Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T09:48:18.969Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparing Gender, Institutions and Political Behavior: Toward an Integrated Theoretical Framework

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2010

Miki Caul Kittilson
Miki Caul Kittilson
Affiliation:
Arizona State University. E-mail: Miki.Kittilson@asu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Integrating the behavioral and institutional approaches to comparative politics will provide a more comprehensive theoretical framework for understanding why differences in political engagement among men and women vary cross-nationally and cross-temporally. This essay advances the argument that gender-related policies and institutions are not only outcomes in the political process, but also exert powerful influence over citizens' interests, values, and perceptions of politics. This policy feedback loop has implications for a wide array of political attitudes and activities—from political interest to running for elected office. Specifically, the adoption and expansion of national policies on issues such as equal wages, childcare provision, paid maternity leave, and violence against women carry important messages to the electorate: Issues that disproportionately affect women, long considered private, have become important national policy choices.

Type
Symposium
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , March 2010 , pp. 217 - 222
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2010

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

Bacchi, Carol Lee. 1999. Women, Policy and Politics. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Baldez, Lisa. 2007. Primaries Versus Quotas: Gender and Candidate Nomination in Mexico. 2003. Latin American Politics and Society. 49 (3): 69–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banaszak, Lee Ann. 2009. The Women's Movement Inside and Outside the State. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burns, Nancy, Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Verba, Sidney. 2001. The Private Roots of Public Action: Gender, Equality and Political Participation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, Andrea Louise. 2008. “Policy Feedbacks and the Political Mobilization of Mass Publics.” http://web.mit.edu/polisci/research/Campbell/papers.htmlGoogle Scholar
Carroll, Susan J. 1994. Women as Candidates in American Politics. Indiana University Press, second edition.Google Scholar
Gauthier, Anne H., and Bortnik, A.. 2001. Comparative Maternity, Parental and Childcare Database (University of Calgary). http://www.soci.ucalgary.ca/FYPP.Google Scholar
Gray, Mark, Kittilson, Miki Caul, and Sandholtz, Wayne. 2006. Women and Globalization: A Study of 180 Countries, 1975–2000. International Organization 60: 293–333.Google Scholar
Hall, Peter A., and Taylor, Rosemary C.R.. 1996. Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies 44: 936–57.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald, and Norris, Pippa. 2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inter-Parliamentary Union website. 2007. http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/world.htm, accessed October 10, 2007.Google Scholar
Karp, Jeffrey, and Banducci, Susan A.. 2008. When Politics is Not Just a Man's Game: Women's Representation and Political Engagement. Electoral Studies 27: 105–115.Google Scholar
Keck, Margaret, and Sikkink, Katherine. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Kittilson, Miki Caul. 2008. Representing Women: The Adoption of Family Leave in Comparative Perspective. Journal of Politics 70 (2): 323–34.Google Scholar
Krook, Mona Lena. 2006. Reforming Representation: The Diffusion of Candidate Gender Quotas Worldwide. Politics & Gender 2 (3): 303–27.Google Scholar
Lovenduski, Joni. 1993. Contemporary Feminist Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
O'Regan, Valerie. 2000. Gender Matters: Female Policymakers' Influence in Industrialized Nations. Westport CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Pierson, Paul. 1994. Dismantling the Welfare State? New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, Meg, and O'Cinneide, Colm. 2003. Positive Action to Promote Women in Politics: Some European Comparisons. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 52: 587–614.Google Scholar
Schneider, Anne Larason, and Ingram, Helen. 1997. Policy Design for Democracy. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Tripp, Aili Mari, and Kang, Alice. 2008. The Global Impact of Quotas. Comparative Political Studies. 41 (3): 338–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations. 1988. Compendium of International Conventions Concerning the Status of Women. Doc. No. ST/CSDHA/3. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
Verba, Sidney, Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Brady, Henry E.. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politcs. Cambridge: Harvard University.Google Scholar
Weir, Margaret, Orloff, Ann Shola, and Skocpol, Theda, eds. 1988. The Politics of Social Policy in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar