Changing female representation: Reanalyzing the impact of gender quotas through the evolution of legislative initiatives Iñaki Sagarzazu School of Social and Political Sciences University of Glasgow [email protected] Thiago Silva Graduate Student in Political Science Texas A&M University [email protected] April 15, 2015 Abstract In 1995, Brazil adopted a gender quota law to increase female representation in Congress. However, this law has had very little effect, with an increase in representation of only 3% after 20 years of enactment. While significantly increasing the number of female members of congress is a goal of the law, representation broadly understood can be evaluated through the changing patterns of bill initiatives in Congress. By using quantitative text analysis over a corpus of more than 50,000 Brazilian bill initiatives from 1990 to 2013, we evaluate whether the gender quota law influenced the bill initiatives and women’s issues that where presented and discussed in Congress. We find that, even though the Brazilian gender quota did not fully reach its goal, it is not necessarily a failure, as the political representation in Congress has been influenced by the adoption of quotas for women. Paper prepared for the 73rd Annual Conference of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago IL, April 16-19, 2015. 1 Introduction In 2012, the Brazilian population was estimated at 196.9 million people (PNAD- IBGE 2013); the majority of which is composed by women (51.3%). Women are also the majority of the Brazilian electorate. According to data from Brazil’s Supreme Electoral Court (TSE do Brasil 2014), out of the 142 million Brazilian voters by December 2013, 74 million were women (52%). Women, however, aren’t equally present in the country’s elected positions, and while women have made inroads into the political arena, with a sitting president for instance, disparity still persists in the Brazilian political system. As such albeit the majority in the country, women still occupy a very restricted place in Brazilian politics. This reality is far from being unique to Brazil, however, as this country is not alone in having a significant gap between the percentage of women in the population and the percentage of women representatives in Congress (see table 1). While we would expect that our representative bodies ‘represent’ the characteristics of the population that elects them (Reingold 2000, p. 31), the gap reveals that almost half of the citizens might be being excluded from the highest levels of policy-making (Sapiro 1981; Whicker and Whitaker 1999, p. 187). As we can see in Table 1, Brazil in the beginning of 2015 occupies the 124th place in the ranking of women representation at the Lower House, with 51 female representatives from a total of 513 members in the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies elected in October of 2014. This represents the worst position among the Latin American nations. In an attempt to overcome the restricted and unequal place that women occupy in Brazilian politics, Brazil adopted a gender quota law for elections into the country’s Chamber of Deputies in 1995. Paragraph three of this quota law (law number 9100/95) defined that “at least twenty percent of the positions of each party or coalition must be filled by women candidates.” This was amended in 1997 (9504/97), to increase the quota to 30%. Yet, almost 20 years after the enactment of the gender quotas law, the female presence in the Brazilian lower house reaches a mere 9.9% of the total number of seats available, an increase in representation of less than 4% since 1997. As it can be seen 2 Table 1: Women representation rank at Lower Houses (Sample with the first and last positions, United States and Latin American Democracies)(2014) Rank Country Rwanda Bolivia .. . Number of Seats 80 130 .. . Number of Women Legislators 51 69 .. . % of Women Legislators 63.8% 53.1% .. . 1 2 .. . 9 10 .. . Nicaragua Ecuador .. . 92 137 .. . 39 57 .. . 42.4% 41.6% .. . 18 .. . Mexico .. . 500 .. . 187 .. . 37.4% .. . 20 .. . Argentina .. . 257 .. . 94 .. . 36.6% .. . 26 .. . Costa Rica .. . 80 .. . 51 .. . 33.3% .. . 41 .. . El Salvador .. . 84 .. . 23 .. . 27.4% .. . 62 .. . Peru .. . 130 .. . 29 .. . 22.3% .. . 67 .. . Dominican Republic .. . 183 .. . 38 .. . 20.8% .. . 72 .. . Colombia .. . 166 .. . 33 .. . 19.9% .. . 75 76 .. . Panama United States of America .. . 57 435 .. . 11 84 .. . 19.3% 19.3% .. . 87 .. . Venezuela .. . 165 .. . 28 .. . 17.0% .. . 91 .. . Uruguay .. . 99 .. . 16 .. . 16.2% .. . 93 .. . Chile .. . 120 .. . 19 .. . 15.8% .. . 96 .. . Paraguay .. . 80 .. . 12 .. . 15% .. . 105 .. . Guatemala .. . 158 .. . 21 .. . 13.3% .. . 124 .. . Brazil .. . 513 .. . 51 .. . 9.9% .. . 148 Vanuatu 52 0 - Source: Elaborated by the authors from information gathered from Inter-parliamentary Union (IPU 2015). 189 countries were classified by descending order of the percentage of women in the Lower or Single House. 3 in Table 2 below, while the percentage of women representation has indeed increased from 1996 to 2015 this increase has been very small1 . Table 2: Latin American Gender Quota Laws Country Adoption’s % of the Women Representation Year Quota 1 yr Before Law January 2015 Brazil 1995 30%a 7% 10% Paraguay 1996 20% 3% 15% Venezuela 1998 30% 6% 17% Panama 1997 30% 8% 19% Dominican Republic 1997 25% 12% 21% Peru 1997 25% 10% 22% Costa Rica 1997 40% 14% 33% Argentina 1991 30% 6% 36% Ecuador 1997 20% 4% 42% Bolivia 1997 50% 11% 53% a. Although Brazil adopted the gender quotas law in 1995, the increase of quota from 20% to 30% was adopted in 1997. Source: Adapted from Jones (2000, p. 39). Information updated from Inter-parliamentary Union (IPU 2015). Although Table 2 shows that only Argentina, Ecuador and Bolivia are currently achieving the quota percentage determined by their respective laws, all other Latin American countries that adopted a gender quotas law had an increase of at least 10% of the women representation in Congress, with Brazil being the notable exception. The literature has pointed out to some reasons behind the small effect the quota laws have had on representation in Congress. For instance, the absence of a punishment mechanism for parties