DFA Logo

This content from the
Department of Foreign Affairs
has now moved to Ireland.ie/sydney. If you are not redirected in five seconds, click here.

Skip to main content

Please be advised that the Consulate General of Ireland, Sydney website has moved and this page is no longer being updated. The Consulate website is now available at Ireland.ie/sydney.

Ireland’s experience of parliamentary gender quotas

Ireland’s experience of parliamentary gender quotas

Dr Buckley addressing members of the National Council of Women NSW and other guests at the Consulate General

Dr Fiona Buckley of University College Cork gave a talk on Ireland’s experience of parliamentary gender quotas to members of the National Council for Women, New South Wales, and other invited guests, on 9 May 2019.

In 2012, Ireland introduced a 30 per cent gender quota for party candidates at general elections. Dr Buckley is a lecturer in the Department of Government and Politics, University College Cork specialising in gender politics. Her research is largely focused on gender politics, in particular gender and cabinet government and gender quotas.

Dr Buckley was visiting Sydney as part of an exchange programme between UCC and UNSW. This exchange is funded by the EU's Erasmus+ programme for the development of educational links between EU and non-EU higher education institutes.



Ireland’s experience of parliamentary gender quotas
Lunchtime talk in the Irish Consulate, Sydney

Fiona Buckley
University College Cork

on Thursday 9 May, at 12.45pm, in the Consulate General of Ireland,
1 Market Street, level 26, Sydney.

Thank you to Owen Feeney, Consul General of Ireland, for the invitation to speak today. Also thanks to everyone in the Consulate Office for organising this event, in particular Lorna Hennessy, for arranging the logistics for today. And many thanks to all of you for attending. It’s lovely to see so many of you here today. Great to see new, as well as familiar, faces.

Today is Europe Day, a day that the EU celebrates peace and unity across Europe, though many may question the extent of unity in the current Brexit climate (!), but it is appropriate that I speak to you today as my trip to Sydney is supported by the EU’s Erasmus+ programme which seeks to build relations between EU and non-EU institutions. Under this programme, an academic mobility exchange has been established between my university, University College Cork, and the University of New South Wales. Prof Louise Chappell and Dr Natalie Galea of UNSW’s Australian Institute for Human Rights, who are present today, will travel to Cork next month as part of this exchange.

It’s nearly a year since I spoke in these lovely surroundings, in fact it was the morning of the Repealthe8th referendum in Ireland – Friday 25th May 2018. The result of the abortion referendum, 66.4% in favour; 33.6% against, showed that Ireland had unshackled itself from the constraints of social conservatism, a social conservatism that had pervaded political culture and society for much of the State’s nearly 100 years in existence.

This referendum, and indeed that of marriage equality in 2015, were no mere coincidence of increasing liberalism in Ireland. A number of institutional and political factors also played a part in making these referendums a reality. Those institutional and political changes also contributed to the adoption of a gender quota law in Ireland. In 2012, the Irish Parliament adopted a law obliging political parties to select at least 30% women candidates and 30% men candidates to contest general elections. The threshold rises to 40% from 2023 onwards. If the quota is not met, political parties will lose 50% of the State funding they receive on an annual basis to run their operations.

This law was the first time that the State acted to redress a significant gender imbalance in Irish politics, whereby women account for less than 10% of all TDs (or MPs) elected to Dáil Éireann, the lower house of parliament in Ireland. The law was also a test to see how open Irish political culture was to embracing change. What we observe is that the adoption of the gender quota law flagged a significant shift in political culture, a cultural shift it could be argued, that laid the basis for rapidly moving to the fore, issues such as abortion and divorce, and new issues of sexual identity such as marriage equality and gender recognition for public and political decision (Galligan and Buckley, working paper, 2019).

So, today I would like to discuss why and how Ireland came to adopt a legislative gender quota and what the impact of that quota is. I would also like to speak about the lessons learned from gender quota adoption and implementation in Ireland.

