Endurance at the Top: Gender and
Political Ambition of Spanish and
Swedish MPs
Carol Galais
Universitat Oberta de Catalunya
Patrik O¨ hberg
University of Gothenburg
Xavier Coller
Universidad Pablo de Olavide
It is widely assumed that an accurate representation of women in political
office is consistent with the legitimacy of the democratic system (Stevens
2007) and makes a difference in the priorities and nature of policies
(Chattopadhyay and Duflo 2004; Clots-Figueras 2012; Rehavi 2008;
Schwindt-Bayer 2006). The underrepresentation of women in politics
has been largely documented, but its causes are far from clear. More
precisely, there is a lively debate on whether this underrepresentation is
caused by demand-side factors — that is, the characteristics of parties,
electorates, and electoral systems — or by supply-side factors. The latter
The authors want to thank the following colleagues for their insightful comments on an earlier
manuscript: Celia Valiente (Universidad Carlos III), Ta`nia Verge (Universitat Pompeu Fabra),
Antonio M. Jaime (Universidad de Ma´laga), and participants in several international conferences.
Published by Cambridge University Press 1743-923X/16 $30.00 for The Women and Politics Research Section of the
American Political Science Association.
# The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association, 2016
doi:10.1017/S1743923X16000416
596
Politics & Gender, 12 (2016), 596–621.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
include candidate resources such as money, time, experience, and
education, as well as political ambition (Norris and Lovenduski 1995).
Political ambition is the main motivational factor needed to fuel and
pursue a political career (Schlesinger 1966). This supply-side factor has
been found to be unevenly distributed across sexes — men being more
ambitious than women — and therefore it is an important aspect of
women’s underrepresentation (Lawless and Fox 2005, 2010). Although
institutional factors such as nomination and party selection processes are
important (Hinojosa 2012), the crucial ingredient for a political career is
political ambition (Macdonald 1987).1 More specifically, women’s lack
of progressive political ambition is a supply aspect that may explain why
so few women serve as cabinet ministers (Reynolds 1999).
Despite its relevance, what causes women’s lack of political ambition has
been underresearched. In comparison to men, women’s lower level of
political ambition is often attributed to different socialization patterns
and values (Fox and Lawless 2003; Lawless and Fox 2005, 2010), which
are believed to produce a scarcity of female politicians as role models
(Campbell and Wolbrecht 2006). However, we know that the roles of
family dynamics and political socialization in the development of
political attitudes and values are highly dependent on a country’s
political culture. Yet research on women’s political ambitions lacks a
comparative perspective. Furthermore, findings concerning women’s
political ambitions have yet to be empirically tested outside the United
States.
Consequently, in this article, we take a novel step in the field of gender as
it relates to career ambition by adopting a comparative perspective. We aim
to test the impact of family dynamics and political socialization on the
political ambitions of female members of parliament (MPs) in two
countries that are similar in their institutional settings but different in
terms of their welfare state policies supporting women’s professional
careers and political culture, especially regarding gender roles. For this
purpose, we use two representative surveys of Swedish and Spanish MPs.
We find that classical explanations based on politicians’ early
socialization explain the gender gap regarding political ambition only in
Sweden. In contrast, explanations based on family arrangements seem to
1. In her research, Hinojosa suggests that because we already know that women are less inclined to be
self-starters, the focus on supply-side factors is inadequate. Instead, the attention should be shifted to the
nomination process within the parties. Hinojosa argues that open and decentralized systems are the
main obstacles for an improved representation of female legislators “since they require self-selection
and increase the influence of local power monopolies” (2012, 79).
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 597
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
work well to explain females’ political ambitions in Spain. Women depend
on their family support in order to develop ambition for long political
careers only where the welfare state is not strong enough to enact basic
policies helping women fully participate in the public sphere.
GENDER AND POLITICAL AMBITIONS
The importance of political ambition in representative democracies was
first stressed by Joseph Schlesinger (1966), who distinguished between
discrete, static, and progressive political ambitions. Politicians bearing
discrete ambitions will most likely withdraw from public service. Those
with static political ambitions will stay in the same office they are already
holding. Finally, those with progressive ambitions will seek to advance
upward in their political career. Schlesinger’s point of departure is that if
politicians do not care about their political future, voters have little
chance of controlling their representatives. Hence, discrete political
ambitions hamper citizens from making politicians accountable. Today,
it is more or less established that a healthy political system should have a
supply of career-oriented candidates eager to step forward and challenge
current officeholders (Maestas et al. 2006; Schlesinger 1994).
Schlesinger’s work has inspired researchers to study the importance of
career ambitions in politics from different angles (Brace 1984; Codispoti
1982; Kazee 1994; Norris and Lovenduski 1995; Stone and Maisel
2003). More recently, scholars have turned their attention to the gender
dimension of career ambitions. In general, women are seen as less
interested in having political careers, in addition to seeing themselves as
less qualified for political office than their male counterparts see
themselves (Fox and Lawless 2003; Lawless and Fox 2005, 2010). In
other words, they are more prone than men to have discrete political
ambitions, and this diminishes their chances of running for office,
winning seats as MPs, and, ultimately, serving as cabinet ministers. As
Sapiro and Farah point out, “women may enter into lower level elite
positions with discrete ambitions and leave at will” (1980, 19), which
would explain why women limit themselves to working as party staff or
why they assume local leadership positions rather than actively seeking
seats in parliament or serving as cabinet ministers.
Hence, the low level of women’s political ambitions is closely related to
their underrepresentation in national parliaments, a phenomenon that is
often seen as a democratic flaw (Carroll 2001; Mansbridge 1999; Phillips
598 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
1995; Young 2000). Moreover, women’s lack of political ambition may
have further implications. For instance, politicians’ willingness to stay in
politics affects how MPs allocate their time and resources (Esaiasson and
Holmberg 1996) and consequently may help explain the differences
between men and women regarding how they perform as representatives
(Barnello and Bratton 2007; Carroll 2001). Furthermore, if women are
less prone to be ambitious in the long run, there will be fewer senior
women than men in parliaments, which, in turn, will diminish their
chances of being designated as cabinet ministers (Krook and O’Brien
2012; Rashkova 2013).
Note, however, that most attention has been paid to women’s decisions
to enter politics (Lawless 2012; Lawless and Fox 2005, 2010) and to step up
from party delegates (Constantini 1990; Sapiro and Farah 1980), local
councils (Allen 2013; Bledsoe and Herring 1990; Burt-Way and Kelly
1992), or state parliaments (Burt-Way and Kelly 1992; Fulton et al.
2006) to the national level. Another section of the literature has focused
on elected MPs, finding that women are more likely to be forced out of
politics than men because of party selection. These last works, however,
neglect the role of career ambitions in the selection process
(Vanlangenakker, Wauters, and Maddens 2013).
What causes the uneven distribution of political ambition across
genders? Ideology and religion are definitely explanatory factors.