that do not meet the law and the open-list electoral system have been suggested as causes of the ineffectiveness of female quotas in Brazil (Miguel and Feitosa 2009; Schmidt and Araujo 2004; Jones 2000; Htun 2001, 2005). Also, a system with values that discourage women’s influence on the legislative process still persist in the society (Dodson 2005, p. 131). Similarly, surveys reveal that the public still sees representative’s rulers acting dichotomously: congresswomen as “warm, compassionate, kind and passive" and congressmen as “strong, knowledgeable, tough, direct and assertive" (Dolan 2005, p. 41). As aforementioned, Brazil is not alone in an infamous position where the percentage 1 The evolution of the percentage of women representation in Brazilian Lower House from 1987 to 2015 can be seen in the Appendix A. 4 of women in Congress is significantly lower than their proportion in the population. The United States, for instance, where women are also the majority of the population, occupies position 76 in the ranking (See Table 1). Rankings like this, however, do not report possible contrasts. As Htun et al. (2013, p. 96-97) reveal, for example, it is not only number of members that matter but the legislation they enact. Looking at it this way we see that in the United States there is more feminist legislation than for example in Rwanda, country occupying the first position in the ranking (Htun and Micozzi 2013). As such while increasing the number of female members of congress significantly is certainly a goal of quota gender laws, representation broadly understood can be evaluated through the changing patterns of bill initiatives in Congress. By using quantitative text analysis over a corpus of more than 50,000 Brazilian bill initiatives from 1990 to 2013 (six legislatures), we evaluate whether the enactment of gender quotas law influenced the bill initiatives and bill amendments in Congress. The literature on female representation topic has profusely tested whether the increase in the number of women legislators impacts women substantive representation. Our contribution to this literature is to test the impacts (if any) of policy—the gender quotas law—on women substantive representation. According to our theory, regardless of the number of women legislators, the enactment of the gender quotas law intensifies the number of bill initiatives related to women’s issues. We find that, even though the Brazilian gender quota did not fully reach its goal, it is not necessarily a failure, as the political representation in Congress have been influenced by the adoption of quotas for women. This paper is structured as follows: In the next section (2), we review the literature based on studies that addressed female representation; In section 3 we present our theory and hypotheses; In section 4 we present the method and the data used to test our hypotheses; The results are presented and discussed in section 5; In section 6 we present our final comments. 5 2 Women’s Representation It has been consistently found that women legislators are more prone to intro- duce legislation addressing women issues (see for instance Saint-Germain 1989; Dodson and Carroll 1991; Carroll 2001; Bratton 2002; Swers 2002; Reingold and Haynie 2014; Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson 2014). Congresswomen have been found to be vigorous advocates for interests concerning women, children and families in legislative committee and on the Floor (Dodson 2005; Dolan and Swers 2011). This is the case both in developed and developing nations such as Honduras (Taylor-Robinson and Heath 2003). Part of their advantage on these issues is that Congresswomen “often point to their experiences as women or as mothers to gain credibility on an issue” (Swers 2002, p. 112). For instance, “women talk more for their constituents and also for the marginalized constituencies, members of social groups typically ignored in the legislative process” (Walsh 2002, p. 382). Specifically regarding Brazil, Miguel and Feitosa (2009, p. 209-212) has found that congresswomen speeches have a high concentration on social topics (specially human rights, family, reproductive rights, childhood and adolescence). These general findings of the literature regarding female political representation provides support for the often called “substantive representation.” As the number of congresswomen increase—descriptive representation—so increases the presence of women’s issues in the legislative process. The argument in this case is that an increased women’s presence at the Congress can regender institutions (Dodson 2011, p. 249), as well as enlarge the scope of perspectives brought to the the legislature (Walsh 2002). Some studies, however, have found that there is no direct relationship between an increase in descriptive and substantive representation. Firstly, because when women’s presence in the legislature is a really small minority this hinders on their ability to really influence the policy making process (Miguel and Feitosa 2009). Secondly, because the presence of Congresswomen on issues of lesser prestige contributes to keep them marginalized in the legislative process. For instance, while the approval of a quota law 6 in Argentina increased the number of women in the Argentinian Congress and subsequently the number of women’s rights bills introduced, the approval rate of these bills actually decreased (Franceschet and Piscopo 2008; Htun and Micozzi 2013). As such “elected women are successfully gendering the legislative agenda but not successfully gendering legislative outcomes" (Franceschet and Piscopo 2008, p. 406). In the same manner, Brazilian congresswomen tend to be marginalized within the legislative process by belonging to committees that are considered less important (environment, family and human rights) (Neiva and Ogando 2010). Such results uncovers that representation depends not only on gender, but also on institutional environment and political positions. These cases might be outliers, however, due to the small number of women represented in Congress. It might instead be needed that women participation in Congress crosses a threshold—or tipping point—after which congresswomen’s presence starts