Should There Be Quotas for Women in Political Offices?

Politics remains a very male-dominated sector. Quotas are essential to highlight the female voice within political discussions, implement new perspectives on policy and help overcome structural barriers that keep women out of the political sphere.

1) Representation - The discussion of political issues with an absence of women present is dangerous and unrepresentative. Issues debated that directly affect women require female spokespersons to share their perspectives, particularly female-focused discussions, such as those surrounding abortion and the pay gap. Without quotas, laws can be made that affect women’s lives, with little female input at all.

2) Different Perspectives on Policy - Studies have found there is a significant gender difference regarding policy preferences. A 2020 study of 60,000 Spanish residents found women were more concerned with the health system than men. Similarly, a study of Swiss referenda found that women are more concerned with health, unemployment and social security spending, and less concerned with military spending, compared to men. Introducing quotas for women in political offices would improve the representation of these different perspectives.

Without quotas, laws can be made that affect women’s lives, with little female input at all

3) Overcoming Structural Barriers - Quotas compensate for the structural barriers restricting women from participating in politics. Societal discrimination such as the expectation to be the primary caregiver of a child, less emphasis on career-building and prejudices about women in positions of power all hinder women’s ability to run for political office. Thus, quotas use positive discrimination to encourage equality and break down patriarchal elements of society.

While on the surface, quotas for women in political office seem essential, in practice, they are undemocratic, ineffective and do not do enough to support the female voice within politics.

1) Effectiveness - Quotas are surrounded by controversy in many countries, making it essential that they produce the desired outcome. However, statistically, this has not been the case. A study of 30 EU countries in 2013 found that in countries without quotas, 26.2% of those elected into office were women whilst in countries with quotas, the percentage was just 3% higher with 29.5%. In addition to their ineffectiveness, quotas promote the idea that women cannot be elected without aid, negatively affecting them rather than empowering them.

Quotas promote the idea that women cannot be elected without aid, negatively affecting them rather than empowering them

2) Not Going Far Enough - Unless trickle-up mechanisms are activated, quotas do little to suggest that women will be supported to progress once holding political office. For example, despite the growth of equality in general political offices, as of June 2024, only 27 countries have women as heads of state and/or government. Quotas do not do enough to support female voices once they are within the political sphere.

3) Undemocratic - Using quotas for women in politics is arguably undemocratic, electing based on population characteristics rather than merit. The pool of candidates is artificially altered to elect more women, manipulating voter choice and potentially denying voters the opportunity to vote for a more able candidate. A focus on equality of opportunity would be much more effective, ensuring women have both greater representation and are well-qualified political candidates.