Republican and religiously affiliated women are less ambitious than
democrats and those without religious affiliation (Constantini 1990). It
has also been argued that women are less likely to pursue the “pipeline”
professions that precede a political career (i.e., legal or business careers;
see Fox and Lawless 2004). Age, marriage, and out-of-home work
experience also explain why women are less ambitious when it comes to
politics (Carroll 1994; Constantini 1990; Fulton et al. 2006; Palmer and
Simon 2003). But the most powerful explanatory factor is the prevailing
social and political culture (Palmer and Simon 2003).
Politics — and everything related to the public sphere — has
traditionally been associated with men (Constantini and Craik 1977; Lee
1976; Mayer and Schmidt 2004), and so is political ambition. Gender
stereotypes, primarily cultivated through socialization and role models,
have transcended into politics, and they are seen as crucial reasons why
women are less likely to become politicians (Elder 2004; Mayer and
Schmidt 2004; Wolak and McDevitt 2011). It has been found that
frequent political talk at home while growing up makes women more
prone to develop a sense of political efficacy. In turn, this fosters the
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 599
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
positive effect of having a female political reference on the future choice of
a political career (Campbell and Wolbrecht 2006; Gidengil, O’Neill, and
Young 2010). Similarly, an early, politically active socialization is one of
the most important factors for closing the gender gap between men and
women when it comes to the decision to run for office (Lawless and Fox
2005). To sum up, engaging girls in political discussions at home —
regardless of the content or tone of the political talk — will foster a
connection to political matters, allowing girls to be better able to
understand and take a position in those discussions. Parents who talk
politics at home positively affect the political ambitions of their
daughters, particularly in comparison with their sons, who already
receive from society the supportive message that being involved in
politics is worthwhile.
While familial upbringing may make a woman as likely a candidate as a
man, Fox and Lawless also found that, later in life, “family arrangements
are not a primary factor explaining why female potential candidates
exhibit lower levels of political ambition than do men” (2014, 399).
Hence, family burdens and dynamics are not determining for adult
women’s political ambitions. This finding goes against conventional
wisdom and established research, which shows that family responsibilities
constitute bigger problems for women in politics than for men (Burrell
1994; Conway, Ahern, and Steuernagel 2004; Dolan, Deckman, and
Swers 2010; Maestas et al. 2006; Witt, Paget, and Matthews 1995).2
The relationship between familial responsibilities and women’s political
ambitions speaks to the literature on demand versus supply factors. As
Krook (2003) suggests, the distinction between supply and demand
factors is actually fuzzy, as demand can shape supply, especially when it
comes to gender issues. In her words, “women often interrupt their
careers when they have children, making it difficult to begin, sustain, or
resume active party engagement until they are much older.
Unsurprisingly, many women who do follow a political career are single
or divorced with no children” (2003, 17). Following this line of thought,
female MPs without children are probably making efforts to fit into the
role model of a productive, dedicated MP, therefore harboring high
expectations with regard to their careers. On the contrary, a woman who
is not willing to abandon the idea of being a mother would send signals
that she does not fulfill the appropriate MP profile, and she may further
2. See also Mestre and Marı´n (2012) for the effect of unequal sexual division of household tasks in the
political interest gender gap.
600 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
inhibit herself from pursuing and/or developing a political career
(Lovenduski 2005; McKay 2011).
Family burdens, family dynamics, and political socialization may not
exert the same influence on the development of women’s political
ambitions across all contexts. It is very likely that institutional incentives
and political culture interact with politicians’ upbringing and familial
situations, resulting in higher or lower levels of political ambition.
However, research on this matter has mainly been confined to singlecase
studies, which do not allow for comparatively testing the roles of
institutional and cultural factors, a reason why these explanatory factors
have long been disregarded (Borchert and Stolz 2011).3 With very few
exceptions, the proportion of single-case studies on the United States is
overwhelming,4 despite the fact that the United States is not a good
example of countries where women are well represented in politics.
Actually, the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IUL, August 2014) ranked the
United States 86th on its list of countries according to the percentage of
female legislators in their representative houses, with just a modest 20%
of women in the House and the Senate.5 This entails that individual
variances within U.S. female MPs’ characteristics — regarding their
attitudes, family constraints, or socialization patterns — are probably too
low to find significant relationships between these factors and women’s
political ambition. An unexplored alternative consists of comparing
countries that have better representation of women.
WOMEN’S POLITICAL REPRESENTATION AND THE GENDER
GAP IN SWEDEN AND SPAIN
The comparison of two countries that have similar institutions but differ in
a few ways is a research design that allows us to control for a series of
contextual factors when explaining differences in female MPs’
ambitions. For this purpose, we have chosen Spain and Sweden, two
3. An important exception to this is found in Hinojosa’s work (2012), comparing the process of
candidacy selection in Mexico and Chile at the municipal level, finding that women’s reluctance to
step forward as candidates might be behind their lower chances — compared with men — of being
elected in inclusive nomination systems.
4. For some exceptions on this matter, see the works on Taiwan (Clark, Clark, and Chou 1993) and
Latin America (Schwindt-Bayer 2011). Nevertheless, these studies mostly focus on presidential systems,
although parliamentary systems are the majority among democratic countries (44% parliamentary, 24%
mixed, 32% presidential; according to the Quality of Government 2015 database, Teorell et al. 2015).
5. Inter-Parliamentary Union, “Women in national parliaments,” http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.
htm (accessed November 10, 2014).
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 601
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
parliamentary monarchies with similar proportional electoral systems. Both
are full members of the European Union (Spain since 1986, Sweden since
1995). This means that both countries are affected by similar institutional
constraints.
Both Spain and Sweden are quite successful in terms of the proportion of
female MPs represented, but they still differ significantly from each other. If
we look at women’s presence in the lower house, Sweden is ranked fourth
with 45% of female MPs, and Spain is 11th with 39.7%.6 The influx of
female MPs has been different, though. Since the mid-1990s, Sweden
has had a proportion of more than 40% female MPs. In Spain, however,
the proportion of female MPs did not exceed 15% until 2000.7 The
picture changed in 2007, when the socialist government passed the Bill
for Effective Equality, which states that political parties should build lists
in which the presence of people of the same sex cannot be below 40%
or above 60% within each section of five candidates.
Among the differences that may explain success in women’s
representation — and probably also differences in women’s political
ambitions at the individual level — two elements stand out in both
countries: gender equality policies and cultural background regarding
gender roles. Both countries have developed different welfare systems,
which facilitate, with different intensities, women’s participation in
public life. Sweden fits into the Nordic system of welfare states (EspingAndersen
1999).8 Since the late 1960s, it has had a generous welfare
system that provides care for children and the elderly (Ola´h and
Bernhardt 2008). Fathers can take long parental leaves, women are fully
incorporated into the job market, and the country promotes a dualearner
family model. As a result, women in Sweden have less household
work burden than in other countries (Fuwa and Cohen 2007), and they
are less economically dependent on their husbands (Evertsson and
6. Inter-Parliamentary Union, http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm (accessed September 20, 2014).
7. Note that these data refer to the first day of the legislature. The data do not take into account the
substitutions that happen during each legislature. In fact, when substitutions occur (when an MP dies or
leaves or resigns and needs to be substituted), the proportion of women increases (Coller, Santana, and
Jaime2014), which shows that a proportion of women enter parliaments as second choices for the
selectorates of their parties.
