Substantive representation:

women and LGBTQ+ people

WEEK 6
Outline
1. Definition and two strands of research on women’s
substantive representation (WSR)
2. Key questions in WSR: who, what, which, where and how
3. LGBTQ+ substantive representation
Definition of substantive
representation
Hanna Pitkin defines substantive representation as “acting
in the interest of the represented, in a manner responsive
to them” (Pitkin 1967, 209).
Women’s substantive representation is “the promotion of
women’s interests” (Franceschet and Piscopo 2008: 393–
425) and “attention to women’s policy concerns” (Celis et al.
2008, 99–110).
 The first strand of WSR research

1. Background: The underrepresentation of women in politics and the

spread of gender quotas worldwide
2. Initial studies of women’s substantive representation
◦ Feminist substantive representation
◦ Female, feminist and left-wing representatives are more likely to represent
women
◦ There is a causal link between descriptive and substantive representation
◦ Critical mass of women is needed for feminist change
◦ Women make a difference: women attach importance to women’s issues
and are advocates of women’s interests in parliaments
◦ How can we explain feminist substantive underrepresentation?

Source: Celis and Erzeel 2015; Mackay 2008

The second strand of WSR research

Mackay (2008, 126) argues that “analysing the complexity of ‘what is

going on in political representation requires a ‘thick’ conception of
substantive representation.” We need to take “a contextualised, inter-
relational, whole-system approach.”
‘Thick’ substantive representation might be enacted through multiple
actors, sources and sites (Mackay 2008, 131).
In order to obtain a broader view of women’s substantive
representation, an open and inductive methodological approach is
required to see who acts for women, on which issues and interests, and
why (Celis et al. 2008; Celis and Erzeel 2015).

Hence we need to ask questions: who, what, where, how, which

WSR Questions

Who acts in the interests of women?

What are women’s interests and issues?
Which factors explain feminist (under)representation?
Where does the representation of women take place?
How is substantive representation done?
Which women are represented?
 Who acts for women?
◦ Women
◦ Women can act as powerful representatives of women’s interests (Childs
2004; Reingold 2000)
◦ Critical mass of female representatives (Kanter 1977; Grey 2002; Thomas
1991; Reingold 2006)
◦ Feminists (Tremblay and Pelletier 2000)
◦ Left-wing parties (Lovenduski and Norris 1995)
◦ Critical actors initiate policy proposals or encourage others to
take steps to promote policies for women, even when women
form a small minority (Krook&Childs 2006; Celis et al 2008).
◦ Non-left, male and non-feminist MPs (Celis and Erzeel 2015)
◦ Non-elected actors through self-representation (Saward 2010).
The Guardian 2020
The adoption of maternity and childcare
leave policy
1. Research question: How can we explain the adoption and scope of maternity
and childcare leave policies?
Possible explanations
◦ Enhanced women’s descriptive representation: critical mass theory
◦ The role of political parties: Left-wing governments
◦ Welfare state theories expect that strong leftist parties and unions drive the expansion of social welfare benefits
(Esping-Anderson 1990). By extension, Left-wing governments are expected to adopt women’s policies

2. 19 OECD democracies from 1970-2000

3. Findings. Critical mass theory is confirmed: Women’s parliamentary presence
significantly influences the adoption and scope of maternity and childcare leave
policies (Kittilson 2008, 323)

Source: Kittilson 2008

 Non-Left, Male and Non-Feminist MPs and the Substantive
Representation of Women (Celis&Erzeel 2015)