to make a substantive difference. The so-called critical mass theorists argue that just after reached this greater proportion of women in the House, usually around 30%, congresswomen can have an impact on politics (Saint-Germain 1989; Thomas 1994; Rule 1999; MacDonald and O’Brien 2010). Still, however, some studies reveal that women deputies can do make the difference on policy priorities even when they are only a few in the House (Taylor-Robinson and Heath 2003, p. 95). The reason behind these disparate findings might be found not only behind institutional rules, but also at the point where legislative behavior is affected by other factors other than gender such as partisanship, ideology, and constituency cleavage (Neto and McCubbins 2003; Htun and Power 2006; Neiva and Ogando 2010; Dolan and Swers 2011; Htun and Micozzi 2013; Arriola and Johnson 2014). Therefore, although the literature usually provides support for the difference that women can make in the Congress, the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation is not categorical (Dodson 2011, p.8). Scholars have been asked whether the increase in the number of congresswomen also increases the legislative issues related to women, but whether gender quotas law even when it does not increase the descriptive 7 representation leads to substantive representation has been an underrated topic in the literature. 3 Descriptive and substantive representation In a seminal work on representation, Pitkin (1967) suggests the distinction between descriptive representation and substantive representation2 . Descriptive representation concerns how the representative body resembles the society. The important element here is to know with what the representatives look like and if they share common characteristics with those they represent (on race, class, sex and other ascriptive similarities) (Dolan and Swers 2011, p. 238). In this case, what matters is how the legislative body is composed, more precisely, in the normative idea that the House of Representatives should be the image of the nation (should reflect the diversity of views and interests of the society). Achieve a descriptive representation, therefore, concerns an accurate correspondence between representatives and represented. Ultimately, the concern here is not with the right and responsibility to perform or take actions, but rather with what those that represent the society look like and if they “stand for” their group. This conceptualization, according to Pitkin (1967, p. 81), is more appropriate and relevant in contexts where the purpose of representation is to provide information about something that is not present and tells us nothing about public policy formulation or government action for a certain portion of society. Substantive representation, in turn, relates to the activity of representatives “in the interest of," as an “agent of," or as a “substitute" of those that are being represented. Here the central question focuses on whether the representative meets the policy preferences and the interests of those represented. Representation, in this case, means that political outcomes are meeting or serving the interests of defined groups or population 2 Actually, Pitkin (1967) does not use the term “substantive representation,” but rather representation “as acting for” (Dahlerup 2014, p. 62). Nevertheless, substantive representation has become the popular nomenclature in the literature in relating representation as policy outputs for a specific group. Beyond descriptive and “substantive” representations, Pitkin (1967) defines other two concepts of representation: formalistic and symbolic. 8 subgroups (Curtin 2006; Tremblay 2007; Piscopo 2011). Pitkin (1967, p. 143) then states that acting “on behalf of others" involves special behavior and obligations reasonably well distinguished in practical terms. According to the author, in this case, we talk about representation only when the actions of the substitute are linked somehow to others (so substantive actions). In the literature on female political representation a recurrent research question is whether descriptive representation led to substantive representation. Scholars addressing this question expect that greater the number of women in the government, greater the women’s issues being debated by representatives and greater the introduction of bills concerning women interests. But a logical possibility not stated or underrated by this literature is to ask whether the gender quota law per se transform and shape the issues of the bills proposed by legislators. In this study, our focus is still on substantive representation, but we don’t take descriptive representation as a logical necessary condition for a greater presence of women’s issues in Congress. We are concerned on an institutional change. That is, the gender quotas law. Our interest is in the question whether the gender quotas law impacts the issues of bill initiatives, and we expect that gender quotas law can influence legislators not initially concerned with women issues; increasing the bill initiatives related to women interests. Figure 1: Theory. From Gender Quotas Law to Women Substantive Representation 1. Gender . Quotas Law 2. Descriptive Representation 3. Substantive Representation As aforementioned, studies on gender quotas law are usually concerned to answer the question whether gender quota laws increase descriptive representation—number of women legislators—and, consequently, substantive representation—greater presence of women’s issues in Congress. According to our theory, we expect that the enactment 9 of gender quotas law, regardless of the number of women legislators in Congress (and the apparent failure of that law in cases such as Brazil), can leads to substantive representation. Therefore, we suggest a path that goes from gender quotas law to women’s substantive representation, not necessarily undergoing an increase in the number of congresswomen (see the upper arrow in Figure 1). Two reasons are presented here as not using descriptive representation as a logical necessary condition for substantive representation. The first one, following Pitkin, the mere fact that a representative “is a very good descriptive