8. Both countries have also developed different varieties of capitalism, as Sweden is a coordinated
market economy where the state has a prominent role in providing social protection and working
conditions are regulated by agreements between employers and unions. Spain, on the other hand, is
placed along with France or Italy in an intermediate category between the coordinated market
economy and the liberal market economy named “Latin capitalism,” “mixed market economies,” or
“state-influenced market economies” (Hall and Gingerich 2009, 458; Molina and Rhodes 2007;
Royo 2008; Schmidt 2009).
602 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
Nermo 2004). Moreover, egalitarian gender attitudes are comparatively
widespread in Sweden (Svallfors 2006), and the aim of Sweden’s gender
equality policies is, and has been, to ensure equal opportunities for
women and men in all areas of life, in particular with regard to work and
family life.9 This was not done in vain: Sweden ranked fourth in the
world for gender equality in the Global Gender Gap Report of 2013 and
was the world leader in 2012.
Conversely, Spain belongs to the “Mediterranean model” (Bettio and
Villa 1998) or “southern” welfare state type (Esping-Andersen 1999). In
general terms, this model is based on women being in charge of the
family (even the extended one), irrespective of their work outside the
household. Even though the participation of women in the labor force
has increased over the years, women’s employment rates in Spain are
significantly lower than in Sweden (51.3% versus 71.8%, respectively, in
2012) and lower than those of their male counterparts. Maternity leaves
are relatively short (16 weeks), and public child care for the youngest
children is scarce and expensive (Lapuerta, Baiza´n, and Gonza´lez 2011).
In short, Spanish women have more difficulties reconciling their
professional careers with their family lives (Valiente 2000), which
explains why Spain’s position in the Global Gender Gap Index in 2013
was 30th.
There are prevalent gender stereotypes in Spanish society, making it
difficult for women to participate in public life if they have to take care
of what is considered to be “their” family duties. The last wave of the
World Values Survey (2011) revealed that in Sweden, only 2% of
citizens believed that when jobs are scarce, men should have more right
to work than women, whereas in Spain, this percentage was 10 points
higher (12%). In the same survey, Swedes believed that equal rights for
men and women are more important for democracy than did Spaniards
(an average of 9.6 and 9, respectively, on a 1–10 importance scale).10
These prevalent gender stereotypes in Spanish society are partly
inherited from culturally Catholic traditionalist values (strongly
promoted by the previous authoritarian regime, between 1939 and
1976), which limited women to a domestic role rather than a public one
(Galais 2008). Indeed, religion is a cultural aspect that has been proven
relevant for the development of gender stereotypes and female labor
9. See http://sweden.se/society/gender-equality-in-sweden/#start (accessed August 10, 2014).
10. World Values Survey Wave 6 (2010–2014), v.20150418, World Values Survey Association, http://
www.worldvaluessurvey.org.
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 603
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
force participation, Catholicism being among the organized religions —
along with Islam and Hinduism — that have lower female labor force
participation rates (Psacharopoulos and Tzannatos 1989). Sweden offers
a completely different scenario in this respect. Greater religiosity is not
associated with patriarchal views for members of the Church of Sweden
(whose membership accounts for 66% of the Swedish population) but
partly explains gender stereotypes for those professing other faiths
(Goldscheider, Goldscheider, and Rico-Gonzalez 2014).
EXPECTATIONS
To what extent might these scenarios explain political ambition gender
gaps between MPs across the two countries? In the first place, because it
is easier for women in Sweden than in Spain to combine family life with
work, we believe this may have consequences for the supply of
candidates able to reach any political office, especially in parliaments. In
other words, Spanish women will have a harder time combining family
life with a political career and, consequently, will have to travel a greater
social distance than men in order to become candidates.11 More
precisely, we expect Spanish female MPs to make greater personal and
familial sacrifices than their fellow countrymen and Swedish counterparts.
Moreover, the Nordic welfare state provides incentives for women to
invest time and effort in developing their careers, while the
Mediterranean model is less generous. As a result, Spanish women must
rely to a larger extent on family support for their public (mainly working)
activities. Moreover, potential candidates who are encouraged by their
families to run are clearly more likely to actually stand as candidates (Fox
and Lawless 2003). Extending these two arguments to female MPs, we
expect that when family support is absent or weak, it will be harder for
female MPs in Spain to continue their political careers. Conversely,
Swedish female MPs likely will not experience this trade-off between
political ambition and family support. As Swedish policies and
institutions enforce gender equality and empower women, female MPs
will need less encouragement and support from their families to consider
a long-term political career.
Finally, we test elected representatives on the classical assumption that
active political socialization patterns assist in overcoming gender gaps in
11. The “norm of distance” was introduced by Sartori et al. (1963, 317) as a way of highlighting that
some citizens from nonprivileged environments find it more difficult to access politics than others.
604 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
political ambition. Modernization and democratization processes have
helped slowly replace traditional values and gender roles in Spanish
society, which are nevertheless still strong among older generations
(Lo´pez-Sa´ez, Morales, and Lisbona 2008). Hence, we expect greater
variation with regard to active/passive political socialization styles
between individuals in Spain compared with those in Sweden, where
political culture is more gender egalitarian. In other words, we assume
that active political socialization will be more evenly distributed across
Swedish MPs regardless of gender. Therefore, either having or lacking
early politicized socialization will play more of a role for female MPs’
ambitions in Spain compared with those in Sweden.
To summarize our expectations,
H1: Spanish female MPs will face more family costs than Spanish male
MPs and Swedish MPs.
H2: Family support will predict female MPs’ political ambitions in
Spain, but not in Sweden.
H3: A politicized upbringing will be more strongly associated with
female MPs’ willingness to stay in politics in Spain than in Sweden.
DATA AND METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Our data come from two surveys that were conducted independently
during the same period of time in Spain and Sweden. The Spanish
survey was conducted face to face from 2009 to 2011 on a representative
sample of 133 from a total of 616 MPs from national parliaments (about
22% of the total).12 Interviewed MPs were selected on the basis of sex,
party, and territory quotas in order to have the same distribution as
the total population of Spanish MPs, with a 5% margin of error. The
Swedish data come from the international Comparative Candidate
Survey project, sent out as an online survey to all candidates in
the national election in 2010, and include all members of parliament.
The Swedish survey was launched in the first half of 2011. A total of 181
out of 349 (52%) MPs answered. In relation to gender, age, and party
affiliation, the respondents are representative of the totality of MPs in the
Swedish parliament, with less than a 2% margin of error.
12. The survey was carried out by the research group Democracy and Autonomies: Society and
Politics (DASP, Universidad Pablo de Olavide), http://www.upo.es/democraciayautonomias. Data
also include a representative sample of regional MPs (not used here).
