IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cra/wpaper/2017-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Explaining a Paradox of Democracy: The Role of Institutions in Female Enfranchisement

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Maria Koukal
  • Reiner Eichenberger

Abstract

Switzerland is known for its highly developed direct democracy. However, Swiss women were enfranchised at the federal level only in 1971 and in many cantons even later. We analyze the role of direct democracy in the delayed Swiss enfranchising process by investigating a novel dataset covering referenda among males about enfranchising women. Applying a difference-in-differences approach, we shed light on the conditions under which strong local direct democracy becomes a barrier to women’s suffrage. Our results are consistent with direct democracy having two effects: it boosts men’s demand to enfranchise women, but it also increases the price for men to do so. Depending on the specific conditions of the vote, the former or the latter effect dominates.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Maria Koukal & Reiner Eichenberger, 2017. "Explaining a Paradox of Democracy: The Role of Institutions in Female Enfranchisement," CREMA Working Paper Series 2017-13, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    • Handle: RePEc:cra:wpaper:2017-13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.crema-research.ch/papers/2017-13.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.crema-research.ch/abstracts/2017-13.htm
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bertocchi, Graziella, 2011. "The enfranchisement of women and the welfare state," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 535-553, May.
    2. James Andreoni & Lise Vesterlund, 2001. "Which is the Fair Sex? Gender Differences in Altruism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(1), pages 293-312.
    3. Daron Acemoglu & James A. Robinson, 2000. "Why Did the West Extend the Franchise? Democracy, Inequality, and Growth in Historical Perspective," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(4), pages 1167-1199.
    4. Aidt, Toke S. & Jensen, Peter S., 2014. "Workers of the world, unite! Franchise extensions and the threat of revolution in Europe, 1820–1938," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 52-75.
    5. Rick Geddes & Dean Lueck, 2002. "The Gains From Self-Ownership and the Expansion of Women's Rights," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1079-1092, September.
    6. Patricia Funk & Christina Gathmann, 2015. "Gender gaps in policy making: evidence from direct democracy in Switzerland," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 30(81), pages 141-181.
    7. repec:ner:ucllon:http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/17678/ is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Hicks, Daniel L., 2013. "War and the political zeitgeist: Evidence from the history of female suffrage," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 60-81.
    9. Mueller,Dennis C., 2003. "Public Choice III," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521894753.
    10. Patricia Funk & Christina Gathmann, 2011. "Does Direct Democracy Reduce the Size of Government? New Evidence from Historical Data, 1890–2000," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(557), pages 1252-1280, December.
    11. Matthias Doepke & Michèle Tertilt & Alessandra Voena, 2012. "The Economics and Politics of Women's Rights," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 339-372, July.
    12. Leonid Polishchuk & Georgiy Syunyaev, 2015. "Ruling elites’ rotation and asset ownership: implications for property rights," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 159-182, January.
    13. Ernst Fehr & Holger Herz & Tom Wilkening, 2013. "The Lure of Authority: Motivation and Incentive Effects of Power," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(4), pages 1325-1359, June.
    14. Funk, Patricia & Litschig, Stephan, 2020. "Policy choices in assembly versus representative democracy: Evidence from Swiss communes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    15. Aghion, Philippe & Tirole, Jean, 1997. "Formal and Real Authority in Organizations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(1), pages 1-29, February.
    16. Meltzer, Allan H & Richard, Scott F, 1981. "A Rational Theory of the Size of Government," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(5), pages 914-927, October.
    17. John P. Conley & Akram Temimi, 2001. "Endogenous Enfranchisement When Groups' Preferences Conflict," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(1), pages 79-102, February.
    18. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    19. John R. Lott & Jr. & Lawrence W. Kenny, 1999. "Did Women's Suffrage Change the Size and Scope of Government?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(6), pages 1163-1198, December.
    20. Stadelmann, David & Portmann, Marco & Eichenberger, Reiner, 2015. "Income and policy choices: Evidence from parliamentary decisions and referenda," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 117-120.
    21. Hainmueller, Jens & Hangartner, Dominik, 2013. "Who Gets a Swiss Passport? A Natural Experiment in Immigrant Discrimination," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 159-187, February.
    22. Stadelmann, David & Portmann, Marco & Eichenberger, Reiner, 2014. "The law of large districts: How district magnitude affects the quality of political representation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 128-140.
    23. Toke S. Aidt & Raphaël Franck, 2015. "Democratization Under the Threat of Revolution: Evidence From the Great Reform Act of 1832," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 505-547, March.
    24. Braun, Sebastian & Kvasnicka, Michael, 2013. "Men, women, and the ballot: Gender imbalances and suffrage extensions in the United States," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 405-426.
    25. Alois Stutzer & Lukas Kienast, 2005. "Demokratische Beteiligung und Staatsausgaben: Die Auswirkungen des Frauenstimmrechts," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 141(IV), pages 617-650, December.
    26. Ben-Ner, Avner & Kong, Fanmin & Putterman, Louis, 2004. "Share and share alike? Gender-pairing, personality, and cognitive ability as determinants of giving," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 581-589, October.
    27. Christopher J. Ellis & John Fender, 2011. "Information Cascades and Revolutionary Regime Transitions," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(553), pages 763-792, June.
    28. Aidt, T.S. & Dutta, Jayasri & Loukoianova, Elena, 2006. "Democracy comes to Europe: Franchise extension and fiscal outcomes 1830-1938," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 249-283, February.