representative does not automatically guarantee that they will be good representatives in the sense of acting for [. . . ]” (Pitkin 1967, p. 142). In this case, we assume that a greater presence of women in the Congress is not necessarily the most important condition for having more women issues in the bills proposed by legislators. Our second reason relates to the concept of “surrogate representation.” Surrogate representatives represent issues of those whom interests lie beyond the representatives’ own electoral constituency or district; for instance Mansbridge (2003, p. 523) states that, representatives who are female, African American, or of Polish ancestry, who have a child with a disability, or who have grown up on a farm, in a mining community, or in a working-class neighborhood, often feel not only a particular sensitivity to issues relating to these experiences but also a particular responsibility for representing the interests and perspectives of these groups, even when members of these groups do not constitute a large fraction of their constituents. Based on our theory, we can formulate the following hypotheses: • Hypothesis 1a. After the enactment of gender quotas law in 1997, the number of bill proposals related to women’s issues increased in the Congress, regardless of the gender of the representatives. • Hypothesis 1b. More than a general increase, it is expected a higher presence of bill proposals related to women issues in the bills proposed by women legislators. A common hypothesis in the literature is that left-leaning Congresswomen tend to advocate more progressive and liberal (non-conservative) policies, including a feminist 10 policy agenda (Htun and Power 2006, p.83; p. 99). Beyond the importance of gender, party membership has been considered one of the most consistently predictor of how representatives behave (Htun and Power 2006, p. 84; Dolan and Swers 2011, p. 241). Therefore, in addition to testing for the importance of gender, we should control the effect of legislator’s party ideology. By controlling for the ideological effect, we are able to know if a supposed increase in women substantive representation is attributed to the gender quotas law or if it is because the legislator belongs, for example, to a leftist party. • Hypothesis 2. As the percentage of left leaning legislators increases, also increases the presence of women’s issues on Congress bill proposals. In 2010, Dilma Rousseff, from the Worker’s Party (PT), was the first female president elected in Brazil. In 2014, she was reelected for more 4 years. It is reasonable to believe that the figure of a female president in the country’s highest political post may impact the Congress’ bill initiatives. Therefore, • Hypothesis 3. With the presence of a woman president in Brazil, we expect an increase in the presence of women’s issues on Congress bill proposals 4 Analyzing Substantive Representation in the Brazilian Congress As it was mentioned earlier, Brazil adopted a gender quota law in 1995 (subsequently revised in 1997), however, despite the existence of this quota law there was little increase of women’s descriptive representation with a mere 3% increase in 20 years. As such, Brazil provides an interesting opportunity to explore whether or not “substantive” and “descriptive” representations are linked to each other, or if on the contrary what matters is the institutional norm change to provide a venue for the discussion of women’s issues. In Brazil, a bill may be initiated by any member or committee of the Chamber of Deputies (Câmara dos Deputados), the Senate or the Congress (deputies and senators 11 presenting the bill together). May also propose new laws the President, the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the Attorney General’s Office, and citizens through popular initiative (requires up 1% of the total subscriptions of the electorate of the country). In our analysis, we included as bill initiatives all bill proposals initiated by legislators in the Chamber of Deputies (the House to which the gender quotas are intended). All Congress bill initiatives, from 1990 to 2013, were gathered from the Brazilian Center of Analysis and Planning (CEBRAP). Bill initiatives provide a unique opportunity to evaluate the preferences and issues introduced by legislators. 4.1 Classifying Bill Initiatives Each bill introduced gets assigned a group of key words (Indexação) to describe the content of the bill initiative. These words, on average 8 per bill initiative, are standard and are assigned by the Legislative Advisory Body (CONLE), a non-partisan office in charge of advising members of Congress on technical and legislative rules. In order to classify the bills we took hold of these key words and via Quantitative Text Analyisis we classified each bill as being a women’s issue bill or not. Quantitative Text Analysis allows researchers to analyze large quantities of data in a simple, reliable, and replicable way (Grimmer and King 2009; Hopkins and King 2010; Benoit and Lowe 2012), effectively reducing both the costs and likelihood of human error associated with hand coding texts (Neuendorf 2001). Specifically, in this study we use a dictionary approach. A dictionary allows the definition of categories through the classification of specific words into these. These categories can be issue areas (Pardos-Prado and Sagarzazu 2015), policy positions (Laver and Garry 2000), or budgetary policy decisions (Langer and Sagarzazu 2015). We built our dictionary by taking all the unique key words used by the CONLE in classifying the bill initiatives introduced in the Brazilian Congress. Each of these keywords was classified as pertaining (1) or not (0) to “women’s issues”. This categorization was done after consulting specialists on gender studies, and can be found in the appendix. Overall from the initial list of 534 tokens we classified 13 as women’s 12 issues keywords (see Table 5 in Appendix C). Once our dictionary was defined, we proceeded to classify the bills. Each bill was classified using the percentage of keywords which belonged to women’s issues. If a bill had more than 10% of keywords within our women’s rights keywords dictionary it was classified as a female issues bill. It