Women in government

Women in government in the modern era are under-represented in most countries worldwide, in contrast to men. However, women are increasingly being politically elected to be heads of state and government. More than 20 countries currently have a woman holding office as the head of a national government, and the global participation rate of women in national-level parliaments is nearly 20%. A number of countries are exploring measures that may increase women's participation in government at all levels, from the local to the national.

Importance

Increasing women’s representation in the government can empower women.^[1] Increasing women’s representation in government is necessary to achieve gender parity.^[2] This notion of women’s empowerment is rooted in the human capabilities approach, in which individuals are empowered to choose the functioning that they deem valuable.^[3]

Women, as the conventional primary caretakers of children, often have a more prominent role than men in advocating for children, resulting in a “double dividend” in terms of the benefits of women’s representation.^[1] Female representatives not only advance women’s rights, but also advance the rights of children. In national legislatures, there is a notable trend of women advancing gender and family-friendly legislation. This advocacy has been seen in countries ranging from France, Sweden and the Netherlands, to South Africa, Rwanda, and Egypt. Furthermore, a number of studies from both industrialized and developed countries indicate that women in local government tend to advance social issues. In India, for instance, greater women’s representation has corresponded with a more equitable distribution of community resources, including more gender-sensitive spending on programs related to health, nutrition, and education.

Challenges faced by women

Women face numerous obstacles in achieving representation in governance.^[1] Their participation has been limited by the assumption that women’s proper sphere is the “private” sphere. Whereas the “public” domain is one of political authority and contestation, the “private” realm is associated with the family and the home.^[3] By relegating women to the private sphere, their ability to enter the political arena is curtailed.

Gender inequality within families, inequitable division of labor within households, and cultural attitudes about gender roles further subjugate women and serve to limit their representation in public life.^[1] Societies that are highly patriarchal often have local power structures that make it difficult for women to combat.^[4] Thus, their interests are often not represented.

Even once elected, women tend to hold lesser valued cabinet ministries or similar positions.^[3] These are described as “soft industries” and include health, education, and welfare. Rarely do women hold executive decision-making authority in more powerful domains or those that are associated with traditional notions of masculinity (such as finance and the military). Typically, the more powerful the institution, the less likely it is that women’s interests will be represented. Additionally, in more autocratic nations, women are less likely to have their interests represented.^[4] Many women attain political standing due to kinship ties, as they have male family members who are involved in politics.^[3] These women tend to be from higher income, higher status families and thus may not be as focused on the issues faced by lower income families.

Challenges within political parties

In Canada, there is evidence that female politicians face gender stigma from male members of the political parties to which they belong, which can undermine the ability of women to reach or maintain leadership roles. Pauline Marois, leader of the Parti Quebecois (PQ) and the official opposition of the National Assembly of Quebec, was the subject of a claim by Claude Pinard, a PQ "backbencher", that many Quebecers do not support a female politician: "I believe that one of her serious handicaps is the fact she's a woman [...] I sincerely believe that a good segment of the population won't support her because she's a woman".^[5] A 2000 study that analyzed 1993 election results in Canada found that among "similarly situated women and men candidates", women actually had a small vote advantage. The study showed that neither voter turnout nor urban/rural constituencies were factors that help or hurt a female candidate, but "office-holding experience in non-political organizations made a modest contribution to women's electoral advantage".^[6]

Bruce M. Hicks, an electoral studies researcher at Université de Montréal, states that evidence shows that female candidates begin with a head start in voters' eyes of as much as 10 per cent, and that female candidates are often more favourably associated by voters with issues like health care and education.^[5] The electorate's perception that female candidates have more proficiency with traditional women's spheres such as education and health care presents a possibility that gender stereotypes can work in a female candidate's favour, at least among the electorate. In politics, however, Hicks points out that sexism is nothing new:

