IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v11y2023i1p097-107.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender and Strategic Opposition Behavior: Patterns of Parliamentary Oversight in Belgium

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin de Vet

    (Department of Political Science, Ghent University, Belgium)

  • Robin Devroe

    (Department of Political Science, Ghent University, Belgium)

Abstract

Studies on strategic parliamentary opposition often focus on broader behavioral patterns or party‐level variation. This article analyzes differences at the individual level, more notably between male and female opposition members of parliament. Using rational‐choice perspectives of opposition activity and theories of gendered political behavior, we hypothesize that female opposition members focus less on ideological conflicts (with or between coalition parties) and more on their party’s core issues. Furthermore, we expect them to more frequently target female ministers, in part because of the nature of their respective portfolios. Our analysis of all parliamentary questions tabled by opposition members in the Belgian Federal Parliament between 2007 and 2019 (N = 48,735) suggests that female members of parliament seem more likely to focus on issues that are salient to their party and less on conflictual matters between coalition partners. These results provide new empirical insights into strategic opposition behavior and gendered differences in the legislature.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin de Vet & Robin Devroe, 2023. "Gender and Strategic Opposition Behavior: Patterns of Parliamentary Oversight in Belgium," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 097-107.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:11:y:2023:i:1:p:097-107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/6135
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cowley, Philip & Childs, Sarah, 2003. "Too Spineless to Rebel? New Labour's Women MPs," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(3), pages 345-365, July.
    2. Sarah C. Dingler & Ludger Helms & Henriette Müller, 2023. "Women Opposition Leaders: Conceptual Issues and Empirical Agendas," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 080-84.
    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. Sarah C. Dingler & Ludger Helms & Henriette Müller, 2023. "Women Opposition Leaders: Conceptual Issues and Empirical Agendas," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 080-84.

    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. Sarah Childs & Julie Withey, 2004. "Women Representatives Acting for Women: Sex and the Signing of Early Day Motions in the 1997 British Parliament," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 52(3), pages 552-564, October.
    2. Henriette Müller & Pamela Pansardi, 2023. "Women Leading the Opposition: Gender and Rhetoric in the European Parliament," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 164-176.
    3. Sarah Childs & Mona Lena Krook, 2008. "Critical Mass Theory and Women's Political Representation," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(3), pages 725-736, October.
    4. Clayton, Amanda & Tang, Belinda, 2018. "How women’s incumbency affects future elections: Evidence from a policy experiment in Lesotho," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 385-393.

    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:cog:poango:v:11:y:2023:i:1:p:097-107. 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: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    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.