Melody Ellis Valdini

Electoral Institutions and the Manifestation of Bias: The Effect of the Personal Vote on the Representation of Women

The “personal vote” refers to “that portion of a candidates electoral support which originates in his or her personal qualities, qualifications, activities, and record” (Cain, Ferejohn, and Fiorina 1987, 9). The presence of a personal vote in an electoral system means that the person up for election matters, not just the candidates party. Cain, Ferejohn, and Fiorina go so far as to refer to it as “ relationships between the represented and representatives,” claiming that these relationships are more “personal, particularistic, and idiosyncratic than in other kinds of systems” (8, emphasis mine).

Women's Representation in the Highest Court: A Comparative Analysis of the Appointment of Female Justices

The presence of women justices in the highest constitutional courts varies significantly across countries, yet there is little existing research that engages this substantial cross-national variation. Using an original data set of women’s representation in the constitutional courts in fifty democracies combined with qualitative case studies, we assess the effect of the selection mechanism on this variation and find that the existence of a “sheltered” versus “exposed” selection mechanism is a critical determinant of women’s presence. That is, when the selectors are sheltered from electoral accountability, they are less likely to select women as judges because they do not benefit from credit claiming. When the selectors are exposed and can claim credit, however, the unique traits and visibility of the highest court generate an incentive to appoint women.

Shattered, Cracked, or Firmly Intact? Women and the Executive Glass Ceiling Worldwide by Farida Jalalzai

The political ascent of women to the highest levels of leadership has fueled a belief that the executive glass ceiling has been shattered; women are now, many believe, just as likely to win a presidency or hold the office of prime minister as men. Drawing on both qualitative and quantitative evidence from a wide selection of countries, Farida Jalalzai persuasively demonstrates that in reality, the glass ceiling has barely been cracked. She finds that men continue to dominate as presidents and prime ministers, particularly in those countries where the executive holds substantial and concentrated power. In addition, through data sets that include both men and women executives, she finds that the pathway to power is more difficult for women, thereby offering evidence for the continued role of discrimination in the political lives of women. This book is an important and much-needed contribution to the underresearched subject of gender and the executive branch, especially in light of Hillary Clinton’s likely run for president of the United States in 2016. One of the most important contributions of this book is its emphasis on the consequences of institutional differences among executive branches for women’s representation. Jalalzai points out substantial variations in executive power, highlighting differences such as the amount of unilateral decisionmaking authority and the level of dependence on other political actors to maintain that authority. These institutional differences indicate that to simply count the number of women in executive office—as we frequently do in studies of the legislative branch—is a woefully inadequate method for understanding the representation of women at the executive level. Instead, as Jalalzai illustrates with her analysis, the institutional differences across executive offices require that we consider more of the details of their positions before making a claim about women’s representation at the highest levels of leadership. This book is therefore obviously appropriate for scholars of gender and politics but is also relevant for both scholars and students who are simply interested in the variety and consequences of institutional designs.