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 605
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
We decided to tap the phenomenon of MP’s political ambitions with a
dichotomous variable that distinguishes politicians who want to stay in
politics and those who want to quit in the long run. Both surveys
included a question about what the respondents would like to do “10
years from now” that allowed us to create a dichotomous variable that
takes the value 1 for those who want to stay in politics and the value 0
for those who do not.13
Both surveys included a question about how often the respondents had
political discussions at home during their childhoods and whether their
parents were active in politics.14 The latter refers to any kind of political
activity, in unions, local politics, assemblies, social movements, or any
other field. As for family support, the Spanish questionnaire asked a
question about whether the MPs would say that their families support
them in their political careers or whether their families would prefer that
they were not in politics.15Although the meaning of “support” may vary
between some kind of diffuse, moral support or “tolerance” that
encourages the MP to pursue his or her political career to actively
providing resources — babysitting, money — when needed, the question
is useful because it is not gender specific. In the Swedish survey, this
question was framed as the extent to which the MP is supported by his
or her husband/partner/wife. In both cases, family support is coded as a
dummy variable (0 indicates not supported by the family, 1 means
supported by the family).
We focus on how these variables interact with sex on the MPs’ political
ambitions in different contexts.16 As control variables, we use age (three
13. Note that this is analogous to collapsing Schlesinger’s (1966) static and progressive ambitions
against discrete ambitions. Originally, respondents could choose between different options, among
them, being member of the national parliament, being active in local politics, being a member of
the government, an MP in the European Parliament, or quitting politics altogether. Unfortunately,
the anonymity process of the Spanish data impeded matching MPs’ current positions, offices and
responsibilities with their prospects. Thus, the only way to detect those who are ambitious to some
degree is by distinguishing them from those who definitely want to quit politics in the long term.
14. The exact wording in the Swedish survey was, “during your upbringing, how often did your parents
have political discussions with you.” Choices were “Often,” “Occasionally,” “Seldom,” and “Never.”
15. The exact wording in the Spanish survey was, “would you say that a) your family supports you in
your dedication to politics or b) your family would prefer that you were not in politics”. The wording in
the Swedish survey was: “if you are married or have a partner, to what extent did he/she encouraged you
to stand as a national candidate?” Choices were “Very encouraging,” “Fairly encouraging,” “Not very
encouraging,” “Not encouraging at all,” and “I do not have a partner.” In this case, we coded the
“very” and “fairly” categories as family support (value 1) against all the other values.
16. Another relevant difference emerges here between the Spanish and the Swedish questionnaires.
While the first asks for children in general, the second explicitly refers to children at home. This might
sound problematic but, as we will see, if both questions about children were identical, the different
patterns would be even more in favor of our first hypothesis.
606 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
groups), education (attended university or not), seniority (number of
election periods as an MP), and self-placement on the left–right scale
(0–10). For more information about the coding and descriptive statistics
of these variables, we refer the reader to the online appendix.
On the basis of these data, we conduct two different analyses. First, we
present descriptive data on political ambitions for each country.
Afterward, we examine the extent to which female MPs in Spain and
Sweden have made personal and familial sacrifices compared with their
male colleagues. Finally, we test the effect of MPs willingness to stay in
politics on the interaction between sex, on the one hand, and familial
support and political socialization, on the other. These interactions are
expected to find in what context and for what sex these two sets of
explanations better predict political ambition — in other words, in what
country they work better at reducing the gender gap.
RESULTS
Figure 1 shows the willingness of MPs to stay in politics. When asked
whether they would like to be in politics 10years from now, there were
no gender differences between the Swedish MPs: half of them wanted to
stay, and half of them wanted to quit in the long run. In Spain, there was
a gender difference — 55% of female MPs wanted to stay in politics,
while only 44% of male MPs shared the same ambition. However, the
gender gap in Spain is not statistically significant.17
Table 1 depicts MPs’ family situations. As expected, there are some
contextual differences. In Sweden, female MPs tend to be married and
have children proportionally more often than men, although the
differences are not statistically significant. We find the reverse in Spain:
female MPs tend to be married and have children proportionally less
than their male counterparts, and the difference is significant at the .05
level.
The picture that emerges is that of Swedish MPs for which family
(marriage and children) has the same characteristics for both men and
17. This result is consistent with previous research. While Schwindt-Bayer (2011) found that female
Latin American MPs had levels of political ambition very similar to those of men, Palmer and Simon
(2003) found that American congresswomen exhibited lower levels of political ambition than men.
Maybe the first generations of women entering parliaments in younger democracies are also younger
than their male counterparts, and also more eager to close the gap with men, hence, more
ambitious. This points to the advisability of considering age as an individual-level explanatory factor
of political ambition.
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 607
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
women. Therefore, we can assume that familial status has no effect on the
presence of Swedish MPs in the parliament and that these variables
probably cannot account for any difference between men and women.
Conversely, married women with children are less frequent in the
Spanish parliament than married men with children. This does not
necessarily imply that Spanish women are sacrificing a family life in
order to get into parliament. Spanish women are actually less likely to
have children than Swedish women, with lower birth rates during the
period analyzed.18 But this does not explain gender differences for the
MPs within each country. On the other hand, the differences observed
between Spanish and Swedish MPs regarding their family composition
may be due to age — a reason to delay marriage or children — as
FIGURE 1. Distribution of political ambition (percentage who want to stay in
politics within 10 years) and gender, per country.
Table 1. Differences among female and male MPs, by country, family variables
Sweden Spain
Men Women Diff. Men Women Diff.
Are married/have partner 77.4 82.2 4.8 (166) 76 50 226*(90)
Have children 76.3 85.5 9.2 (142) 89 71 218* (110)
Notes: Cells denote column percentages. For dichotomous variables, only the positive category is
shown.
Total number of observations per row shown in parentheses.
* Identifies significant differences in proportions between sexes at the .05 level.
18. The number of births per thousand habitants in Spain for the period 2009–11 was 10.37. In
Sweden it was 11.77.
608 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
Spanish female MPs are much younger than their male counterparts. This
difference is negligible in Sweden.19 Therefore, we must control for the
effect of age in subsequent estimations of political ambition. But if, after
considering age, ideology, and other factors leading to the decision to
stay single and childless, family situation still explains females’ political
ambitions, this could suggest that they are adapting their personal lives to
the expectations that come with the job (Krook 2003).
Next, we estimated political ambition for each country (see Table 2). In
the first model, we introduced all the variables that could explain why some
politicians are more ambitious than others. Sex is our main independent
variable here. The coefficient for the variable “woman” is positive in
Spain and negative in Sweden, although it does not reach the .1
threshold of statistical significance in either case. Age is introduced as a
set of dummy variables to estimate the effect of belonging to the young
or middle-age cohorts against the older cohort (born before 1959). We
see in both cases a positive, significant effect of the middle cohort.
