Why Are Fewer Women than Men Elected? Gender and the Dynamics of Candidate Selection

Why are fewer women than men elected? Research suggests that this is the combined result of: (1) the supply of female aspirants, or the qualifications of women as a group to run for political office; and (2) the demand for female aspirants, or the preference of political elites for male over female candidates. The aim of this article is to reassess this explanation through the lens of recent case studies of female representation in four regions of the world: Africa, Latin America, North America and Western Europe. On their own, each contribution lends support to arguments about either supply or demand, leading their authors to offer distinct recommendations for change: an increase in the number of women who come forward, which is likely to be a slow and difficult process, or the adoption of gender quotas, which are quick but may produce mixed results. Yet juxtaposing these studies also exposes the limits of the traditional supply and demand model of candidate selection. On the one hand, the ‘political market’ does not operate efficiently towards an equilibrium solution of supply and demand. Rather, ideologies of gender introduce important distortions to the process: the fact that women are under‐represented in all countries around the world suggests that both the supply of and demand for female candidates is artificially repressed, leading to low numbers of women in elective office. On the other hand, important variations exist in women's descriptive representation across countries and across political parties. These differences suggest that dynamics of supply and demand are shaped in crucial ways by features of the broader political context, which may include structural conditions but also the emergence of new and sometimes unanticipated opportunities.