(Marois' issue) does reflect what has been going on for some time now: women in positions of authority have problems in terms of the way they manage authority [...] The problem isn't them, it's the men under them who resent taking direction from strong women. And the backroom dirty dialogue can come into the public eye.^[5]

Within Quebec itself, Don McPherson pointed out that Pinard himself has enjoyed greater electoral success with Pauline Marois as party leader than under a previous male party leader, when Pinard failed to be elected in his riding. Demographically, Pinard's electoral riding is rural, with "relatively older, less-well educated voters".^[7]

Women's suffrage

National representation

As of 2011, the global average of women in national assemblies is 19.3%.^[8]

Women in national parliaments

Out of 188 countries, listed in descending order by the percentage of women in the lower or single house, the top 10 countries with the greatest representation of women in national parliaments are (figures reflect information as of August 31, 2011):^[9]

The major English-speaking democracies are placed in the top 40% of the ranked countries. New Zealand ranks at position 17 with women comprising 33.6% of its lower house in parliament. Australia (24.7% in the lower house, 35.5% in the upper house) and Canada (24.7% lower house, 35.9% upper house) rank at position 38 out of 188 countries. The United Kingdom is ranked at 48 (22.0% lower house, 20.1% upper house), while the United States ranks 69 (16.9% in the lower house, 17.0% in the upper house).^[9] It should be noted that not all of these lower and/or upper houses in national parliaments are democratically elected; for example, in Canada members of the upper house (the Senate) are appointed. In a small number of countries, for example Saudi Arabia, women's suffrage does not exist, and therefore there is a 0% representation of women in the national government.

Policies to increase women’s participation

The United Nations has identified six avenues by which female participation in politics and government may be strengthened. These avenues are: equalization of educational opportunities, quotas for female participation in governing bodies, legislative reform to increase focus on issues concerning women and children, financing gender-responsive budgets to equally take into account the needs of men and women, increasing the presence of sex-disaggregated statistics in national research/data, and furthering the presence and agency of grassroots women’s empowerment movements ^[1]

Education

Women with formal education (at any level) are likelier to delay marriage and subsequent childbirth, be better informed about infant and child nutrition, and ensure childhood immunization. Children of mothers with formal education are better nourished and have higher survival rates.^[1] Equalization of educational opportunities for boys and girls may take the form of several initiatives:

• abolishment of educational fees which would require parents to consider financial issues when deciding which of their children to educate. Poor children in rural areas are particularly affected by inequality resulting from educational fees.^[10]
• encouragement of parents and communities to institute gender-equal educational agendas. Perceived opportunity cost of educating girls may be addressed through a conditional cash transfer program which financially reward families who educate their daughters (thus removing the financial barrier that results from girls substituting school attendance for work in the family labor force).^[11]
• creation of “girl-friendly” schools to minimize bias and create a safe school environment for girls and young women. Currently, a barrier to female school attendance is the risk of sexual violence en route to school.^[12] A “safe school environment” is one in which the school is located to minimize such violence, in addition to providing girls with educational opportunities (as opposed to using female students to perform janitorial work or other menial labor).^[12]

Quotas

Quotas are mechanisms by which governments seek to numerically increase the numbers of female represented in the governing body.^[12] Types of quotas include:^[12]

• Gender quota systems: institute a “critical value” below which is deemed an imbalanced government. Examples of such critical values include 20% of legislators, 50% of politicians, etc.
• Legal quota systems regulate the governance of political parties and bodies. Such quotas may be mandated by electoral law (as in Ecuador, for example) or may be constitutionally required (as in Nepal).
• Voluntary party quota systems may be used by political parties at will, yet are not mandated by electoral law or by a country’s constitution. If a country’s leading or majority political party engages in a voluntary party quota system, the effect may “trickle down” to minority political parties in the country (as in the case of the African National Congress in South Africa).