Indeed, those born between 1959 and 1973 were more willing to remain
in politics in 10 years than the older cohort. The variable tapping the
experience of the MP in terms of legislatures does not play a role in
Spain, but it does in Sweden. Veteran Swedish MPs, regardless of their
age, sex, studies, and so on, are less willing to stay in politics in the long
term. Self-placement on the left–right scale does not play a role in
predicting political ambition.
If we move to the variables that capture family and socialization, we do not
appreciate any significant effect, although some peculiarities appear. Having
childrenseems positively — although not significantly — related to ambition
in Sweden, whereas this coefficient is negative for Spain. Neither of the two
variables intended to capture the effects of an active, early socialization seem
to play a role in political ambition, and this is true for both of the countries
analyzed. Finally, and according to the value of the R2
in both countries,
the model fits the Swedish data slightly better.
The second model features interactions between the two indicators of
interest (family support and family discussion at home when growing
up), on the one hand, and being a woman, on the other.20 Control
variables do not change substantively when compared with the previous
19. In all, 16% of female and 9% of male Spanish MPs were born after 1973, while in Sweden the
proportion for both sexes is 17%. Similarly, 36% of female MPs in Spain and 54% of males belong
to the oldest cohort (born before 1959) while proportions in Sweden are 44% and 46%.
20. In alternative models — not shown but available upon request — interactions have been
introduced one by one, achieving the same results in the second model shown here.
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 609
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
model, with the exception of having active parents in Spain, which is now
significant at the 10% level. Although the magnitude of this effect is not
remarkable, the negative influence of family roles on politicians’ ambitions
is an intriguing and robust finding, taking into account that we observe the
same pattern in both countries under analysis. Apparently, having parents
who were involved in politics does not encourage representatives to stay in
politics for longer periods of time, from which we can derive that MPs find
some drawbacks to having politically engaged parents.
On the other hand, belonging to the middle cohort still has a positive,
significant effect in both countries; the number of mandates exerts a
Table 2. Logit estimations of political ambition, by country
Sweden Spain
Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2
Woman –.11 21.75 .22 21.38
(.39) (1.06) (.45) (.91)
Age: Young cohort .67 .67 1.3 1.47
(.57) (.61) (.89) (.93)
Age: Middle cohort 1.53** 1.57** 1.45** 1.48**
(.64) (.67) (.47) (.48)
Age: Old cohort (ref.) — — — —
University –.03 .05 .24 .3
(.43) (.46) (.71) (.77)
Children .44 .32 –.18 –.07
(.45) (.48) (.61) (.83)
Ideology (left, 1 to right, 10) .10 .12 .008 –.03
(.08) (.09) (.14) (.14)
Mandates –.50** –.52** –.06 –.03
(.18) (.19) (.21) (.22)
Family support –.01 –.12 .32 –.44
(.49) (.63) (.42) (.53)
Political discussions at home: A lot .31 –.79 .09 .15
(.48) (.61) (.48) (.62)
Active parents –.48 –.40 –.7 –.96*
(.44) (.47) (.48) (.51)
Family support * Woman .79 2.3**
(1.19) (1)
Political discussions at home * Woman 4.71** .43
(1.53) (1.1)
Constant –.21 .14 –.78 –.04
(.86) (.90) (1.1) (1.2)
Pseudo R2
.132 .193 .112 .15
N 145 145 124 124
*** p , .001; ** p , .05; * p , .1.
610 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
negative, significant effect in Sweden but none in Spain, and the level of
education, having children, or the self-placement in the left–right scale,
holds no influence in Sweden or in Spain. In this second model, the
coefficient for the variable “woman” indicates the effect of sex on
political ambition when a woman has neither family support nor a history
of political discussions at home while growing up. Regardless of the
country, this effect is not significantly different for women compared to
men. As for the remainder of the principal effects, “family support” and
“political discussions at home” have no significant effect on the men’s
subsample, as indicated by the nonsignificant coefficients of the variables.
Moving now to the interactions between sex and the other main
independent variables, we see that while having familial support seems
to boost females’ political ambition in Spain, this plays no role in
Sweden. This is the only significant interactive effect for Spain. In the
Swedish case, we observe that growing up in a politicized family that
frequently discussed politics has a considerable effect on females’
political ambitions: it is significantly more important for women than for
men. This effect is not significantly different for Spanish male and
female politicians.
Figures 2 and 3 depict the two main interaction effects found for Sweden
and Spain. We can see that family discussions operate in different
directions for Swedish women and men. While a lot of family discussion
during childhood seems to predict lower levels of ambition for males
compared with those who did not discuss politics as much, female MPs
follow a different pattern: the more often they discussed politics, the
more likely they were to consider longer political careers. This, although
in line with previous literature, falsifies our initial hypothesis. In spite of
a longer tradition of gender equality, political discussions at home while
growing up reduced the political ambition gender gap more in Sweden
than in Spain.
Moving to Figure 3, we see that while familial support does not make a
big difference for Spanish men (a 10-point decrease in the probability of
considering a long political career as compared to those who claimed
that they lack family support), this effect is larger and goes in the
opposite direction for women. A female Spanish MP without family
support has a 27% probability of having the ambition to stay in politics,
and one who claims to have familial support has a 64% chance of
wanting to stay in politics, everything else being equal.
Moving to the magnitude of these effects, Table 3 displays the predicted
probabilities for the willingness to stay in politics over the following 10 years
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 611
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
for female Spanish and Swedish MPs. We can see that different
combinations of the four aforementioned factors focusing on family
burdens and a politically engaged socialization produce different results
in each case.21 With regard to Sweden, the most favorable situation for
females’ political ambition is that in which women have children,
FIGURE 2. Interaction between gender and family discussion, Sweden.
FIGURE 3. Interaction between gender and family support, Spain.
21. The probabilities have been calculated keeping the rest of variables in the model at their actual
values. In other words, these are average of the predictions, not predictions at the average. Hence,
the cell entries represent the average of the probability of considering staying in politics within 10
years among actual persons in the data.
612 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
Table 3. Predicted probabilities after Model 2, Table 2
Swedish Female MPs Spanish Female MPs
Children Family
Support
Discussed
Politics a Lot
Active
Parents
Predicted
Probabilities
Children Family
Support
Discussed
Politics a Lot
Active
Parents
Predicted
Probabilities
V V V V .87 V V V V .58
X V V V .83 X V V V .64
V X V V .73 V X V V .21
V V X V .42 V V X V .45
V V V X .91 V V V X .77
X X V V .51 X X V V .26
V V X X .67 V V X X .66
X X X X .26 X X X X .33
Average predicted probabilities .52 Average predicted probabilities .48
ENDURANCEATTHETOP613
termsofuse,availableathttps:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms.https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloadedfromhttps:/www.cambridge.org/core.UniversityofColorado,Boulder,on23Jan2017at16:58:59,subjecttotheCambridgeCore
familial support, and were born or socialized in families that used to discuss
politics a lot but in which their parents were not actively involved in politics
(91% probability of considering staying in politics over the following 10
years). Conversely, the most detrimental combination for women’s
political ambitions is that in which a representative has neither children
nor family support nor a politicized background. If we look more closely
at the contribution of each one of these factors or the combination of
them, we see that a low or medium level of political discussion at home
when growing up — as opposed to a high level — is the variable that
causes the greater change in probabilities (a reduction of 49 percentage
points compared with the most beneficial combination of factors). This
situation, however, predicts a 42% chance of considering a political
career 10 years from now, which is only 10% less than the average
probability for the whole sample.
If we move to the Spanish case, we see that the most beneficial situation
for females’ political ambitions is one in which women have children, have
familial support, and often discussed politics while growing up, combined
with parents who were not politically engaged. This is the same situation as
in Sweden, although it only yields a 77% probability of being “ambitious.”
If we consider a situation in which parents were actively involved in politics,
the probability goes down to 58%. Taking this last scenario as a baseline, we
see that not having children increases the chances of being ambitious by 6
percentage points. Lacking frequent political discussion at home is
definitely detrimental because it reduces the chances of being ambitious
by 13 percentage points. Clearly, however, the most detrimental
situation for Spanish females’ ambitions is that in which the
representative has children and claims to not have familial support. With
this being the case, a female MP would only have a 21% probability of
being willing to stay in politics over the following 10 years. Family
support is the crucial variable here. It is so important that the
probabilities of considering a long political career are almost equally low
for women with (21%) and without children (26%) if they lack this support.
CONCLUSIONS
In this article, we addressed gender differences with regard to MPs’ political
ambitions in two European countries. The aim was to push the boundaries
of the research on the gender gap and political ambition, which has mostly
focused on U.S. candidates and their willingness to run for office, testing
614 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
classical explanations for this gender gap based on political socialization
patterns and family dynamics, as well as bringing forth new explanations,
such as the role of the welfare state on downplaying or fostering the
explanatory power of such factors.
For this purpose, we compared Spanish and Swedish representatives. We
found that there are no significant differences among male and female MPs
in Sweden with regard to their willingness to stay in politics in the long run.
However, Spanish female MPs are, comparatively, slightly more ambitious
than their male counterparts. More precisely, we found that 55% of female
MPs plan to stay in politics in the forthcoming 10 years, while only 44% of
male MPs have the same ambition. Although this came as a surprise, these
data should probably be interpreted in the light of gender roles and political
culture in the two countries. For Spanish women, it is — and had been
especially so up to 2008 — harder to be placed on the electoral lists in a
position that allows them to become MPs. Thus, it makes sense that a
greater dose of ambition is still required for women. The gender gap in
favor of Spanish female MPs will persist once women make their way to
their parliamentary seats. This is also consistent with previous research
on entrepreneurial attitudes. According to this literature, countries
scoring high on the masculinity index, such as Spain, have clearly
distinct gender roles (men expected to be assertive, competitive, tough,
and goal oriented; women expected to be modest, cooperative,
empathic, and tender), and people in managerial roles are expected to
have stereotypical masculine qualities (Mueller and Dato-On 2008).
Following this line of thought, female elected politicians would be
expected to possess some stereotypical masculine traits — in this case,
greater ambition — to adapt to a masculine world.
We hypothesized that female Spanish MPs face higher costs and make
greater sacrifices in their private lives if they want to have a political
career. This assumption was based on the fact that women in Spain have
difficulties combining family life and a career because women, to a
larger extent than men, are responsible for the care of children, the sick,
and the elderly. Given the development of an egalitarian welfare state in
Sweden, we assumed that this trade-off would be less prevalent there. A
test of the equality of proportions showed that Spanish female MPs are
less likely to have children and a partner than their male counterparts,
whereas the opposite is true in Sweden, where female MPs are more
likely to have a partner and children. Hence, Spanish female
representatives are not only more ambitious than their male counterparts
or their Swedish colleagues, but also they make greater sacrifices in order
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 615
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
to get into parliament. Although the relationship between gender and
family variables is probably moderated by age (younger MPs are less
likely to have a family), this is in line with the aforementioned finding
on Spanish female MPs being the most ambitious subsample in our
research. This also opens the door to considering family arrangements
and dynamics as a plausible explanatory factor for a gender gap regarding
political ambitions.
The next step was to study the importance of political socialization and
family support for women’s long-term ambitions. On the basis of history,
culture, and the welfare state institutions of each country, we advanced
two main hypotheses. First, political socialization is a factor that
encourages women’s long-term ambitions, and this should be especially
important for women in a country such as Spain, with a relatively recent
authoritarian and traditionalist regime that would be related to more
within-individual variation regarding active socialization patterns.22 We
also advanced the hypothesis that familial support should be of greater
importance for female MPs in a country with more traditional gender
roles entrenched in its political culture and less intense welfare state
policies fostering females’ participation in public life. Only one of these
two hypotheses was supported by our analyses, however. As expected,
female MPs in Spain depend on family support. Women with family
support are more ambitious than women who are not encouraged and
backed by their families. The importance of familial support for female
MPs in Sweden, on the other hand, is of lesser significance. This lends
support to the idea that the independence and ambition of female
Swedish politicians result from the combination of culture and welfare
state institutions.
However, we detected the opposite pattern for political socialization, as
female MPs in Sweden are more ambitious if they grew up in a home with
lively political discussions. A politicized family background does not seem
to be of relevance for female MPs’ ambitions in Spain. Furthermore,
having parents that had been involved in politics seems to predict a lower
willingness to stay in politics, especially in Spain. We find this
intriguing, and the result deserves the attention of further research.
Our research suggests that it is either the political culture or the welfare
state explanation — or both — that explains why Swedish female MPs do
22. The standard deviation of this variable (see the online appendix) contradicts this expectation. This
statistic is almost identical in both countries (and even slightly lower for Spain). Maybe our assumption
that there should be more variation regarding active socialization in Spain than in Sweden would work
for regular citizens, but not for elected politicians.
616 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
not need familial support in order to envision themselves running for office
in the long run. In this manner, our work contributes to an ongoing
discussion of how supply factors relate to women’s underrepresentation.
Individual factors such as political socialization and family dynamics
help explain the political ambition gender gap, but these depend in turn
on the institutional and cultural contexts. Women’s motivation reacts to
the expectations that come with the role of MP, but also to contextual
incentives, benefiting from either public or private support, and
ultimately predicting their resilience as politicians and probably their
success and their likelihood of achieving important offices. Naturally, we
would like to have enough second-level units (countries) to put
contextual hypotheses to empirical test, but these, as many other causes
and combinations related to female MPs’ ambitions, are beyond the
scope of these pages.
Previous research has been conducted in a presidential system (United
States) with an electoral system focusing on individual candidates. In
contrast, our study gives attention to parliamentary systems with strong
political parties and where politicians and candidates are less likely to be
known to their voters (Holmberg 2009). Our research therefore deals
with processes and attitudes that go unnoticed as compared to the
nomination and selection of candidates in presidential systems, which
adds value to our work. On the other hand, we do believe that our
results tell a simple story. The recent intense incorporation of women
into the Spanish parliament has resulted in ambitious female politicians,
especially when taking into account that they are usually younger than
their male counterparts. This being said, to be an ambitious female
politician in Spain is conditioned: candidates must fight harder than
men in order to establish a family and are still more dependent on
familial support in order to fulfill their career ambitions.