Source: Celis&Erzeel 2015

 What are women’s interests?
oFeminist interests aim to overcome gender discrimination and inequality
(Williams 1998) and seek to transform existing gender roles and norms
(Celis and Childs 2014)
oConservative (gendered) interests are “underpinned by a commitment to
women’s traditional roles and experiences, as mothers and care givers, and
are framed in terms of improving women’s lives within traditional terms,
rather than in feminist ones” (Celis and Childs 2014, 11).
oConservative feminist interests – a mix of liberal feminist and conservative
interests (Schreiber 2018)
oInductive (endogenous) approach to women’s interests means avoiding a
priori definitions. Interests are “context-related and subject to evolution”
(Yildirim 2021; Reingold and Swers 2011). Women’s interests might be
defined differently by women.
oIntersectional approach to women’s interests - intersectionality of gender
with race, class, partisanship, etc. (Yildirim 2021).
Women’s issues as policies
1. Women’s issues (a broad policy category) versus women’s interests
(the content given to this category by various actors) (Celis et al. 2014).
2. Women’s issues are those “where policy consequences are likely to
have a more immediate and direct impact on significantly larger
numbers of women than of men” (Carroll 1994, 15).
3. Feminist policies: gender equality, political representation, equal
employment, reconciliation, family, reproduction, sexuality and violence
(Mazur 2002).
What explains feminist substantive
representation?

oCritical mass
oCritical actors
oFormal institutions
oInformal institutions
oPolitical parties and party ideology
oWomen’s movements and organizations
o State feminism
Where does WSR take place?
1. “Representation occurs in institutions” (Childs and Lovenduski 2013, 501).
2. In fact, most studies emphasize the role of parliamentary representation and
parliaments as sites of representation. However, Saward (2010) argues that, in
addition to parliaments, other sites of representation should be considered.
3. Scholars have looked at executives, agencies, parties, and social organisations
(Childs and Lovenduski 2013).
4. Weldon (2002) supports extra-legislative avenues of representation and argues
that women’s agencies and women’s movements provide more effective avenues
of expression for women than female presence in legislatures. Likewise, Squires
(2008) focuses on women's policy agencies and feminist NGOs.
WSR in authoritarianism: the case of
China
Where, by whom and how is WSR done in authoritarianism?
The case of China: absence of an electorate mandate and omnipresence of
state power (China’s Communist Party, CPP); 26.5% of women in the
People’s Congress (IPU 2024) but percentage of women in the CCP’s
Politburo remains very low (below 10%, has mostly remained at 0%); All-
China Women’s Federation – women’s policy agency controlled by the CPP
(Jiang & Zhou 2022, 980).
WSR requires a unified societal demand which is represented by a coalition
of state agency allies (critical actors) navigating within legislative, executive
and party-affiliated institutional bodies (Jiang & Zhou 2022, 978).
Lobbying against domestic violence resulted in the promulgation of China’s
first specific law against domestic violence in 2015 while lobbying on anti-
sexual harassment only led to a few local or university-led regulations and
heavy state repression (Jiang & Zhou 2022, 981).

Source: Jiang&Zhou 2022

 How is substantive representation
done?
Franceschet and Piscopo (2008) differentiate between process and outcome
1. Substantive representation as process, where women change the legislative
agenda by introducing women’s issues during parliamentary debates, committee
proceedings, and question time, is a case of “speaking for women”,
◦ Parliamentary process as agenda setting (Bratton 2005); parliamentary debates (Clayton
et al 2017); committee work (Funk et al 2017)

2. Substantive representation as outcome (output), where female legislators

succeed in passing laws reflecting women’s concerns, is a case of “acting for
women.”
◦ Laws/policies
 The case of Argentina
The mobilization of women instilled norms of cooperation and collaboration
among female politicians and women’s movement activists (Franceschet &
Piscopo 2008).
WSR as process: Female party members are more likely to introduce
women’s rights bills than are their male colleagues, regardless of party
membership.
Legislative success is dependent on institutional rules; formal and
informal norms can limit female legislators’ ability to move from bill
introduction to bill passage.

