IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v7y2019i3p124-136.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Defining Women’s Representation: Debates around Gender Quotas in India and France

Author

Listed:
  • Virginie Dutoya

    (Center for South Asian Studies, School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences/French National Center for Scientific Research, France)

  • Yves Sintomer

    (Centre Marc Bloch, Humboldt University Berlin, Germany / Nuffield College, University of Oxford, UK / Department of Political Science, Paris 8 University, France)

Abstract

In 1999, after a heated debate on gender parity in political representation, the French constitution was amended to include the principle of “equal representation” of both sexes. This paved the way for the introduction of gender quotas. In the same period, a bill providing reservations for women at the national level provoked a political crisis in India. The objective of this article is to compare both debates, looking in particular at the way women’s representation was framed. In France, the main argument against quotas was that republican representation should be unitary and transcend social differences, but at the end of the 1990s, women in mainstream politics were seen as one element of the dual nature of human kind, different from other categories such as class or race. In India, the specific representation of certain groups (Dalits, lower castes, tribal groups) had been the traditional framework for political representation since independence in 1947. But when the bill proposed to extend reservations to women, opponents of the project claimed that women did not constitute a category in themselves, and that sex should be intersected with caste and religion for the attribution of quotas. Looking at parliamentary debates, articles, and tribunes supporting or opposing quotas in both countries, we show that the arguments mobilized reveal different conceptions of the political representation of gender difference, which are partly transversal and partly specific to each country.

Suggested Citation

  • Virginie Dutoya & Yves Sintomer, 2019. "Defining Women’s Representation: Debates around Gender Quotas in India and France," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 124-136.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v7:y:2019:i:3:p:124-136
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.v7i3.2130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/2130
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.v7i3.2130?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mcdonagh, Eileen, 2002. "Political Citizenship and Democratization: The Gender Paradox," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 96(3), pages 535-552, September.
    2. D. Asher Ghertner, 2011. "Gentrifying the State, Gentrifying Participation: Elite Governance Programs in Delhi," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 504-532, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Petra Guasti & Brigitte Geissel, 2019. "Rethinking Representation: Representative Claims in Global Perspective," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 93-97.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Virginie Dutoya & Yves Sintomer, 2019. "Defining Women’s Representation: Debates around Gender Quotas in India and France," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 124-136.
    2. Naomi Prachi Hazarika, 2020. "Spaces of Intermediation and Political Participation: a Study of KuSumpur pahadI redevelopment project," CSH-IFP Working Papers 0016, Centre de Sciences Humaines, New Delhi, revised Jul 2020.
    3. Philipp Horn & Diana Mitlin & Jhono Bennett & Beth Chitekwe-Biti & Jack Makau, 2018. "Towards citywide participatory planning: emerging community-led practices in three African cities," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 342018, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    4. Malini Ranganathan, 2014. "Paying for Pipes, Claiming Citizenship: Political Agency and Water Reforms at the Urban Periphery," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 590-608, March.
    5. Gordon MacLeod & Martin Jones, 2011. "Renewing Urban Politics," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(12), pages 2443-2472, September.
    6. Shenjing He & George CS Lin, 2015. "Producing and consuming China’s new urban space: State, market and society," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(15), pages 2757-2773, November.
    7. Bradlow, Benjamin H., 2019. "Weapons Of The Strong: Elite Resistance And The Neo-Apartheid City," SocArXiv g5y3b_v1, Center for Open Science.
    8. Clara Siagian & Ariane Utomo & Muhammad Insan Kamil & Brian Cook, 2023. "UNRAVELLED HOMES: Forced Evictions and Home Remaking in Jakarta," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 386-404, May.
    9. Gavin Shatkin, 2014. "Contesting the Indian City: Global Visions and the Politics of the Local," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 1-13, January.
    10. Seth Schindler, 2014. "Producing and contesting the formal/informal divide: Regulating street hawking in Delhi, India," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(12), pages 2596-2612, September.
    11. Auerbach, Adam Michael, 2017. "Neighborhood Associations and the Urban Poor: India’s Slum Development Committees," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 119-135.
    12. Sundar Burra & Diana Mitlin & Gayatri Menon & Indu Agarwal & Preeti Banarse & Sharmila Gimonkar & Maria Lobo & Sheela Patel & Vinodkumar Rao & Monali Waghmare, 2018. "Understanding the contribution of the BSUP (JNNURM) to inclusive cities in India," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series esid-097-18, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    13. Rémi de Bercegol & Shankare Gowda, 2019. "A new waste and energy nexus? Rethinking the modernisation of waste services in Delhi," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(11), pages 2297-2314, August.
    14. Soumyadip Chattopadhyay, 2017. "Neoliberal Urban Transformations in Indian Cities: Paradoxes and Predicaments," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 17(4), pages 307-321, October.
    15. Fulong Wu, 2020. "Scripting Indian and Chinese urban spatial transformation: Adding new narratives to gentrification and suburbanisation research," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 38(6), pages 980-997, September.
    16. Michael Janoschka & Jorge Sequera & Luis Salinas, 2014. "Gentrification in Spain and Latin America — a Critical Dialogue," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 1234-1265, July.
    17. Harriet Bulkeley & Andrés Luque-Ayala & Colin McFarlane & Gordon MacLeod, 2018. "Enhancing urban autonomy: Towards a new political project for cities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(4), pages 702-719, March.
    18. Tendai Zawaira & Matthew Clance & Carolyn Chisadza, 2023. "Social institutions, gender attitudes and female labour force participation in sub‐Saharan Africa," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 91(2), pages 186-213, June.
    19. Siobhan Austen & Astghik Mavisakalyan, 2016. "Constitutions and the Political Agency of Women: A Cross-Country Study," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 183-210, January.
    20. Carolina Sternberg & Matthew Anderson, 2014. "Contestation and the local trajectories of neoliberal urban governance in Chicago’s Bronzeville and Pilsen," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(15), pages 3198-3214, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v7:y:2019:i:3:p:124-136. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.