Quotas may be utilized during different stages of the political nomination/selection process to address different junctures at which women may be inherently disadvantaged:^[12]

• Potential candidacy: gender quota systems can mandate that from the pool of aspirants, a certain percentage of them must be female.
• Nomination: legal or voluntary quotas are enforced upon this stage, during which a certain portion of nominated candidates on the party’s ballot must be female.
• Election: “reserved seats” may be filled only by women.

Quota usage can have marked effects on female representation in governance. In 1995, Rwanda ranked 24th in terms of female representation, and jumped to 1st in 2003 after quotas were introduced. Similar effects can be seen in Argentina, Iraq, Burundi, Mozambique, and South Africa, for example.^[12] Of the top-ranked 20 countries in terms of female representation in government, 17 of these countries utilize some sort of quota system to ensure female inclusion. Though such inclusion is mainly instituted at the national level, there have been efforts in India to addresses female inclusion at the subnational level, through quotas for parliamentary positions.^[13]

Legislation

Legislative agendas, some pushed by female political figures, may focus on several key issues to address ongoing gender disparities:

• Reducing domestic and gender-based violence. The Convention on the Rights of the Child, in 1989, addressed home violence and its effects on children. The Convention stipulates that children are holders of human rights, and authorizes the State to 1) prevent all forms of violence, and 2) respond to past violence effectively.^[14] Gender-based violence, such as the use of rape as a tool of warfare, was addressed in Resolution 1325 of the UN Security Council in 2000. It calls for “all parties of armed conflict to take special measures to protect women and girls from gender-based violence.” ^[15] Currently, 64 countries have either drafted or are in the process of drafting laws to criminalize gender violence.^[1]
• Reducing in-home discrimination through equalizing property and inheritance rights. National legislation can supersede traditionally male-dominated inheritance models. Such legislation has been proven effective in countries like Colombia, where 60% of land is held in joint titles between men and women (compared to 18% before the passage of joint titling legislation in 1996).^[16]

Financing

Gender-responsive budgets address the needs and interests of different individuals and social groups, maintaining awareness of gender issues within the formation of policies and budgets. Such budgets are not necessarily a 50-50 male-female split, but accurately reflect the needs of each gender (such as increased allocation for women’s reproductive health.^[17] Benefits of gender-responsive budgets include:

• Improved budget efficiency by ensuring that funds are allocated where they are needed most
• Strengthened government position by advocating for needs of all, including the poor and the underrepresented
• Increased information flow surrounding needs of those who are usually discriminated against

A gender-responsive budget may also work to address issues of unpaid care work and caring labor gaps.^[17]

Research/data improvements

Current research which uses sex-aggregated statistics may underplay or minimize the quantitative presentation of issues such as maternal mortality, violence against women, and girls’ school attendance.^[18] Sex-disaggregated statistics are lacking in the assessment of maternal mortality rates, for example. Prior to UNICEF and UNIFEM efforts to gather more accurate and comprehensive data, 62 countries had no recent national data available regarding maternal mortality rates.^[19] Only 38 countries have sex-disaggregated statistics available to report frequency of violence against women.^[20] 41 countries collect sex-disaggregated data on school attendance, while 52 countries assess sex-disaggregated wage statistics.^[20]

Grassroots women’s empowerment movements

Women’s informal collectives are crucial to improving the standard of living for women worldwide. Collectives can address such issues as nutrition, education, shelter, food distribution, and generally improved standard of living.^[21] Empowering such collectives can increase their reach to the women most in need of support and empowerment.

Case studies

Brazil

A 1995 Brazilian gender quota was extended first to city councilor positions in 1996, then extended to candidates of all political legislative positions by 1998.^[22] By 1998, 30% of political candidates had to be women, with varied results in terms of the gender balance of the officials ultimately elected. Though the percentage of national legislature seats occupied by women dropped in the initial years following the passage of the quota law, the percentage has since risen (from 6.2% pre-quota, to 5.7% in 1998, to 8.9% in 2006). However, Brazil has struggled with the quota law in several respects:

• Though the quota law mandates a certain percentage of candidate spots be reserved for women, it is not compulsory that those spots be filled by women.
• The quota law also allowed political parties to increase the number of candidates, further increasing electoral competition and having a negligible impact on the actual number of women elected.
• Brazil is the fifth-largest country in the world (in terms of both population size and also land area), making it difficult for women to accept the distance from home which would accompany traveling to seek a spot in the national legislative body.