is still important to be careful about different dimensions in the same topic discussed by the representatives. It might be that in some issues, for example a health care bill, women emphasize aspects related to a specific women problem (for example breast cancer research) while men emphasize how much the bill will cost (economic dimension). These keywords are seen as women’s issues because, as stated by Swers (2002, p. 10; and Swers and Larson 2005, p.113-114), “they seek to achieve equality for women; they address women’s special needs, such as women’s health concerns or child care; or they confront issues with which women have traditionally been concerned in their role as caregivers, as education or the protection of children". Figure 2: Percentage of Gender Bill Initiatives introduced per Legislature Figure 2 shows the percentage of bills classified as gender bills per legislature. As it can be seen the percentage of gender bills remains around 10% to 12%; however, in the last legislature this number increased to 15% which is already higher than the 9.9% 13 of women representatives in Congress. We corroborated this smooth relationship by doing an auto-regressive regression on the percentage of women’s issue bill initiatives, the auto-regressive component was not significant but the gender law variable was significant, specially so for women MC’s (see Table 6 in Appendix D). 4.2 Data, Sources and Variables Having defined the criteria for classification of bills as gender legislation we can proceed to test our hypotheses. We test the effects of four main independent variables (“Quota Law 1997,” “Female,” “Dilma,” and “Ideology”) on our dependent variable, “Gender Bill.” Our dependent variable is a dichotomous variable assigned with a value of 1 when the bill proposal is related to women’s issues and 0, otherwise. Gender quota 1997 is a dichotomous variable for the gender quota law. Although the Brazilian gender quota law was adopted in 1995, the law was applied for the first time in the 1998 Brazilian national elections (already with a quota of 30%, according to the amendment to the law in 1997). Female is a dichotomous variable assigned with a value of 1 if the legislator that initiated the bill is a woman (0 if a man). Dilma Rousseff, from the Workers’ Party (PT), was elected president of Brazil in 2010 and reelected in 2014; thus this variable receives a value of 1 from 2011 onwards. Ideology is a measure for the party ideology of the legislators; if the legislator is a member of a left-of-center party (1) otherwise (0).3 We included in the analysis different control variables data (political, economic and socio-demographic). We created dummy variables for the presidents before President Roussef, these are: Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002), from the Brazilian Social Democracy Party (PSDB); and Luiz Inácio ‘Lula’ da Silva (2003-2010), from the Workers’ Party (PT); the base category (where all three president dummies are zero is for President’s Collor de Mello and Franco (1990-1992 and 1992-1995 respectively). We furthermore control for whether the legislator is member of the governing coalition (1) 3 This binary variable for ideology was created based on information gathered from Zucco and Power (2009), a reliable and well accept ideology classification for Brazilian political parties. 14 or not (0). Because the first year of a legislature can be it’s most active we include a control for it.4 Using roll-call data we estimated the ideological position of the legislators for a given congress by using Poole and Rosenthals’s W-NOMINATE (Poole and Rosenthal 1985; Poole 2005). With this ideological positions we estimated each legislator’s distance to the median ideological position of the congress to control for whether legislators who are closer to the chamber’s mean propose more gender legislation as it will have a higher likelihood of being approved (as in the case in the Argentinian Congress, Calvo and Sagarzazu 2011). Finally, we introduced controls for the geographical area where the legislator is a representative of North, Northeast, Southeast, South, or the West-Central (base category) region. Geographical areas in Brazil are good proxies for development, income inequality, and education of a representative’s constituency. 5 Results and Discussion Because our dependent variable, whether a proposed bill is a ‘gender bill’ or not, we use a logistic regression model. The full econometric model to be estimated is presented by the following equation, GenderBill = f (QuotaLaw + F emale + Dilma + Ideology (1) +IdeologicalDistancetoChamberM edian + Controls + ϵ) Where the change in our dependent variable, “gender bill,” is expected to be a function of the independent variables “quota law,” “female,” “Dilma,” “Ideology,” control variables, and a disturbance term, ϵ. Table 3, presents the results for the effects of gender quota law (“Gender Law 1997”) and controls in three different logit models. In Model 1, all membems of congress (MC) are included; In Model 2, only female legislators are included, and; In Model 3, only 4 The list of variables and descriptive statistics can be seen in Appendix B. 15 male legislators are included. Table 3: The impact of gender quota law on bill initiatives Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 All MC’s Female MC’s Male MC’s Gender Law 1997 0.216*** 0.610** 0.168** (0.07) (0.24) (0.08) Female Ideological Distance to Chamber Mean Ideology Lula Dilma Cardoso Coalition First Year North Northeast Southeast South Constant N LogLik AIC 0.471*** (0.06) -0.227** (0.09) 0.002 (0.04) -0.298*** (0.10) -0.236** (0.11) -0.052 (0.08) 0.026 (0.05) 0.160*** (0.05) 0.164* (0.09) 0.081 (0.08) -0.054 (0.07) -0.096 (0.08) -2.114*** 24357 -8527 17081.5 0.297 (0.24) 0.027 (0.11) -1.026*** (0.32) -0.998*** (0.33) -0.516** (0.25) 0.141 (0.11) 0.327** (0.13) 0.463** (0.20) 0.704*** (0.21) 0.181 (0.14) 0.219 (0.23) -1.886*** 3759 -1613 3251.0 -0.223** (0.10) -0.002 (0.05) -0.246** (0.11) -0.175 (0.12) -0.017 (0.09) 0.020 (0.05) 0.137*** (0.05) 0.107 (0.10) -0.006 (0.08) -0.118 (0.07) -0.166** (0.08) -2.043*** 22285 -7609 15244.0 Standard errors in parenthesis. Significance levels: * p<0.1, ** p<0.05, *** p<0.01. Two-tailed