Source: Franceschet & Piscopo 2008

 How to measure (operationalise) WSP?
As a process or an output in parliament (Kroeber 2018; Franceschet & Piscopo 2008).
1. Bill sponsorship
2. Voting behaviour
3. Self-reported preferences and activities based on surveys or interviews
4. Content analysis of parliamentary speeches and questions
5. (The number of) feminist bill/s passed by parliament
6. Policy congruence between representatives (parliament) and female citizens
(public opinion)
7. Committee membership
WSR in terms of outcomes: gender equality indices (Week 9)
Which women are represented?
1. Elected women are more likely to be highly educated, middle-class,
and elite women (Childs and Lovenduski 2013).
2. According to Childs and Lovenduski (2013, 501), “politically salient
differences among women are as substantial as those among men
and include class, ethnicity, religion, age, employment status, etc.
These overlapping differences are captured through the concept of
intersectionality, which means that multiple identities intersect to
create a whole that might be different from the component
identities.”
Intersectionality
“‘Intersectional analysis started with Crenshaw’s (1991) study of how the
intersection of inequalities of gender, race and class had consequences
for people’s opportunities” (Kantola and Lombardo 2017, 14).
Intersectionality theorists reject treating women as a homogeneous
group, as well as the idea that gender can be parcelled out as a single
category without attention to other politically salient categories, such as
race, class, and sexuality (Smooth 2011).
Intersectionality “consists of an assemblage of ideas and practices that
maintain that gender, race, class, sexuality, age, ethnicity, disability,
and similar phenomena cannot be analytically understood in isolation
from one another” (Hill Collins and Chepp 2013, 58).
Substantive representation of
LGBTQ+ people

The substantive representation of LGBTQ+ people is

the promotion of LGBTQ+ interests and policy
concerns.
Descriptive-substantive link
The presence of even a small number of openly gay legislators is
associated significantly with the future passage of enhanced gay
rights (Reynolds 2013).
The direct relationship between out LGBT MPs and public policy
appears to be as strong as it is for other marginalized groups, if
not more so, because the total number of MPs is small but the
statistical relationship between those elected officials and legal
progress is strong (Reynolds 2013).
Source: Reynolds 2013
Source:
Equaldex
 Same-sex marriage law in Greece,
Feb. 2024
Centre-right New Democracy party prime minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis
(critical actor) championed the bill, saying it would end a “serious
inequality for our democracy.”
Without the backing of Syriza, the main opposition leftist party led by
Stefanos Kasselakis, Greece’s first gay leader, and other smaller groups,
the bill would not have passed.
The Orthodox Church of Greece opposed the proposed bill.
A final vote on the legislation took place on 15 February with the bill
passing by 175 votes to 77. The bill was signed into law by President
Katerina Sakellaropoulou on 16 February 2024.

Source: The Guardian 2024

Summary
Definition and two strands of research on women’s substantive
representation (WSR)
Key questions in WSR: what, who, which, where and how
LGBTQ+ substantive representation
 Seminar questions
1. How can we define and operationalise substantive representation?
2. How can we explain the substantive underrepresentation of women and
LGBTQ+ people?
3. Do women and LGBTQ+ representatives make a difference in politics in
terms of endorsing new policy priorities, proposals and outputs?
4. Can non-descriptive representatives have, for various reasons, greater
ability to represent minority interests than descriptive representatives?
 References
Beckwith, K. (2011) ‘Interests, Issues, and Preferences: Women’s Interests and Epiphenomena of Activism,’ Politics & Gender 7(3), pp. 424 –
29.
Carroll, Susan. 1994. Women Candidates in American Politics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Celis, K. and S. Childs (2012)The Substantive Representation of Women: What to Do with Conservative Claims? Political Studies, 60, 2012,
Celis, Karen, and Sarah Childs. 2014. “Introduction: The ‘Puzzle’ of Gender, Conservatism and Representation.” In Gender, Conservatism and
Political Representation, edited by Karen Celis, and Sarah Childs, 33–87. Colchester: ECPR Press

Celis, K. S. Childs, J. Kantola, and M. L. Krook (2008) Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation, Representation, 44(2), 2008, pp. 99–
110.