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
To view supplementary material for this article, please visit http://dx.doi.
org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Carol Galais is a Postdoctoral Fellow at Universitat Oberta de Catalunya,
Barcelona, Spain: cgalais@uoc.edu; Patrik O¨ hberg is Assistant Professor of
Political Science at the University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden:
patrik.ohberg@pol.gu.se; Xavier Coller holds a Chair in Sociology at
Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Seville, Spain: xaviercoller@upo.es
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 617
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
REFERENCES
Allen, Peter. 2013. “Gendered Candidate Emergence in Britain: Why Are More Women
Councillors Not Becoming MPs?” Politics 33 (3): 147–59.
Barnello, Michelle A., and Kathleen A. Bratton. 2007. “Bridging the Gender Gap in Bill
Sponsorship.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 32 (3): 449–74.
Bettio, Francesca, and Paola Villa. 1998. “A Mediterranean Perspective on the Breakdown
of the Relationship between Participation and Fertility.” Cambridge Journal of
Economics 22 (2): 137–71.
Bledsoe, Timothy, and Mary Herring. 1990. “Victims of Circumstances: Women in Pursuit
of Political Office.” American Political Science Review 84 (1): 213–23.
Borchert, Jens, and Klaus Stolz. 2011. “Introduction: Political Careers in Multi-Level
Systems.” Regional and Federal Studies 21 (2): 107–15.
Brace, Paul. 1984. “Progressive Ambition in the House: A Probabilistic Approach.” Journal
of Politics 46 (2): 556–71.
Burrell, Barbara C. 1994. AWoman’s Place Is in the House: Campaigning for Congress in the
Feminist Era. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Burt-Way, Barbara J., and Rita Mae Kelly. 1992. “Gender and Sustaining Political
Ambition: A Study of Arizona Elected Officials.” Political Research Quarterly 45 (1):
11–25.
Campbell, David E., and Christina Wolbrecht. 2006. “See Jane Run: Women Politicians as
Role Models for Adolescents.” Journal of Politics 68 (2): 233–47.
Carroll, Susan J. 1994. Women as Candidates in American Politics. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press.
——— ed. 2001. The Impact of Women in Public Office. Bloomington: Indiana University
Press.
Chattopadhyay,Raghabendra,andEstherDuflo.2004.“WomenasPolicyMakers:Evidence
from a Randomized Policy Experiment in India.” Econometrica 72 (5): 1409–43.
Clark, Cal, Janet Clark, and Bih-er Chou. 1993. “Ambition, Activist Role Orientations, and
Alienation among Women Legislators in Taiwan: The Impact of Countersocialization.”
Political Psychology 14 (3): 493–510.
Clots-Figueras, Irma. 2012. “Are Female Leaders Good for Education?” American
Economic Journal: Applied Economics 4 (1): 212–44.
Codispoti, Franck. 1982. “American Governors and Progressive Ambition: An Analysis of
Opportunities to Run for the Senate.” PhD diss., Michigan State University.
Coller, Xavier, Andre´s Santana, and Antonio M. Jaime. 2014. “Problemas y soluciones para
la construccio´n de bases de datos de polı´ticos.” Revista Espan˜ola de Ciencia Polı´tica y de
la Administracio´n 34: 169–98.
Costantini, Edmond. 1990. “Political Women and Political Ambition: Closing the Gender
Gap.” American Journal of Political Science 34 (3): 741–70.
Constantini, Edmond, and Kenneth H. Craik. 1977. “Women as Politicians: The Social
Background, Personality, and Political Careers of Female Party Leaders.” In A Portrait
of Marginality: The Political Behavior of American Women, eds. Marianne Githens
and Jewell Prestage. New York: McKay, 221–40.
Conway, M. Margaret, David W. Ahern, and Gertrude A. Steuernagel. 2004. Women and
Political Participation: Cultural Change in the Political Arena. 2nd ed. Washington,
DC: CQ Press.
Dolan, Julie Anne B., Melissa M. Deckman, and Michele L. Swers. 2010. Women and
Politics: Paths to Power and Political Influence. 2nd ed. New York: Pearson.
Elder, Laurel. 2004. “Why Women Don’t Run: Explaining Women’s Underrepresentation
in America’s Political Institutions.” Women & Politics 26 (2): 27–56.
618 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
Esaiasson, Peter, and So¨ren Holmberg. 1996. Representation from Above: Members of
Parliament and Representative Democracy in Sweden. Aldershot: Dartmouth.
Esping-Andersen, Gosta. 1999. Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economies. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Evertsson, Marie, and Magnus Nermo. 2004. “Dependence within Families and the
Household Division of Labor Comparing Sweden and the United States.” Journal of
Marriage and Family 66 (5): 1272–86.
Fox, Richard L., and Jennifer L. Lawless. 2003. “Family Structure, Sex-Role Socialization,
and the Decision to Run for Office.” Women & Politics 24 (4): 19–48.
———. 2004. “Entering the Arena? Gender and the Decision to Run for Office.” American
Journal of Political Science 48 (2): 264–80.
———. 2014. “Reconciling Family Roles with Political Ambition: The New Normal for
Women in Twenty-First Century U.S. Politics.” Journal of Politics 76 (2): 398–414.
Fulton, Sarah A., Cherie D. Maestas, L. Sandy Maisel, and Walter J. Stone. 2006. “The
Sense of a Woman: Gender, Ambition, and the Decision to Run for Congress.”
Political Research Quarterly 59 (2): 235–48.
Fuwa, Makiko, and Philip N. Cohen. 2007. “Housework and Social Policy.” Social Science
Research 36 (2): 512–30.
Galais, Carol. 2008. “¿Socializacio´n o contexto? La implicacio´n polı´tica subjetiva de los
espan˜oles (1985–2006).” Unpublished thesis, Universidad Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona.
Gidengil, Elisabeth, Brenda O’Neill, and Lisa Young. 2010. “Her Mother’s Daughter? The
Influence of Childhood Socialization on Women’s Political Engagement.” Journal of
Women, Politics & Policy 31 (4): 334–55.
Goldscheider, Frances, Calvin Goldscheider, and Antonio Rico-Gonzalez. 2014. “Gender
Equality in Sweden: Are the Religious More Patriarchal?” Journal of Family Issues 35 (7):
892–908.
Hall, Peter A., and Daniel W. Gingerich. 2009. “Varieties of Capitalism and Institutional
Complementarities in the Political Economy: An Empirical Analysis.” British Journal
of Political Science 39 (3): 449–82.
Hinojosa, Magda. 2012. Selecting Women, Electing Women: Political Representation and
Candidate Selection in Latin America. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Holmberg, So¨ren. 2009. “Candidate Recognition in Different Electoral Systems.” In The
Comparative Study of Electoral System, ed. Hans-Dieter Klingemann. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 158–70.
