Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T23:01:50.642Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The UN Convention to Eliminate All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW): A New Way to Measure Women's Interests

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 November 2011

Lisa Baldez
Affiliation:
Dartmouth College

Extract

Questions about the quality of political representation are central to research on women and gender, and to political science in general. Given a certain set of interests, how well do political institutions and political actors address and advance those interests? Research about the quality of political representation relies a priori on the existence of fixed, stable, and measurable interests; we need to know what women want before we can assess how well politicians represent them. Perfect measures of the interests that all women share have proven elusive. The measures of women's interests that scholars commonly employ lend themselves reasonably well to research, but have unfortunate side effects: They essentialize gender norms, exclude certain groups of women, or define women's interests too narrowly. In this essay, I explore the political implications of the empirical measures of women's interests on which scholars have relied in research on women's political representation. I offer a way to measure women's interests that draws upon the United Nations Convention to Eliminate All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). CEDAW provides a way to think about women's interests that is broad, inclusive, and sufficiently flexible to reflect changes over time. Furthermore, it enjoys the explicit approval of almost every nation in the world; 186 countries have ratified CEDAW since the UN General Assembly approved it in 1979.

Type
Critical Perspectives on Gender and Politics
Copyright
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alvarez, Sonia E. 1990. Engendering Democracy in Brazil: Women's Movements in Transition Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Huddy, Leonie, Cassese, Erin, and Lizotte, Mary-Kate. 2008. “Gender, Public Opinion, and Political Reasoning.” In Political Women and American Democracy, ed. Wolbrecht, Christina, Beckwith, Karen, and Baldez, Lisa. New York: Cambridge University Press. 3149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molyneux, Maxine. 1985. “Mobilization Without Emancipation? Women's Interests, the State, and Revolution in Nicaragua.” Feminist Studies 11 (2): 227–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sapiro, Virginia. 1981. “When Are Interests Interesting? The Problem of Political Representation of Women.” American Political Science Review 75 (3): 701–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwindt-Bayer, Leslie A. 2006. “Still Supermadres? Gender and the Policy Priorities of Latin American Legislators.” American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 570–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar