Author
Abstract
In the face of mounting evidence for the substantive under-representation of marginalized groups and for the lack of responsiveness to their concerns in democratic legislation, calls for measures to improve descriptive representation have become louder. While better descriptive representation may be in the interest of a majority of citizens, the implementation of respective measures is eventually down to political elites. We therefore ask what legislators in the United States and Germany think about the importance of descriptive representation. Leveraging data from new surveys in both countries, we analyze respondents’ views on descriptive representation concerning gender, age, class, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. We hypothesize, first, that process preferences for better descriptive representation are correlated with substantive preferences for progressiv e policies and that parties on the left will deem descriptive representation more important. Secondly, we expect intersectionality to affect the formation of process preferences, and members of disadvantaged groups to be more supportive of better descriptive representation of all groups. Our findings show clear differences between parties, confirming that left-leaning parties tend to be more supportive of descriptive representation. Moreover, women are more supportive of descriptive representation in most parties, with female legislators supporting not only women’s representation but also better descriptive representation for other groups. The group least supportive of descriptive representation are men in right-wing parties.
Suggested Citation
Claudia Landwehr & Armin Schäfer, 2024.
"Who wants descriptive representation, and why?,"
Working Papers
2407, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
Handle:
RePEc:jgu:wpaper:2407
Download full text from publisher
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:jgu:wpaper:2407. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Research Unit IPP (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vlmaide.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.