Finland

The Finnish national quota law, introduced in 1995, mandates that among all indirectly elected public bodies (at both a national and a local level), at least 40% of the governing body must be female.^[23] The 1995 laws was a reformed version of a similar 1986 law. Unlike other countries’ quota laws, which affect party structure or electoral candidate lists, the Finnish law addresses indirectly elected bodies (nominated by official authorities)—the law does not address popularly elected bodies. The Finnish law heavily emphasizes local municipal boards and other subnational institutions. From 1993 (pre-quota law) to 1997 (post-quota law), the proportion of women on municipal executive boards increased from 25% to 45%. The quota law also affected gender segregation in local governance: before the passage of the law, there had been a gender imbalance in terms of female overrepresentation in “soft-sector” boards (those concerned with health, education, etc.) and female underrepresentation in “hard-sector” boards (those concerned with economics and technology). In 1997, the boards were balanced horizontally. However, areas not subject to quota laws continue to be imbalanced. In 2003, it was determined that only 16% of the chairs of municipal executive boards are female—chair positions in this area are not quota-regulated.^[24]

Spain

In 2007, Spain passed the Equality Law, requiring a “principle of balanced presence” by mandating political parties to include 40-60% of each sex among electoral candidates.^[25] This law is unique in that surpasses the 40% parity figure established by the European Commission in 1998; a figure which (according to the EC) indicates “parity democracy.” Though there is anecdotal of increasing female representation on a local and national level, there has not yet been national-level data to quantitatively bolster this assertion.

India

In India, the local city elections of 1997 and 2002 serve as a natural experiment for reservation of seats in village elections. With the 73rd and 74th constitutional amendments passed in 1992, India’s state governments held local elections with a reservation of one-third of the seats for women.^[26] These political reservation quotas randomly choose cities to implement a women-only election. In these cities, parties were forced to either give a ticket to a women candidate or choose to not run in those locations. This reservation randomizes the city or village every new election, so that the quota changes its location each time. This addresses the political discrimination of women at various levels: parties are forced to give women the opportunity to run, the women candidates are not disadvantaged by a male incumbent or general biases for male over female leadership, and the pool of women candidates is increased because of the guaranteed opportunity for female participation. From 1997 to 2002, quota locations that repealed their mandate portrayed a huge increase in female leadership. In the 2002 election, Bhavnani (2009) notes “although female candidates were competitive in 43% of the [quota locations], they were competitive in just 14% of the [non-quota locations]” (p. 28). The percentage of open (non-quota) seats in which women won elections increased from 3.4% in 1997 to 8.6% in 2002, and six of the eight women who won elections in 2002 from quota locations were incumbents.^[26] This shows a huge gain for women leadership: even when the mandates are withdrawn, women were still able to keep their positions of leadership. Given the opportunity to get a party ticket, create a platform and obtain the experience to run for a political position, women are much more likely to be able to overcome these hurdles in the future, even without the quota system in place. Especially in India, where the caste system has been prominent in politics for many years, female quotas are necessary to prove to both voters and parties that women are viable candidates for political positions. The random nature of India’s quotas allows for the reservation of a position of power for women, while only keeping this reservation open for one election. While some would argue that this might promote reverse discrimination against male candidates, others view reservation quotas as creating opportunity for women to run against each other and prove to voters that they are qualified. Reservation of seats also challenges the selection bias in voters, who tend to vote for the (usually male) incumbent. From India’s case study, Bhavnani (2009) concludes, “I find the probability of a women winning office conditional on the constituency being reserved for women in the previous election is approximately five times the probability of a women winning office if the constituency had not been reserved for women”.^[26] Examples of reserved seats for women being implemented and withdrawn (i.e. randomly assigned) is an unusual form of gender quota, however, it serves as a great example of how gender quotas can change women leadership in the short term and long term.