Why is it important to have women in politics?
Before discussing the gender quota specifically, it is no harm to rehearse the reasons why it is important to have women in politics. Anne Phillips’ (1998: 224–40) Politics of Presence identified a number of reasons to support women’s political representation. She argues that women’s presence is warranted for:
• Symbolic effects - women politicians act as role models for aspiring women candidates;
• Women should be equally represented for justice reasons as they compose 50 percent of most populations;
• Women’s interests are inadequately addressed in a politics dominated by men; and
• Women’s political representation revitalizes democracy, with some studies pointing to increased levels of efficacy and interest in politics among women voters when they see women candidates in the race

People ask - do women and men emphasise different policy issues?
There are 3 trends to note:
• Women & men politicians do not hold significantly different policy priorities overall. All prioritise economic, finance & social issues;
• However, women emphasise the importance of social issues more often than men;
• Women politicians are more likely to allocate a higher importance to ‘women’s issues’ than male politicians
• Women politicians take more parliamentary initiative than men on women’s issues in general

Women’s experiences of politics
When I speak to women in politics, whether in Ireland or Australia, about their experiences of life as a politician, a number of common themes emerge:

1) there is recognition that women are under-represented in politics and men are over-represented. The facts don’t lie - currently in Australia, at the federal level, just 30% of seats in the lower house are held by women, placing Australia in 48th position worldwide for women’s political representation. The situation in Ireland is worse; just 22% of the seats in Dáil Éireann, the lower house, are held by women, ranking it in 87th place in the global rankings;

2) women politicians will express sentiments such as having to work twice as hard to be considered half as good or needing to have many more strings to their bow than male counterparts and speak about double-standards or a feeling of being held to higher standards than male counterparts;

3) women politicians speak about a blokey culture or an old boys’ network;

and finally when asked what needs to be done to change the culture I’ve heard [paraphrasing]:-

4) something needs to be done, but I’m not comfortable speaking up as I don’t want to draw attention to myself or be seen as not being able to ‘hack it’; I don’t feel comfortable about gender quotas as I want to be in politics ‘on merit’; I need to be strategic and not isolate myself and be confined to women’s issues only if I take the lead on this

Why do women politicians express these sentiments? Well much of this is because politics, political culture and political institutions are gendered, specifically male-gendered.

Gendered institutions and gender power
Research on institutions reveals that institutions become gendered partly due to “associations between gender and an organisation’s function” (for example, the army is commonly associated with masculinity, while day care is commonly associated with femininity), and partly due to the “socio-demographics” of those “who founded, populated and developed them overtime” (for example, the fire brigade is considered a masculinized profession/institution because it is mostly men who occupy this profession; nursing is considered a feminised profession as it is mostly women who occupy this profession) [quotes from Duerst-Lahti, 2005: 231 – 232]. One common finding in studies on political institutions, as Jillson and Wilson (1994) observe, is that political institutions remain ‘remarkably sticky’ to their past. Duerst-Lahti (2005: 231 – 232) assess that because men established political institutions, masculine frames of preference and “domination” are embedded in, and associated with, politics. As a result, when people think of what a politician looks like, men have become the primary reference group leading to the notion of men as 'natural' political leaders emerging. It has resulted in a situation that when women enter politics, they are considered ‘the other’, an ‘outsider…operating in contrast to the norm or the native inhabitant of the political institutions”.

In addition to all this is status characteristics theory which tells us that male politicians benefit compared to women politicians on the basis of their biological sex, as politics has traditionally been seen as a male domain. Thus being male is considered a gendered power construct, and male gender power permeates politics, shaping its rules of access and engagement, as well as the outputs of the policy process. The result of all this is that women politicians oftentimes find themselves being overlooked for consideration for candidate selection and political office, and even if they are considered, they oftentimes are held to higher performance standards than their male counterparts.

The Merit Debate
The merit question is always raised when gender quotas are up for discussion. Those against gender quotas will say that political parties should recruit on the basis of merit, not gender; stating that quotas recruit on the basis of gender and are not meritocratic. However, Prof Rainbow Murray of Queen Mary University London argues that this is a myth, a myth used to justify the privilege-based male status quo. Writing in a blog in 2015 (https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/merit-vs-equality-argument/), she states:
one common denominator in our assessments of “quality” and “merit” is that we tend to base these judgements on the status quo. We look at existing politicians (ie men) and examine how they got into office as our guidelines for determining what future politicians should do. The result is that we tip the playing field by favouring criteria that have already advantaged men and will continue to do so. This is not an objective measure of merit. Recruitment without gender quotas is not meritocratic. Rather, it is based on (male) gender, privilege, and an uneven playing field. In fact, Murray says, quotas are essential to a meritocratic system for they open up politics to everyone.

