Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:44:09.275Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Pros and Cons of Gender Quota Laws: What Happens When You Kick Men Out and Let Women In?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2006

Lisa Baldez
Lisa Baldez
Affiliation:
Dartmouth College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

What country currently boasts the highest percentage of women in parliamentary office? If you ask most people, they will guess one of the Nordic countries: Sweden, Norway, Finland, or Denmark. These guesses are close in one sense but very far off in another. The answer is Rwanda. As of this writing, women make up nearly half of the members of the Rwandan Chamber of Deputies—48.8% according to the Inter-Parliamentary Union (2005b). Most people find this answer surprising. Sadly, we tend to associate Rwanda with the genocide of 1994 rather than with gender equality. What has put Rwanda in the number one spot on the list of women in elective office, an important indicator of women's equality?

Type
CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON GENDER AND POLITICS
Information
Politics & Gender , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , March 2006 , pp. 102 - 109
Copyright
© 2006 The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association

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

Baldez, Lisa. 2004. “Elected Bodies: Gender Quota Laws for Legislative Candidates in Mexico.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 29 (May): 231–58.Google Scholar
Baldez, Lisa. 2005. “ Obedecieron y Cumplieron: The Implementation of Gender Quotas in Mexico.” Paper prepared for presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Latin American Studies Association, Las Vegas, Nevada, October 6–8.
Dahlerup, Drude. 1998. “About Quotas.” International IDEA and Stockholm University. www.quotaproject.org (July 12, 2005).
Ferguson, Michaele. 2005. “‘W’ Stands for Women: Feminism and Security Rhetoric in the Post-9/11 Bush Administration.” Politics & Gender 1 (March): 1–31.Google Scholar
Htun, Mala N. 2004a. “Is Gender Like Ethnicity? The Political Representation of Identity Groups.” Perspectives on Politics 2 (May): 439–58.Google Scholar
Htun, Mala N. 2004b. “Women, Political Parties, and Electoral Systems in Latin America.” Women in Parliament: Beyond Numbers. 2d. ed. Stockholm: International IDEA and Stockholm University.
Htun, Mala N. 2005. “Why Women, But Not Blacks or Indians, Got Quotas in Politics in Latin America.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April 7–9.
Instituto Federal Electoral. N.d. “Codigo Federal de Instituciones y Procedimientos Electorales.” 〈cofipe.ife.org.mex〉 (July 12, 2005).
International IDEA. 2005. “The Global Database of Quotas for Women.” www.quotaproject.org (July 12, 2005).
Inter-Parliamentary Union. 2005a. “Parline Database: Rwanda.” Inter-Parliamentary Union. http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2265_E.htm (July 12, 2005).
Inter-Parliamentary Union. 2005b. “Women in National Parliaments.” Inter-Parliamentary Union. http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm (updated April 30, 2005).
Ladies First. 2005. Video directed by Gini Reticker and Produced by Deborah Shaffer. Los Angeles: Wide Angle.
Norris, Pippa. 2004. Electoral Engineering: Voting Rules and Political Behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schnall, Lisa. 2005. “Party Parity: A Defense of the Democratic Party Equal Division Rule.” Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law 13 (2): 381–414.Google Scholar