Rwanda

Since the election of 2008, Rwanda is the first country to have a majority of women in legislature.^[27] Rwanda is an example of a developing country that does not have spectacular gender equality in other aspects of society, but radically increased its female leadership because of national conflict. After the genocide that killed 800,000 Tutsis in 100 days, women in legislature went from 18% women before the conflict to 56% in 2008. Two pieces of legislature enabled and supported women into leadership positions: the Security Council Resolution of 1325 urged women to take part in the post-conflict reconstruction and the 2003 Rwandan Constitution included a mandated quota of 30% reserved seats for all women in legislature. Of the 24 women who gained seats directly after the quota implementation in 2003, many joined political parties and choose to run again. Once again we can see the quota working as an “incubator” for giving women confidence, experience, and driving women’s participation in leadership. It is argued that the increase of female leadership in Rwanda also led to an increase in gender equality. World Focus (2009) writes, “Rwandan voters have elected women in numbers well beyond the mandates dictated by the post-genocide constitution.^[28] And though women in Rwanda still face discrimination, female legislators have influenced major reforms in banking and property laws.” A parliamentary women’s caucus in Rwanda (FFRP) has also “led a successful effort to pass ground-breaking legislation on gender-based violence in part by involving and garnering support from their male colleagues”.^[27] While some researchers see reform, others see dominant party tactics. Hassim (2009) writes, “It could be argued that in both countries [Uganda and Rwanda] women’s representation provided a kind of alibi for the progressive, ‘democratic’ nature of new governments that at their core nevertheless remained authoritarian, and increasingly so”.^[29] Rwanda shows that increased women participation in democracy tends leads to progress in gender equal legislature and reform, but research must be careful not to immediately relate increased gender equality in politics to increased gender equality in policy.

Germany

The gender quotas implemented across parties in Germany in the 1990s serve as a natural experiment for the effect of sub-national party political gender quotas on women participation. Davidson-Schmich (2006) notes, “the German case provides the variance needed to explain the successful (or failed) implementation of these political party quotas”.^[30] Germany’s sixteen state legislatures, the Lander, feature a variety of party systems and varied number of potential female candidates. Germany is rated highly in its gender gap ; however, Germany is an example of a developed country with a low percentage of female leadership in politics. Davidson-Schmich’s study shows that there are many factors that influence how effective a political quota for women will be. Because Germany’s quotas cover culturally diverse areas, Davidson-Schmich was able to see which cities best responded to the increase in women running for office. In his bivariate study, the quota was more successful when the city had a PR electoral system, when more women held inner-party and local political offices, and when there were more women in state-level executive offices. The quota was less successful in rural areas, areas with a large number of Catholic voters, electoral systems with a preferential system, in extremely competitive party systems, and with greater rates of legislative turnover. In his multivariate study of these regions, however, Davidson-Schmich narrowed these factors down even further to the most significant variables of: Catholicism and agricultural economics (Davidson-Schmich, 2006, p. 228). This is very intriguing, and as he explains, “the success of voluntary gender quotas in the German states hinged not on the political structure of these Lander, but rather the willingness of within the system to act on the opportunities inherent in these structures” (Davidson-Schmich, 2006, p. 228). Social factors and inherent gender discrimination are more important in the success of a female political quota than the structure of the quota itself.