    29. Alessandro Lizzeri & Nicola Persico, 2004. "Why did the Elites Extend the Suffrage? Democracy and the Scope of Government, with an Application to Britain's "Age of Reform"," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 707-765.
    30. David Stadelmann & Marco Portmann & Reiner Eichenberger, 2014. "Politicians and Preferences of the Voter Majority: Does Gender Matter?," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 355-379, November.
    31. Bruno Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2000. "Happiness Prospers in Democracy," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 79-102, March.
    32. Anna Maria Koukal, 2017. "How Vatican II influenced female enfranchisement: A story of rapid cultural change," CREMA Working Paper Series 2017-07, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    33. Giovanni B. Pittaluga & Giampiero Cama & Elena Seghezza, 2015. "Editor's choice Democracy, extension of suffrage, and redistribution in nineteenth-century Europe," European Review of Economic History, European Historical Economics Society, vol. 19(4), pages 317-334.
    34. Dufwenberg, Martin & Muren, Astri, 2006. "Generosity, anonymity, gender," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 42-49, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anna Maria Koukal & Marco Portmann, 2020. "Political Integration of Foreigners How does foreigners suffrage impact natives’ attitudes?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2020-05, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    2. Koukal, Anna Maria & Schafer, Patricia & Eichenberger, Reiner, 2021. "Enfranchising non-citizens: What drives natives’ willingness to share power?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 1088-1108.
    3. Alois Stutzer & Michaela Slotwinski, 2021. "Power sharing at the local level: evidence on opting-in for non-citizen voting rights," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 1-30, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Koukal, Anna Maria & Schafer, Patricia & Eichenberger, Reiner, 2021. "Enfranchising non-citizens: What drives natives’ willingness to share power?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 1088-1108.
    2. Anna Maria Koukal & Reiner Eichenberger & Patricia Schafera, 2019. "Enfranchising Foreigners: What Drives Natives’ Willingness to Share Power?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2019-10, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    3. Bertocchi, Graziella, 2011. "The enfranchisement of women and the welfare state," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 535-553, May.
    4. Aidt, Toke S. & Jensen, Peter S., 2014. "Workers of the world, unite! Franchise extensions and the threat of revolution in Europe, 1820–1938," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 52-75.
    5. Jonathan Chapman, 2020. "Extension of the Franchise and Government Expenditure on Public Goods: Evidence from Nineteenth-Century England," Working Papers 20200045, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Mar 2020.
    6. Gathmann, Christina, 2019. "Proportional Representation, Political Responsiveness and Child Mortality," IZA Discussion Papers 12729, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Frederik Toscani, 2013. "Why High Human Capital Makes Good Revolutionaries: The Role of the Middle Classes in Democratisation," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1332, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    8. Hiller, Victor & Touré, Nouhoum, 2021. "Endogenous gender power: The two facets of empowerment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    9. Alberto Batinti & Joan Costa‐Font & Timothy J. Hatton, 2022. "Voting Up? The Effects of Democracy and Franchise Extension on Human Stature," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(353), pages 161-190, January.
    10. Braun, Sebastian & Kvasnicka, Michael, 2013. "Men, women, and the ballot: Gender imbalances and suffrage extensions in the United States," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 405-426.
    11. Braun, Sebastian & Kvasnicka, Michael, 2010. "Men, women, and the ballot: Gender imbalances and suffrage extensions in US states," Kiel Working Papers 1625, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    12. Toke Aidt & Peter Jensen, 2013. "Democratization and the size of government: evidence from the long 19th century," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 511-542, December.
    13. Aidt, Toke S. & Eterovic, Dalibor S., 2011. "Political competition, electoral participation and public finance in 20th century Latin America," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 181-200, March.
    14. Stahl, Jörg R., 2023. "Changes in the electorate and firm values: Evidence from the introduction of female suffrage in Switzerland," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 386-402.
    15. Kammas, Pantelis & Sarantides, Vassilis, 2020. "Democratisation and tax structure in the presence of home production: Evidence from the Kingdom of Greece," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 219-236.
    16. Christopher J Ellis & John Fender, 2010. "Information Aggregation, Growth and Franchise Extension with Applications to Female Enfranchisement and Inequality," Discussion Papers 10-27, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    17. Toke Aidt & Stanley L. Winer & Peng Zhang, 2020. "Franchise Extension and Fiscal Structure in the United Kingdom 1820-1913: A New Test of the Redistribution Hypothesis," CESifo Working Paper Series 8114, CESifo.
    18. Tavares, José & Rahim, Fazeer, 2012. "Gender Discrimination: The Role of Males and Per Capita Income," CEPR Discussion Papers 9045, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Christopher Ellis & John Fender, 2016. "Information Aggregation, Growth, And Franchise Extension With Applications To Female Enfranchisement And Inequality," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 239-267, April.
    20. Aidt, T.S. & Eterovic, D.S., 2007. "Give and Take: Political Competition, Participation and Public Finance in 20th Century Latin America," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0714, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    women’s suffrage; municipal institutions; direct democracy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • N24 - Economic History - - Financial Markets and Institutions - - - Europe: 1913-
    • N44 - Economic History - - Government, War, Law, International Relations, and Regulation - - - Europe: 1913-
    • P16 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Capitalist Institutions; Welfare State

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cra:wpaper:2017-13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anna-Lea Werlen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cremach.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.