test. According to the results presented in Table 3, Brazilian gender quota law had positive and significant (at level .05) effects on bill initiatives, increasing the likelihood of bill proposals related to women’s issues in Brazilian Congress. This finding supports our hypothesis 1a. According to this hypothesis, after the enactment of gender quotas law, 16 we expected that the number of bill proposals related to women’s issues increased in the Congress, regardless of the gender of the representatives. This finding is consistent in all our models. According to our hypothesis 1b, we expected a higher presence of bill proposals related to women issues in the bills proposed by women legislators. In order to test this hypothesis, we divided our sample between women members of congres (MC) and male members of congress. The results can be see in Model 2 and Model 3 of Table 3. The coefficients of these models reveal that Brazilian gender quota law increases the likelihood of bill proposals related to women’s issues in Brazilian Congress, and this likelihood is higher for female members of congress (Model 2, coefficient positive and significant at level 0.05), supporting our hypothesis 1b. We found no effect of ideology on gender bills (hypothesis 2), the results are not statistically significant. According to our expectation, legislators who are closer to the chamber’s mean propose more gender legislation as it will have a higher likelihood of being approved, we found this to be true. The negative sign of the coefficient indicates that legislators who are further away from the chamber mean will be less likely to propose legislation than those legislators who are closer to the chamber mean. It is interesting to notice, however, that once we split the model for men and women legislators this effect is different. While it remains similar for male-MC’s (Model 3), it is not statistically significant for women-MC’s (Model 2), this indicates that ideological location doesn’t seem to influence the likelihood with which women propose gender bills. Unexpectedly, the coefficient for President Dilma Roussef is in the opposite direction from our hypothesis 3, and statistically significant in Model 1 and 2. We expected that a women in the position of president would increase the number of bills related to women interests, but our results show a different scenario. Figure 3 shows the predicted probabilities of introducing a Gender Bill by both Men (left) and Women (right). The hollow circles represent the probabilities before the enactment the Quota Law, while the filled circles are for after the enactment of 17 Figure 3: Predicted probabilities of initiating Gender Legislation the law. The x-axis is the distance of the legislator to the chamber’s mean ideological position. This figure clearly shows the effect, on substantive representation, of the quota law. As it can be seen on the left hand side graph, the probability that men introduce legislation actually goes down after the enactment of the quota law, while that of women increases significantly. This divergent effect is probably due to the fact that men MC’s change their priorities after the enactment of quota laws, while before they thought they were representing everyone afterwards they might feel that women are getting true representatives in female MC’s and as such leave those issues to them. 18 6 Conclusions Studies on women in legislatures have often argued about the effect of gender quota laws in increasing the number of women legislators (Jones 2000; Htun 2001; Bratton 2002; Celis 2006; Franceschet and Piscopo 2008; Krook 2008; Htun and Micozzi 2013). This increase in descriptive representation has been directly linked to an increase in women’s issues being addressed and introduced into the agendas of parliaments worldwide (Saint-Germain 1989; Dodson and Carroll 1991; Carroll 2001; Swers 2002; Reingold and Haynie 2014; Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson 2014). The argument of the current literature is that as descriptive representation increases, so does substantive representation. This link between descriptive and substantive representation suggests that once women reach parliament, they become the strongest supporters for women’s, family, and children’s issues, whether it is by speaking on these issues or by introducing legislation on the matter (Swers 2002; Taylor-Robinson and Heath 2003; Dodson 2005; Dolan and Swers 2011). In light of this direct relationship, countries worldwide (including Brazil) have adopted gender quota laws to increase descriptive representation, and its positive outcome of enhancing womens’ substantive representation. In 1995 Brazil enacted its gender quota law which mandated the presence of women in congress. After 20 years, however, women representation in the Brazilian Congress has increased a mere 3% going from 7 to 10 percent. This small increase in descriptive representation has been linked to the absense of punishment for parties that don’t increase their number of female candidates, and also to the proportional representation open list electoral system in Brazil (Schmidt and Araujo 2004; Jones 2000; Htun 2001, 2005). In light of the failure of Brazil’s gender quota law to significantly increase the presence of female legislators, we questioned whether the increase in substantive representation is due to the increase in descriptive representation, or if it could be due to the institutional adoption of a quota law, which could change members of congress’ (MC) behavior. As such, this paper analyzed whether the gender quota law approved in Brazil 19 is directly affecting the level of substantive representation. Specifically, we aimed to understand whether this law effectively transformed the bill initiatives introduced in Congress by influencing the issues of the bills proposed by Brazilian legislators. In order to evaluate whether the Brazilian Congress saw more bill initiatives favoring women’s issues after the enactment of the quota law, we analyzed over 50,000 bill initiatives introduced from 1990 to 2013. Each of these proposals was coded—by means of a dictionary—as addressing or not addressing women’s issue. In our analysis we found that, even