experiment, we asked respondents to evaluate two hypothetical candidates running under a quota law, parity law or no such mention of positive action (control).
Figure 3: Quotas, parity, and perceived qualifications of women candidates
Note: The figure shows mean “qualified” ratings by treatment for women candidates for the UK (top) and France (bottom). Error bars show 95% confidence intervals (dotted for Quota, solid for Parity, dashed for Control). For more information, see the authors’ accompanying paper in the Journal of European Public Policy.
We found no evidence that respondents believe women running under quota or parity measures are seen as less qualified compared with our control condition. This finding reflects a wealth of scholarship showing that women candidates elected under positive action measures are just as qualified as those not elected under such a framework.
Good news
Overall, our study reports good news – when citizens receive balanced information about positive action measures, they tend to be supportive, and we find no evidence that they punish women candidates running under either quota or parity rules. So perhaps politicians need not worry that voters will question the merit of women elected under these measures.
We also add to evidence that finds support for positive action measures tends to be higher in countries which have already adopted these measures, perhaps because they become familiar and normalised. While more research is needed to understand the link between exposure to quota or parity laws and public support over time, the lesson for policymakers is clear: the public are not lined up against positive action measures, and in fact their policies might also reinforce public support.
For more information, see the authors’ accompanying paper in the Journal of European Public Policy
Note: This article gives the views of the authors, not the position of EUROPP – European Politics and Policy or the London School of Economics. Featured image credit: NeydtStock / Shutterstock.com
Discussion about this post