Using merit as a reason to argue against gender quotas also ignores the many informal practices, norms and relations surrounding candidate recruitment and selection in politics, a fact that has led political scientists to describe candidate selection as the “secret garden” of politics.

The reality is candidate selection is often determined by interpersonal links, summed up in the old adage of who you know, not what you know. Given the male dominance of politics, this practice privileges men, who disproportionally hold positions of power within political parties and who tend to recruit and select other men for political office.

Why a gender quota law in Ireland?
When introducing the legislative gender quota in Ireland, the then minister with responsibility for electoral and franchise matters, Mr Phil Hogan, described the scheme as a ‘proportional response to address a significant weakness in Ireland’s democratic system’. This year, 2019, Dáil Éireann marks 100 years in existence. In that century, just 114 women have been elected as TDs. In comparison, approximately 1190 men have been elected. A review of the membership of Dáil Éireann from 1973 to 2011 (see Table 1) shows that the proportion of women’s representation never rose above 15.1%. Viewed another way, prior to the adoption of gender quota legislation, the Dáil had always been at least 85% male. Related to this is the male dominance of cabinet government. Of the 201 people who have served as cabinet ministers in Ireland, just 19 have been women. Gendered patterns can be observed in terms of portfolio assignments with women ministers more likely than men to be appointed to socio-cultural positions. Ireland has yet to see a woman hold the positions of Taoiseach (Prime Minister), Minister for Finance, Minister for Foreign Affairs or Minister for Defence.

Leah Culhane, a feminist political scientist based in the University of Manchester, succinctly outlines that for many years prior to the adoption of a gender quota law in Ireland, the under-representation of women in Irish politics was framed as:

an unfortunate consequence of a gender-neutral, fair and effective system, which produced the best people for the job.

While political parties in Ireland had given rhetorical support for more women in politics throughout the 1990s and 2000s, their actions, particularly in the long established and centre-right parties of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, told a different story. Informal gender targets were missed; in the general elections of 2002, 2007 and 2011, Fianna Fáil selected just 13% women candidates, and Fine Gael 16%. The figure for the centre-left Labour was 25%. In addition if we look at party expenditure on measures to promote the participation of women in politics, on the eve of the adoption of Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Act in 2012, of the €4.2 million that political parties spent that year, just 1.6 per cent of this was spent on measures to promote women in politics.

Following the 2011 general election, just 15% of the seats in the Irish lower house of parliament, Dáil Éireann, were occupied by women. With election surveys and analysis showing women did not face discrimination at the hands of the electorate, it was clear women’s political under-representation lay at the door of political parties.

If Irish political parties could not be trusted to ensure gender equity, it was clear an interventionist measure in the shape of gender quotas was required.

Concurrently, a political reform debate emerged in response to the financial crash of 2008 and the ensuing economic recession. The financial crisis shone a spotlight on personalism in Irish politics and the ‘cute hoor’ way of doing politics. To paraphrase and quote Leah Culhane again: the ‘cute hoor’ way of doing politics ‘gained negative connotations’ and became ‘associated with political corruption, the Irish banking crisis and the unsavoury relationship between politicians and their political funding’ . In response, political parties engaged in a political reform discourse promising democratic renewal, change, and a break from the past and the old way of doing politics. It is no accident then, that the introduction of gender quotas was considered an attempt to diversify politics, to make it more reflective of the gender profile of society, as well as a signal to retreat away from the old way of ‘doing’ politics.

Feminist activism, both inside and outside parliament, brought salience to the issue of women’s political under-representation and ensured the issue remained on the political agenda. Feminist politicians such as Senator Ivana Bacik and organisations such as The 5050 Group, the National Women’s Council of Ireland, Labour Women and Women for Election coalesced to agitate for legislative change, demonstrating the importance of alliances in advocacy campaigns.

The key argument made by campaigners in favour of affirmative action was that Irish politics is not a level playing pitch. They highlighted the 5Cs of cash, care, confidence, culture and candidate selection – as gendered barriers that women face when deciding upon a career in politics, barriers that do not exist to the same extent for men. They also highlighted that male candidacy has benefited from many hidden advantages such as the 4Gs of Irish politics which are gender (being a man in politics), genetics (coming from a political family), geography (being selected on the basis of location) and the GAA (being networked into the local community through involvement in Gaelic sports).