though the Brazilian gender quota did not fully reach its goal of increasing descriptive representation, it is not necessarily a failure, as we found evidence that political representation in the Brazilian Congress has been influenced by the adoption of quotas for women. Specifically, we find that after the quota law’s enactment there was an increase in the number of legislative initiatives favoring women. Moreover, we found that the dynamics of initiating a piece of women’s issue legislation changed with the 1997 quota law, with men less likely to propose legislation dealing with women’s issues, while women are more likely to do so. 20 Appendix A Figure 4: The evolution of the percentage of women representation in Brazilian Lower House (1987-2015) Source: Elaborated by the authors. Information from Brazilian Chamber of Deputies Portal (Câmara dos Deputados do Brasil 2014). Note: In 1995 (vertical red line) was approved a law providing 20% (in 1997, 30%) quota for women seats in the Brazilian legislature. * The composition of the Chamber of Federal Deputies for the legislature from 1991 to 1994 increased from 495 to 503 members due to the inclusion of Amapá and Roraima territories as states; increasing their seats from four to eight seats. ** A Complementary Law increased the legislative seats of São Paulo from 60 to 70 members. The composition of the Chamber of Federal Deputies for the legislature from 1995 to 1998 increased from 503 to 513 members; remaining with the same size until today. 21 Appendix B Table 4: Variables Names and Descriptive Statistics Variable Mean Std. Dev. Min. Dependent Variables Gender Bills 0.133 0.339 0 Independent Variables Gender Quota 1997 Ideological Distance to Chamber Median Ideology Lula FHC Dilma Coalition Female First Year North Northeast West-central Southeast South 0.701 0.22 0.312 0.371 0.291 0.134 0.544 0.081 0.288 0.093 0.179 0.093 0.363 0.152 0.458 0.244 0.463 0.483 0.454 0.341 0.498 0.273 0.453 0.291 0.383 0.291 0.481 0.359 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Max. N 1 50584 1 1.408 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 50584 28500 42845 50026 50026 50026 46276 44603 50584 50584 50584 50584 50584 50584 22 Appendix C Table 5: Keywords associated with Gendered Legislation Portuguese English criança(s) kid(s) discriminação discrimination domestico domestic household domiciliar or domicílio household equiparação pay equity exam exam filh kid(s) gestante pregnant/pregnancy gratuidad free guarda custody, child custody licencia maternal license sexual sexual victim victim 23 Appendix D Table 6: The impact of gender quota law on the number of bill initiatives TS Model 1 TS Model 2 TS Model 3 All MC’s Female MC’s Male MC’s yt−1 0.184 0.372 0.246 (0.26) (0.39) (0.41) Gender Law 1997 0.077* 0.153* 0.082 (0.04) (0.08) (0.06) Gender Law’97 × yt−1 -0.349 -0.772 -0.535 (0.32) (0.50) (0.49) Cardoso 0.000 0.021 -0.016 (0.02) (0.04) (0.01) Lula -0.021 -0.012 -0.031* (0.03) (0.05) (0.02) Dilma 0.003 0.017 -0.002 (0.03) (0.05) (0.02) First Year 0.024* 0.040 0.015 (0.01) (0.03) (0.01) Female 0.044*** (0.01) Constant 0.071** 0.067 0.086* (0.03) (0.06) (0.05) N 48.000 24.000 24.000 LogLik 95 43 68 R-sqr .386 .359 .405 AIC -172.9 -70.7 -119.2 24 References Arriola, Leonardo and Martha Johnson. 2014. “Ethnic politics and women’s empowerment in Africa: ministerial appointments to executive cabinets.” American Journal of Political Science 58(2):495–510. Benoit, Kenneth, Michael Laver and Will Lowe. 2012. “How to scale coded text units without bias: A response to Gemenis.” Electoral Studies 31:605–608. Bratton, Kathleen. 2002. “The Effect of Legislative Diversity on Agenda Setting: Evidence from Six State Legislatures.” American Politics Research 30(2):115–142. Calvo, Ernesto and Iñaki Sagarzazu. 2011. “Legislator Success in Committee: Gatekeeping Authority and the Loss of Majority Control.” American Journal of Political Science 55(1):1–15. Câmara dos Deputados do Brasil. 2014. “Portal of Chamber of Deputies.” http://www2.camara.leg.br. Carroll, Susan. 2001. Representing Women: Women State Legislators as Agents of Policy-Related Change. In Women Transforming Congress, ed. Cinty Simon Rosenthal. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press pp. 50–68. Celis, Karen. 2006. “Substantive Representation of Women: The Representation of Women’s Interest and the Impact of Descriptive Representation in the Belgian Parliament (1900–1979).” Journal of Women, Politics and Policy 28(2):85–114. Curtin, Jennifer. 2006. Conclusion: Gendering Political Representation Women in Parliament. In Representing Women in Parliament, ed. Manon Tremblay Sawer, Marian and Linda Trimble. New York: Routledge pp. 236–251. Dahlerup, Drude. 2014. Representing Women: Defining Substantive Representation of Women. In Representation: The Case of Women, ed. Maria Escobar-Lemmon and Michelle Taylor-Robinson. New York: Oxford University Press pp. 57–75. 25 Dodson, Debra. 2005. Making a difference: behind the scenes. In Women and Elective Office: Past, Present and Future, ed. Sue Thomas and Clyde Wilcox. Oxford: Oxford University Press pp. 129–151. Dodson, Debra. 2011. The impact of Women in Congress. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dodson, Debra and Susan Carroll. 1991. Reshaping the Agenda: Women in State Legislatures. New York: Oxford University Press. Dolan, Julie; Deckman, Melissa and Michele Swers. 2011. Women and politics: paths to power and political influence. Illinois: Pearson. Dolan, Kathleen. 2005. How the public views women candidates. In Women and Elective Office: Past, Present and Future, ed. Sue Thomas and Clyde Wilcox. Oxford: Oxford University Press pp. 41–59. Escobar-Lemmon, Maria and Michelle Taylor-Robinson. 2014. Does Presence Produce Representation of Interests? In Representation: The Case of Women, ed. Maria Escobar-Lemmon and Michelle Taylor-Robinson. New York: Oxford University Press pp. 227–247. Franceschet, Susan and Jennifer Piscopo. 