Celis, K. and S. Childs (2012) The Substantive Representation of Women: What to Do with Conservative Claims? Political Studies, 60, 2012,
pp. 213–225.

Childs, S. and J. Lovenduski, Political representation, in: The Oxford Handbook of Gender and Politics, (eds.) Waylen, G., Celis, K., Kantola, J.,
and Weldon, L. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013, p. 501.

Celis, K., (2009) Substantive representation of women (and improving it): What it is and should be about? Comparative European Politics,
7(1), pp. 95–113.

Clayton, A., C. Josefsson and V. Wang (2017) ‘Quotas and Women’s Substantive Representation: Evidence from a Content Analysis of
Ugandan Plenary Debates,’ Politics & Gender, 13 (2017), 276–304.

Franceschet, S. and J. M. Piscopo (2008) Gender Quotas and Women’s Substantive Representation: Lessons from Argentina, Politics &
Gender, 4, 2008, pp. 393–425.

Griffin, John D., Brian Newman and Christina Wolbrecht (2012). A Gender Gap in Policy Representation in the U.S. Congress? Legislative
Studies Quarterly 37(1): 35-66.

The Guardian (2024) Greece becomes first Orthodox Christian country to legalise same-sex marriage. https://
www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/15/greece-becomes-first-orthodox-christian-country-to-legalise-same-sex-marriage (accessed 22
Feb. 2024).
Hill Collins, P. and V. Chepp (2013) Intersectionality. In Waylen, G., Celis, K., Kantola, J., and L. Weldon (eds) (2013) The Oxford Handbook
of Gender and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kittilson, Miki C. (2008) Representing Women: The Adoption of Family Leave in Comparative Perspective. Journal of Politics 70(2): 323-334

Kroeber, C. (2018) ‘How to measure the substantive representation of traditionally excluded groups in comparative research: a literature
review and new data’, Representation, 54:3, 241-259.

Jiang X and Y. Zhou (2022) Coalition-Based Gender Lobbying: Revisiting Women’s Substantive Representation in China’s Authoritarian
Governance. Politics & Gender. 2022; 18(4): 978-1010.

Mackay, F. (2008) ‘“Thick” Conceptions of Substantive Representation: Women, Gender, and Political Institutions’, Representation, 44(2),
pp. 125-139

Pitkin, H. The Concept of Representation. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967, p. 209.

Reingold, B. and M. Swers (2011) An Endogenous Approach to Women’s Interests: When Interests are interesting in and of Themselves,
Critical Perspectives, 7(3), 2011, pp. 429–435.
Reynolds, A. (2013) Representation and Rights: The Impact of LGBT Legislators in Comparative Perspective. American Political Science
Review, Vol. 107, No. 2, May 2013.
Schreiber, R. (2018) ‘Is there a Conservative Feminism? An Empirical Account.’ Politics & Gender, 14(1), 56-79.

Squires, J. (2008) The Constitutive representation of gender: extra-parliamentary representation of gender relations, Representation,
44(2), 2008, pp. 187–204

Thomas, S. (1991) ‘The impact of women on state legislative policies’, Journal of Politics, Vol. 53, No. 4, November 1991.

Wängnerud, L. (2009) Women in Parliaments: Descriptive and Substantive Representation, Annual Review of Political Science, 12, 2009,
pp. 51–69.

Weldon, L.S. (2002) Beyond bodies: institutional sources of representation for women in democratic policymaking, Journal of Politics,
64(4), 2002, pp. 1153–1174.

Webb, Paul and Sarah Childs (2012) Gender Politics and Conservatism: The View from the British Conservative Party Grassroots.
Government and Opposition , Vol. 47, No. 1 (2012), pp. 21-48.

Williams, M. Voice, Trust, and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation. Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1998, pp. 116–148.

Yildirim, T. (2021). Rethinking Women's Interests: An Inductive and Intersectional Approach to Defining Women's Policy Priorities. British
Journal of Political Science, 1-18. doi:10.1017/S0007123421000235