In addition, an informal localism quota is implicitly implemented by all parties when selecting candidates for Dáil elections. As Culhane (2017, p. 46) highlights: this privileging of ‘the local’ is widely known about and shapes political recruitment and selection in terms of shaping informal candidate recruitment criteria, such that the perception of what makes an electable and therefore ‘good’ candidate. However, given 4 out of every 5 local councillors are men, few women have an opportunity to harness localism skills, which are essential for candidate selection and election at the national level (Buckley et al., 2015). Therefore, localism, is highly gendered, with highly gendered outcomes (Culhane, 2017). Another informal candidate selection norm is that of incumbency. The role of incumbency is universally understood to be a barrier to the nomination of challengers, as the majority of incumbents are men, meaning reduced opportunity spaces for ‘new’ women candidates.

So what was the impact of the gender quota law?
The February 2016 general election was the first at which legal gender quotas applied. Of the 551 candidates who contested the election, 163 (30 per cent) were women, the highest number and proportion of women candidates to ever contest a general election in Ireland, and the number of women candidates represented a 90 per cent increase on the number of women who contested the previous general election in 2011.

All political parties met, in most cases exceeded, the 30 per cent gender quota threshold, a huge achievement considering women’s candidacy averaged 15 per cent across political parties prior to the implementation of the quota. Left-of-centre political parties and newer parties had a tendency to select higher proportions of women candidates than those on the centre-right or those parties longer in existence. The number and proportion of women independent candidates also increased.

The 2016 general election saw a 40 per cent increase in the number of women elected. Of the 35 women elected, 16 are incumbents and 19 are new female TDs, the highest number of non-incumbent women ever elected in a single Dáil election. Dáil Éireann now consists of 22 per cent women TDs, far from parity, but the highest proportion of women deputies in the history of the state (Buckley et al, 2016). There was a seven percentage point increase in women’s representation in the Dáil between the 2011 and 2016 general elections. Prior to this, it took 22 years and five electoral cycles to see such an increase. Thus, gender quotas have been considered a success in Ireland.

How did political parties meet their gender quota obligations?
Across the four main political parties – Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil, Sinn Féin and Labour – a total of 245 candidates were selected, made up of 80 women and 165 men. Of those women selected, 60% came through convention without a gender directive, 15% were selected at convention with a gender directive and 25% were added on by party headquarters following the completion of candidate selection conventions. Of those men selected, 87% came through convention without a gender directive, 4.5% were selected at convention with a gender directive and 8.5% were added on by party headquarters following the completion of candidate selection conventions.

Routes to candidate selection
(n) Convention
(n) Added-on
(n) Gender Directive
Fine Gael 27 61 13 50 9 6 5 5
Fianna Fáil 22 49 7 40 9 7 6 2
Sinn Féin 18 32 15 30 2 1 1 1
Labour 13 23 13 23 0 0 - -
Total 80 165 48 143 20 14 12 8
32.7% 67.3% 60% 87% 25% 8.5% 15% 4.5%

A majority of women contesting the election came through without a gender directive, confirming what the research had long suggested, that to increase the supply of women, political parties need to signal demand through the adoption of gender quotas. Women are available to contest election and the quota law ensured that political parties could no longer ignore them.

Did Parties Put Forward Less Experienced Female Candidates in 2016?
Looking at the profile of new women candidates in 2016, the proportion of female non-incumbents with prior political experience increased for Fianna Fáil, Sinn Féin, and Labour. In contrast, the proportion of experienced female non-incumbent candidates dropped sharply for Fine Gael, from 88 percent in 2007/11 to 59 percent in 2016 (p. < .05).

When comparing years of experience, we find that female non-incumbents from Sinn Féin, and Labour had more years of experience in 2016, on average, than their counterparts in 2007/11. For Fianna Fáil, female non-incumbents in 2016 had slightly less experience, on average, (6.1 and 6.6 respectively), but the difference was not statistically significant. Again, we find statistically significant drops in female non-incumbents’ years of experience in Fine Gael. For Fine Gael, the average dropped from 7.3 years in 2007/11 to 3.4 years in 2016.

Were Add-Ons More Likely to Run Non-Competitive Races in 2016, defined as those races where the candidates achieves less than 40% of the requisite amount of votes required to win a seat.