The United States

Recent news from the United States shows the precarious nature of women leadership in the U.S. In the elections of 2012, the greatest number of female incumbents ever will be up for re-election in the Senate. Ten female Democrats, six of them incumbents, are nominated, while there is only one Republic nomination for Senate running for office.^[31] Steinhauer notes that in Congress, both in the Senate and the House of Representatives, women historically and currently lack representation. The results from the 2012 election mean life or death for women representation in the Senate: “If all or most of the incumbent women prevail in 2012, and even just a few women of the many recruited win new seats, women would reach an all-time high in the Senate. But the loss of just one female Senate seat with no replacements would cost women ground in the Senate for the first time since 1978, when the number of women in the Senate went to one from two”.^[31] With such little representation, women Senators have a shaky position in either making the highest percentage of seats or the lowest proportion since 1978. In the United States, no political gender quotas exist at all, not even voluntary political party quotas. The proportion of women in leadership roles in the Senate, House of Representatives, and Presidential positions reflect this. The ideology of the country is very pro-democracy and free elections, which stems from the idea of the American dream and a system of inherent meritocracy. For a country of meritocracy to have fifty-four consistent male presidents, however, one would think that the question of gender discrimination in leadership might begin to arise. The United States has yet to address, or even admit, this dilemma.

Women in government office

Women in politics have historically been under-represented in Western societies compared to men. Some women, however, have been politically elected to be heads of state and government.

Historic firsts for women in government

• Sukhbaataryn Yanjmaa, Mongolia (1953–1954): World's first female (acting) president
• Isabel Peron, Argentina (1974–1976): World's first female (non-acting) president
• Vigdis Finnbogadottir, Iceland (1980–1996): World's first female elected president, and first female world leader who did not have a father or husband who was also leader at one time
• Mary McAleese, Ireland (1997–2011):First time that a female president directly succeeded another female president
• Sri Lanka (1994–2000): First time that a nation possessed a female prime minister and a female president simultaneously. Sri Lanka in 1994 also marked the first time that a female prime minister directly succeeded another female prime minister.
• Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir, Iceland (2009- ): World's first openly lesbian world leader, first female world leader to wed a same-sex partner while in office

Some of the most prominent female leaders of world powers in recent decades were (listed by name then position):

Current women leaders of national governments

The following women leaders are currently in office as the either the head of their nation's government or the head of state (as of December 2011):

Women as cabinet ministers

Women holding prominent cabinet posts have grown in numbers worldwide during the 20th and 21st centuries, and in recent years have increasingly held the top profile portfolios for their governments in non-traditional areas for women in government, such as national security and defense, finance, revenue and foreign relations.

Ministers of foreign affairs

The following women have held posts in recent years as ministers of foreign relations or the equivalent for their respective national governments:

Ministers of defense and national security

The following women have held posts in recent years as ministers of defense, national security or an equivalent for their respective national governments:

Ministers of finance or revenue

The following women have held posts in recent years as ministers of finance, revenue, or an equivalent for their respective national governments:

Comparing women's integration into branches of government

Executive branch

Women have been notably underrepresented in the executive branch of government. The gender gap has been closing, however, albeit slowly ^[4] The first women other than monarchs to hold head of state positions were in socialist countries. The first was Khertek Anchimaa-Toka of the Tuvan People's Republic from 1940–1944, followed by Sükhbaataryn Yanjmaa of the Mongolian People's Republic 1953-1954 and Soong Ching-ling of the People's Republic of China from 1968–1972 and 1981.

Following the socialist countries, the Nordic countries have been forerunners in including women in the executive branch. The second cabinet Brundtland (1986–1989) was historical in that 8 out of 18 cabinet members were women, and in 2007 the second cabinet Stoltenberg (2005–present) was more than 50% women. Some current female politicians that have reached top positions in the Nordic countries are the President of Finland, Tarja Halonen and Deputy Prime Minister of Sweden, Maud Olofsson.