2008. “Gender quotas and women’s substantive representation: lessons from Argentina.” Politics Gender 4:393–425. Grimmer, Justin and Gary King. 2009. “Quantitative Discovery from Qualitative Information: A General-Purpose Document Clustering Methodology.” Paper presented at meeting of American Political Science Association . Hopkins, Daniel and Gary King. 2010. “A method of automated nonparametric content analysis for social science.” American Journal of Political Science 54(1):229–247. Htun, Mala. 2001. “A política de cotas na América Latina.” Revista Estudos Feministas 9(1):225–230. 26 Htun, Mala. 2005. Women politicla parties and electoral systems in Latin America. In Women in Parliament: Beyond numbers, ed. J Ballington and A. Karam. Stockholm: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance pp. 112–121. Htun, Mala; Lacalle, Marina and Juan Pablo Micozzi. 2013. “Does Women’s Presence Change Legislative Behavior? Evidence from Argentina, 1983-2007.” Journal of Politics in Latin America 5(1):95–125. Htun, Mala and Timothy Power. 2006. “Gender, Parties, and Support for Equal Rights in the Brazilian Congress.” Latin American Politics Society 48(4):83–104. IPU, Inter-Parliamentary Union. 2015. “Women in National Parliaments.” http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/world.htm . Jones, Mark. 2000. El sistema de cuotas y la elección de las mujeres en América Latina: el papel fundamental del sistema electoral. In La democracia paritaria en la construcción europea, ed. P. S. RUIZ. Madrid: Coordinadora Española del Lobby Europeo de Mujeres pp. 34–47. Krook, M. L. 2008. “Quota Laws for Women in Politics: Implications for Feminist Practice.” Social Politics 15(3):345–368. Langer, Ana Ines and Iñaki Sagarzazu. 2015. “The Media Coverage of the UK Budget.” Forthcoming . Laver, Michael and John Garry. 2000. “Estimating Policy Positions from Political Texts.” American Journal of Political Science 44(3):619–634. MacDonald, Jason and Erin O’Brien. 2010. “Quasi-Experimental Design, Constituency, and Advancing Women’s Interests: Reexamining the Influence of Gender on Substantive Representation.” Political Research Quarterly 64:472–485. Mansbridge, Jane. 2003. “Rethinking Representation.” American Political Science Review 97(4):515–528. 27 Miguel, Luis Felipe and Fernanda Feitosa. 2009. “O gênero do discurso parlamentar: mulheres e homens na tribuna da Câmara dos Deputados.” Dados - Revista de Ciências Sociais 52(1):p. 201–221. Neiva, Pedro and A. Ogando. 2010. “Women’s Issues in the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies: participation in committees and the voting patterns of legislators.” Paper presented at 5th Conference of Latin American Political Science Association (ALACIP) Buenos Aires(Argentina). Neto, Octavio Amorim; Cox, Gary and Mathew McCubbins. 2003. “Agenda Power in Brazil’s Câmara dos Deputados, 1989-1998.” World Politics 55(4):550–578. Neuendorf, Kimberly. 2001. The content analysis guidebook. California: Sage. Pardos-Prado, Sergi and Iñaki Sagarzazu. 2015. “The Political Conditioning of Subjective Economic Evaluations: The Role of Party Discourse.” British Journal of Political Science FirstView:1–25. Piscopo, Jennifer. 2011. “Rethinking descriptive representation: rendering women in legislative debates.” Parliamentary Affairs 64(3):448–472. Pitkin, Hanna. 1967. The Concept of Representation. California: University of California Press. PNAD-IBGE. 2013. “Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios.” Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística . Poole, Keith. 2005. Spatial Models of Parliamentary Voting. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Poole, Keith and Howard Rosenthal. 1985. “A Spatial Model for Legislative Roll Call Analysis.” American Journal of Political Science 29:357–384. Reingold, Beth. 2000. Representing Women: Sex, gender and legislative behavior in Arizona and California. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. 28 Reingold, Beth and Kerry Haynie. 2014. Representing Women’s Interests and Intersections of Gender, Race, and Ethnicity in US State Legislatures. In Representation: The Case of Women, ed. Maria Escobar-Lemmon and Michelle Taylor-Robinson. New York: Oxford University Press pp. 183–204. Rule, Wilma. 1999. Why are more women state legislators? In Women in Politics: Outsiders or Insiders, ed. Lois Duke Whitaker. New Jersey: Prentice Hall pp. 190– 218. Saint-Germain, Michelle. 1989. “Does Their Difference Make a Difference? The Impact of Women on Public Policy in the Arizona Legislature.” Social Science Quarterly 70(4):956–968. Sapiro, Virginia. 1981. “Research frontier essay: When are Interests interesting? The Problem of Political Representation of Women.” American Political Science Review 75(3):701–716. Schmidt, G and C. Araujo. 2004. “The Devil’s in the Details: Open List Voting and Gender Quotas in Brazil and Peru.” Paper presented at the XXV International Congress of Latin American Studies Association . Swers, Michele. 2002. The difference women make: The policy impact of women in Congress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Swers, Michele and Carin Larson. 2005. Women in Congress: Do they act as advocates for women’s issues? In Women and Elective Office: Past, Present and Future, ed. Sue Thomas and Clyde Wilcox. Oxford University Press pp. 110–128. Taylor-Robinson, Michelle and Roseanna Michelle Heath. 2003. “Do women legislators have different policy priorities than their male colleagues?” Women Politics 24(4):77–101. Thomas, Sue. 1994. How Women Legislate. New York: Oxford University Press. 29 Tremblay, Manon. 2007. “Electoral Systems and Substantive Representation of Women: A Comparison of Australia, Canada and New Zealand.” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 45(3):278–302. TSE do Brasil. 2014. “Tribunal Superior Eleitoral do Brasil.”. URL: http://www.tse.jus.br/ Walsh, Katherine. 2002. Enlarging representation: women bringing marginalized perspectives to floor debate in the House of Representatives. In Women Transforming Congress, ed. Cinty Simon Rosenthal. Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press. Whicker, Marcia Lynn and Lois Duke Whitaker. 1999. Women in Congress. In Women in Politics: Outsiders or Insiders, ed. Lois Duke Whitaker. New Jersey: Prentice Hall pp. p. 171–189. Zucco, Cesar and Timothy Power. 2009. “Estimating Ideology of Brazilian Legislative Parties, 1990-2005.” Latin American Research Review 44(1):218–246. 30
© Copyright 2024