Question: If, historically at least, left-wing parties are likely to have a higher proportion of their elected representatives being women, why is it the case that O’Brien (2015) finds no influence of party family (other than Green (positive) and Communist (negative)) on the likelihood of parties selecting female leaders? In other words, if left-wing parties have more elected representatives who are women, why are they not more likely to select leaders who are women?

Answer: The first thing to say is that, based on a quick (and I really do mean quick) search via the LSE Library, this question does appear to expose a gap in the literature. In other words, this might be an opportunity for someone who is interested in the topic to write a research paper; it’s always good to start such a project with an interesting conundrum, which I think this constitutes. However, given what we do already know, I would suggest two possible answers to the question:

1. On a relatively mundane, technical front, we should remember that O’Brien specifically measures the situation in 11 OECD countries from 1965 to 2013. So, it could simply be case selection (i.e. the countries she focuses on) and the particular analytical approach adopted by O’Brien that points towards left-wing parties not being more likely to elect leaders who are women. So, perhaps the observation that left-wing parties have higher proportions of their elected representatives who are women was based on observations relating to more, fewer, or different countries, or a wider, narrower, or different time period. It would be interesting to get hold of O’Brien’s data, code an additional variable focusing on the proportion of elected representatives who are women, and see whether left-wing parties are different in this regard within the countries and time period that she focused on. That said, it should be pointed out that Tripp and Kang observe that ‘strength of Left-leaning parties is statistically significant [in relation to the proportion of elected representatives who are women] only when we omit quotas and regional controls,’ and argue that this suggests left-wing parties become less important in promoting women’s political representation as a wider array of parties adopt quotas. So, perhaps there’s no conundrum after all.
2. If there is, indeed, still a conundrum here then a possible answer may lie in the blog that I cited as a contemporary example in the classes, which highlights that there are barriers facing women at each step of their political careers: recruitment to parties, selection as candidates, election as representatives, and then fulfilling their roles as elected representatives. The blog also highlights the importance of gatekeepers (i.e. important local or national decision-makers) in political parties, who have the power to implement programmes (be they focused on training, quotas, or other support) that remove some of the barriers faced by women (and indeed, may have the power to promote women themselves). If we apply this explanation to our conundrum then it seems eminently plausible that, within the context of left-wing parties, even if women overcome the barriers to becoming elected representatives (which may be lower in said left-wing parties, at least historically) they may still face other barriers to becoming party leaders. There may be different gatekeepers (perhaps in the form of party selectorates) who have different priorities for leader selection than the gatekeepers who they faced when becoming elected representatives. Perhaps, adequate training, opportunities to gain relevant experiences, or support structures (e.g. mentoring) are not available. So, in short, it is possible that left-wing parties have been good at increasing the proportion of their elected representatives who are women whilst also failing to alter institutional and cultural barriers to those women moving up to leadership positions.

In line with the second of the above explanations, and for those who are interested in this topic, I have found a few articles on the topic:

• Cheng and Tavits (2011). ‘Informal Influence in Selecting Female Political Candidates.’ This focuses on the importance of informal gatekeepers in selecting women into party positions.
• Verge and de la Fuente (2014). ‘Playing with different cards: Party politics, gender quotas, and women’s empowerment.’ This focuses on whether increased representation of women leads to greater power for women within parties.
• Jalalzai and Krook (2010). ‘Beyond Hillary and Benazir: Women’s Political Leadership Worldwide.’ Giving a helpful overview of the topic.
• Jalalzai (2008). ‘Women political Leaders.’ Similar to the above.