In 2003, Finland had a historical moment when all top leaders of the country were women and also represented different political parties: Social democrat Tarja Halonen was President, Riitta Uosukainen from National Coalition Party was Speaker of the Parliament and after the parliamentary elections of 2003 Anneli Jäätteenmäki from Center party was on her way to become the first female Prime Minister of Finland. By June 22, 2010 Mari Kiviniemi of the Centre Party was appointed the second female Prime Minister of Finland.

The world's first elected female president was Vigdís Finnbogadóttir of Iceland, whose term lasted from 1980 to 1996.

In 2005, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia became Africa's first elected female head of state.

Legislative branch

It was not until World War I and the first socialist revolutions that the first few women became members of governments. Alexandra Kollontai became the first female to hold a minister position, as the People's Commissar for Social Welfare in Soviet Russia in 1917.^[32] Nina Bang, Danish Minister of Education from 1924–26, was the world's second full female cabinet minister.

The first female head of government was Evgenia Bosh, the Bolshevik military leader who held the People's Secretary of Internal Affairs position in the Ukraine People's Republic of the Soviets of Workers and Peasants from 1917–1918, which was responsible for executive functions.^[33][34][35] Nevertheless, development was slow and it was not until the end of the 20th century that female ministers stopped being unusual.

The first government organization formed with the goal of women's equality was the Zhenotdel, in Soviet Russia.

According to a 2006 report by the Inter-Parliamentary Union, 16% of all parliament members in the world are female. In 1995, the United Nations set a goal of 30% female representation.^[36] The current annual growth rate of women in national parliaments is about 0.5% worldwide. At this rate, gender parity in national legislatures will not be achieved until 2068.^[1]

The top ten countries in terms of number of female parliamentary members are Rwanda with 56.3%, Sweden (47.0%), Cuba (43.2%), Finland (41.5%), the Netherlands (41.3%), Argentina (40.0%), Denmark (38.0%), Angola (37.3%), Costa Rica (36.8%), Spain (36.3%).^[37] Cuba has the highest percentage for countries without a quota. In South Asia, Nepal is highest in the rank of women participation in politics with (33%).^[38] In the United States in 2008, the New Hampshire State Senate became the first state legislature upper house to possess an elected female majority.

The United Kingdom and United States are roughly in line with the world average. The House of Lords has 139 women (19.7%), while there are 125 women (19.4%) in the British House of Commons.

Local representation

There has been an increasing focus on women’s representation at a local level.^[3] Most of this research is focused on developing countries. Governmental decentralization often results in local government structures that are more open to the participation of women, both as elected local councilors and as the clients of local government services.^[4] A 2003 survey conducted by United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG), a global network supporting inclusive local governments, found that the average proportion of women in local council was 15%. In leadership positions, the proportion of women was lower: for instance, 5% of mayors of Latin American municipalities are women.

According to a comparative study of women in local governments in East Asia and the Pacific, women have been more successful in reaching decision-making position in local governments than at the national level.^[1] Local governments tend to be more accessible and have more available positions. Also, women’s role in local governments may be more accepted because they are seen as an extension of their involvement in the community.

Indian panchayats

The local panchayat system in India provides an example of women’s representation at the local governmental level.^[3] The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments in 1992 mandated panchayat elections throughout the country. The reforms reserved 33% of the seats for women and for castes and tribes proportional to their population. Over 700,000 women were elected after the reforms were implemented in April 1993.

See also

• List of the first female holders of political offices
• List of elected or appointed female heads of state
• List of elected or appointed female deputy heads of government
• Council of Women World Leaders

References

Further reading

• Eileen McDonagh (2009), The Motherless State: Women's Political Leadership and American Democracy, University of Chicago Press ISBN 9780226514550
• Helene Silverberg (1998), "A Government of Men: Gender, the City, and the New Science of Politics," in Silverberg (ed.), Gender and American Social Science: the formative years (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).

External links

• Centre for Advancement of Women in politics (Queens University, Belfast)
• Current female leaders
• Political Women (Vol. 1 of 2) by Sutherland Menzies (fl. 1840-1883)