Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-72crv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T10:13:32.480Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Exploring the conditions for youth representation: a qualitative comparative analysis of party parliamentary groups

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Kira Renée Kurz*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of Freiburg, Werthmannstr. 12, 79085 Freiburg, Germany UMR 7363, ‘Societé, Acteurs, Gouvernement en Europe’ at the Université de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
Felix Ettensperger*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of Freiburg, Werthmannstr. 12, 79085 Freiburg, Germany Graduate School, Zeppelin University, Friedrichshafen, Germany
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Research on the underrepresentation of youth in parliaments has rarely focused on political parties. This is surprising as parties are central in the selection of candidates and therefore should play an important role in determining the demographic composition of elected politicians. We created a data set of party parliamentary groups between 2017 and 2020 and conducted a linear regression as well as a fuzzy set QCA. Building upon previous literature, we expected the share of young Members of Parliament (MPs) to be higher under the following conditions: a low/high GDP per capita, a proportional representation electoral system, decentralized nomination processes, strong party youth organizations, an inclusive party ideology and young party structures. Our research support previous findings that electoral systems matter. Furthermore, our results indicate that whilst ideology might be a significant factor by itself, it becomes influential especially in combination with PR systems. The role of strong youth organizations, decentralized selectorates and party age seem to be highly context-dependent and more ambivalent. In summary, there is no singular condition under which we observe adequate youth representation, but rather different configurations of conditions. By applying the newest guidelines on good practices in QCA research, we present one of the first applications of these techniques in party and representation research.

Information

Type
Research
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Copyright
Copyright © 2023 The Author(s)
Figure 0

Table 1 Data sources and fuzzy-set calibration of outcome and conditions

Figure 1

Fig. 1 Histogram of ARI35 scores (mean = 0.505, standard deviation = 0.419). The dashed line indicates proportional representation

Figure 2

Table 2 Linear Regression Model for ARI35 as dependent variable

Figure 3

Table 3 Analysis of necessary conditions (ANC) for the outcome of adequate youth representation/high ARI35 scores

Figure 4

Table 4 Truth table without logical remainders

Figure 5

Table 5 Fuzzy set QCA results for the outcome of adequate youth representation/a high ARI35 score

Figure 6

Table 6 Fuzzy set QCA results for the outcome of low youth representation/a low ARI35 scores

Figure 7

Table 7 List of political parties included in the QCA

Figure 8

Fig. 2 Correlation matrix for the raw data

Figure 9

Fig. 3 Correlation matrix for calibrated data

Figure 10

Fig. 4 Histogram for GDP per capita

Figure 11

Fig. 5 Histogram for the youth wing index

Figure 12

Fig. 6 Histogram for the index scores capturing the decentralization of party selectorates

Figure 13

Fig. 7 Histogram for progressiveness scores (progcons indicator)

Figure 14

Fig. 8 Histogram for party age

Figure 15

Fig. 9 Calibration plot for the outcome ARI35

Figure 16

Fig. 10 Calibration plot for GDP per capita

Figure 17

Fig. 11 Calibration plot for decentralized selectorates

Figure 18

Fig. 12 Calibration plot for the progressiveness of party ideology

Figure 19

Fig. 13 Calibration plot for party age

Figure 20

Table 8 Linear regression model for ARI35 as dependent variable after correcting for kurtosis and skewness

Figure 21

Table 9 Truth Table with logical remainders

Figure 22

Table 10 Sensitivity ranges for the chosen calibration

Figure 23

Table 11 Fuzzy set QCA results for the outcome of adequate youth representation/a high ARI35 score

Figure 24

Table 12 Analysis of necessary conditions (ANC) for the outcome of low youth representation/low ARI35 scores

Figure 25

Table 13 Fuzzy set QCA results for the outcome of low youth representation/a low ARI35 score

Figure 26

Table 14 Fuzzy set QCA results for the outcome of a low share of young MPs (< 35 years) without using the CSA

Supplementary material: File

Kurz and Ettensperger supplementary material

Additional Material for: Exploring the Conditions for Youth Representation: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Party Parliamentary Groups
Download Kurz and Ettensperger supplementary material(File)
File 27.2 KB