In general, female add-on candidates in 2016 were 5.0 times more likely to run non-competitive races (p < .05, model 9). There is clear evidence that the poor performance of female add-ons in 2016 was driven by the extraordinarily poor performance of Fine Gael’s female add-on candidates in 2016. Fine Gael’s female add-ons were 45 times more likely than other candidates to run non-competitive races (p < .01, model 12).

Overall political parties embraced the spirit of the law but there is some evidence that Fine Gael engaged in a sacrificial lamb strategy. The experiences of these women was variable. Some had a good experience and will contest again. Others had a bruising experience.

Resistance: challenges and controversies
The implementation of legislative gender quotas in Ireland has not been without resistance, but this resistance has been replete with double-standards.

As the gender quota was implemented, male candidacy and merit was rarely questioned. Taking experience of political office as a measure of merit, Buckley et al (2016) found that some 39 per cent of men and 48 per cent of women did not have experience of serving in elected office prior to contesting the 2016 general election, yet, it was only women candidates who were challenged about their lack of experience.

In cases where a directive instructed the nomination of a woman candidate, oftentimes the selection of that woman was met with resistance and resentment from party members, with concerns raised about the legitimacy and fairness of the candidate selection process. Yet, the uncontested selection of incumbent male candidates, and their mere conferral as candidates, was rarely questioned. It points to the privileging of the informal norm of incumbency in the selection processes for Irish elections and betrays a male entitlement to political power, whereby the democratic nature of the process is only questioned when a male candidate’s selection prospects is at stake.

But, it must be noted that there have always been tensions between party headquarters and the local organs of political parties when it comes to candidate selection in Ireland as both tussle against one another for power over the candidate selection process. Such tensions have centred on questions about the numbers of candidates to be selected and the geographical location of those candidates. Gender is an additional issue on which power struggles will be fought.

While a constitutional challenge to the Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Act is ongoing since 2015, viewpoints from the electorate towards gender quotas seem to be more positive that those observed in the political parties - the RTÉ Exit poll in 2016 proposed to respondents “Candidate gender quotas for political parties were introduced for these elections to the Dáil. How much do you support the use of gender quotas for national elections on a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means strongly oppose and 10 means strongly support:

17% ranked 0-3; 38% ranked 4-6; 42% ranked 7-10; 4% don’t know

Overall, the research finds that “female candidates were not disadvantaged in their bid to get elected in 2016 though there is evidence to show that Fianna Fáil supporters do seem to prefer male candidates” (McElroy, 2018).

So has the presence of more women in the Irish parliament had a substantive change for women?

Taking the issue of abortion we see that:-

Irish Times Tracker: Should the 8th Amendment to the constitution be repealed?
83% of women TDs supported repealing the 8th amendment
52% of men TDs supported repealing the 8th amendment
A gender gap of 31 percent

14% of women TDs did not support the repealing of the 8th amendment
35% of men TDs did not support the repealing of the 8th amendment
A gender gap of 21 percent

3% of women TDs undeclared
13% of men TDs undeclared

14 of the 19 first time women TDs said yes, that the 8th Amendment should be repealed
5 of the 19 first time women TDs said no, that the 8th Amendment should be repealed

Irish Times Tracker: Do you approve of the proposal to legalise abortion up to 12 weeks in pregnancy?
71% of women TDs approve of the proposal to legalise abortion up to 12 weeks in pregnancy
34% of men TDs supported approve of the proposal to legalise abortion up to 12 weeks in pregnancy
A gender gap of 37 percent

17% of women TDs did not approve of the proposal to legalise abortion up to 12 weeks in pregnancy
41% of men TDs did not approve of the proposal to legalise abortion up to 12 weeks in pregnancy
A gender gap of 24 percent

12% of women TDs undeclared
25% of men TDs undeclared

Lessons learned
Overall the gender quota has been a success. There was a 90% increase in women’s candidacy and a 40% increase in the number of women TD elected. This is not to say that future increases in women’s election is a certainty and a guarantee. Political parties’ activities in terms of their candidate recruitment and selection process must be continually monitored and reassessed to ensure that progress is not subject to reversals.

The responsibility to achieve gender equality in politics is not the sole preserve of women in the parties, which sometimes seems to be the case. It needs to be led from the top. Political leadership is key to face-off the resistance and address the natural uneasiness that comes with change.

We must guard against complacency. The first election under the gender quota was a success but that doesn’t mean that the ‘work is done’. Ireland is nowhere near gender parity and currently occupy 87th ranked position in the Inter-Parliamentary Union’s (IPU) league table for women’s political representation . Work must continue at ensuring that the gender quota is effective in achieving its ultimate aim of increasing the number and proportion of women in Dáil Éireann.

As noted previously, the gender quota is to increase to 40% from 2023 onwards. Already a narrative is developing about the difficulties political parties will face in achieving this threshold. This can become a self-fulfilling prophecy if political parties allow it to be. Some political parties jumped from 15 per cent women’s candidacy in 2011 to 30% in 2016. If they can jump 15 percentage points in one electoral cycle I have full faith in them to jump the 10 percentage points from 30 per cent to 40 per cent from 2023. They need to have full faith in themselves too and resist the naysayers how suggest that the 40 per cent quota is not achievable.

Resistance to the gender quota is present. We observed that in 2016 but currently political parties are engaging in candidate selection conventions for the second election under the 30 per cent gender quota rules. At this early stage of the process, there has been little or no gender related controversies. Does this indicate a normalisation of the gender quota in party mind-sets and party selection processes? We await and see the answer to this question.

The discourse around women in politics, the gender quota and the under-representation of women in politics, provided women politicians, present and past, with the space and platform to ‘speak up and speak out’ about their experiences in politics.

The discourse and debate surrounding gender quotas and the under-representation of women in Irish politics has generated a discussion about the requisite and desired qualities of political candidates. This, I think, is a good thing.

The advent of gender quotas has also brought into focus the informal norms of candidate selection that we privilege – localism, incumbency – and the gendered advantages that accrue to men through these informal norms. The privileging of these informal norms is not going away as they are synonymous with electability in Irish elections. As political parties seek to maximize their vote, these informal norms of candidate selection will continue to exist and actually will co-exist alongside the formal gender quota requirement. The gender quota is essentially being layered into the existing candidate selection processes. How far it will go to subvert informal sources of male power (incumbency, localism) remains to be seen, but as the quota facilitates the election of increased numbers of women, more and more women will be able to take advantage of incumbency to aid their selection processes too. An extension of the gender quota law to local government would be welcome. In its absence, other measures have been introduced for this year’s local elections to incentivise political parties to select women candidates. Enhancing women’s presence in local government provides women with more opportunities to take advantage of localism for their selection prospects at general election level.

In 1903, the motto 'Deeds not Words' was adopted by Emmeline Pankhurst as the slogan of the Women's Social and Political Union. It remains as relevant today as it did in the early years of the 20th century. Over 100 years after the 1918 Representation of People Act facilitated women’s access to voting rights, the deed of gender quota legislation in Ireland in 2012 is levelling the political playing pitch and facilitating women’s access to politics.

Buckley, F, Galligan, Y and McGing, C (2016) ‘Women and the Election: Assessing the Impact of Gender Quotas’ in M Gallagher and M Marsh (eds), How Ireland Voted: The Election that Nobody Won (Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan), 185-205.

Buckley, F, Mariani, M, McGing, C and White, TJ (2015) ‘Is local office a springboard for women to Dáil Éireann?’ 36 Journal of Women, Politics Policy, 311-335.

Buckley, F. and Galligan, Y. (2019) Legislating for gender quotas in Ireland: the politicization of women’s under-representation in politics, a work in progress.

Culhane, L (2017) ‘Local Heroes and ‘Cute Hoors’: Informal Institutions, Male Over-representation and Candidate Selection in the Republic of Ireland’ in G Waylen (ed), Gender and Informal Institutions (London, Rowman and Littlefield International) 45-66.

Duerst-Lahti, G (2005) ‘Institutional Gendering: Theoretical Insights into the Environment of Women Officeholders’ in S Thomas and C Wilcox (eds), Women and Elective Office: Past, Present, and Future, 2nd edition (New York: Oxford University Press) 230-243.

Jillson, C and Wilson, RK, (1994) Congressional Dynamics: Structure, coordination and choice in the first American Congress, 1774 – 1789 (Stanford: Stanford University Press).

Murray, Rainbow (2015) Merit vs Equality? The argument that gender quotas violate meritocracy is based on fallacies - https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/merit-vs-equality-argument/

Phillips, Anne (1998) Politics of Presence, Oxford University Press



« Previous Item | Next Item »