Kazee, Thomas A., ed. 1994. Who Runs for Congress? Ambition, Context, and Candidate
Emergence. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Krook, Mona Lena. 2003. “Not All Quotas Are Created Equal: Trajectories of Reform to
Increase Women’s Political Representation.” Presented at the European Consortium
for Political Research, Joint Sessions of Workshops, Edinburgh, Scotland. http://www.ksg.
harvard.edu/fs/pnorris/Acrobat/stm103%20articles/Krook_2003_Women.pdf (accessed
July 5, 2016).
Krook, Mona Lena, and Diane Z. O’Brien. 2012. “All the President’s Men? The
Appointment of Female Cabinet Ministers Worldwide.” Journal of Politics 74 (3):
840–55.
Lapuerta, Irene, Pau Baiza´n, and Marı´a Jose´ Gonza´lez. 2011. “Individual and Institutional
Constraints: An Analysis of Parental Leave Use and Duration in Spain.” Population
Research and Policy Review 30 (2): 185–210.
Lawless, Jennifer L., and Richard L. Fox. 2005. It Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don’t
Run for Office. New York: Cambridge University Press.
———. 2010. It Still Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 619
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
Lee, Marcia Manning. 1976. “Why Few Women Hold Public Office: Democracy and
Sexual Roles.” Political Science Quarterly 91 (2): 297–314.
Lo´pez-Sa´ez, Mercedes, J. Francisco Morales, and Ana Lisbona. 2008. “Evolution of
Gender Stereotypes in Spain: Traits and Roles.” Spanish Journal of Psychology 11 (2):
609–17.
Lovenduski, Joni. 2005. Feminizing Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Macdonald, Stuart Elaine. 1987. “Political Ambition and Attainment: A Dynamic Analysis
of Parliamentary Careers.” PhD diss., University of Michigan.
Maestas, Cherie D., Sarah Fulton, L. Sandy Maisel, and Walter J. Stone. 2006. “When to
Risk It? Institutions, Ambitions, and the Decision to Run for the U.S. House.” American
Political Science Review 100 (2): 195–208.
Mansbridge, Jane. 1999. “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women?
A Contingent ‘Yes.’” Journal of Politics 61 (3): 628–57.
Mayer, Jeremy D., and Heather M. Schmidt. 2004. “Gendered Political Socialization in
Four Contexts: Political Interest and Values among Junior High School Students in
China, Japan, Mexico and the United States.” Social Science Journal 41 (3): 393–407.
McKay, Joanna. 2011. “‘Having it All?’ Women MPs and Motherhood in Germany and the
UK.” Parliamentary Affairs 64 (4): 714–36.
Mestre, Ta`nia Verge, and Rau¨l Tormos Marı´n. 2012. “La persistencia de las diferencias de
ge´nero en el intere´s por la polı´tica.” Revista Espan˜ola de Investigaciones Sociolo´gicas 138
(1): 89–108.
Molina, O´ scar, and Martin Rhodes. 2007. “Conflict, Complementarities and Institutional
Change in Mixed Market Economies.” In Beyond Varieties of Capitalism: Conflict,
Contradictions, and Complementarities in the European Economy, eds. Bob Hancke´,
Martin Rhodes, and Mark Thatcher. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 223–52.
Mueller, Stephen L., and Mary Conway Dato-On. 2008. “Gender-Role Orientation as a
Determinant of Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy.” Journal of Developmental
Entrepreneurship 13 (1): 3–20.
Norris, Pippa, and Joni Lovenduski. 1995. Political Recruitment: Gender, Race and Class in
the British Parliament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ola´h, Livia Sz., and Eva Bernhardt. 2008. “Sweden: Combining Childbearing and Gender
Equality.” Demographic Research 19 (28): 1105–44.
Palmer, Barbara, and Dennis Simon. 2003. “Political Ambition and Women in the U.S.
House of Representatives, 1916–2000.” Political Research Quarterly 56 (2): 127–38.
Phillips, Anne. 1995. The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Psacharopoulos, George, and Zafiris Tzannatos. 1989. “Female Labor Force Participation:
An International Perspective.” World Bank Research Observer 4 (2): 187–201.
Rehavi, M. Marit. 2008. “Sex and Politics: Do Female Legislators Affect State Spending?”
Mimeo, University of California, Berkeley.
Reynolds, Andrew. 1999. “Women in the Legislatures and Executives of the World:
Knocking at the Highest Glass Ceiling.” World Politics 51 (4): 547–72.
Royo, Sebastia´n. 2008. Varieties of Capitalism in Spain. Remaking the Spanish Economy for
the New Century. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sartori, Giovanni, et al. 1963. Il parliamentoitaliano. Napoli: ESI.
Schlesinger, Joseph A. 1966. Ambition and Politics: Political Careers in the United States.
Chicago: Rand McNally.
———. 1994. Political Parties and the Winning of Office. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press.
Schmidt, Vivien A. 2009. “Putting the Political Back into Political Economy by Bringing
the State Back in Yet Again.” World Politics 61 (3): 516–46.
620 CAROL GALAIS ET AL.
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core
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.
———. 2011. “Women Who Win: Social Backgrounds, Paths to Power, and Political
Ambition in Latin American Legislatures.” Politics & Gender 7 (1): 1–33.
Stevens, Anne. 2007. Women, Power and Politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Stone, Walter J., and L. Sandy Maisel. 2003. “The Not-So-Simple Calculus of Winning:
Potential U.S. House Candidates’ Nomination and General Election Prospects.”
Journal of Politics 65 (4): 951–77.
Svallfors, Stefan. 2006. The Moral Economy of Class: Class and Attitudes in Comparative
Perspective. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Teorell, Jan, Stefan Dahlberg, So¨ren Holmberg, Bo Rothstein, Felix Hartmann, and
Richard Svensson. 2015. “The Quality of Government Standard Dataset,” v. Jan15.
University of Gothenburg, Quality of Government Institute. http://www.qog.pol.gu.se
(accessed June 29, 2016).
Valiente, Celia. 2000. “Reconciliation policies in Spain.” In Gendered Policies in Europe:
Reconciling Employment and Family Life, ed. Linda Hantrais. London: Macmillan,
143–59.
Vanlangenakker, Ine, Bram Wauters, and Bart Maddens. 2013. “Pushed Toward the Exit?
How Female MPs Leave Parliament.” Politics & Gender 9 (1): 61–75.
Witt, Linda, Karen M. Paget, and Glenna Matthews. 1995. Running as a Woman: Gender
and Power in American Politics. New York: Simon &Schuster.
Wolak, Jennifer, and Michael McDevitt. 2011. “The Roots of the Gender Gap in Political
Knowledge in Adolescence.” Political Behavior 33 (3): 505–33.
Young, Lisa. 2000. Feminists and Party Politics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
ENDURANCE AT THE TOP 621
terms of use, available at https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X16000416
Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Colorado, Boulder, on 23 Jan 2017 at 16:58:59, subject to the Cambridge Core