Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T01:26:15.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Makes a Good Politician? Reassessing the Criteria Used for Political Recruitment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2015

Rainbow Murray
Rainbow Murray*
Affiliation:
Queen Mary University of London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Certain societal groups are significantly overrepresented within politics, including men, ethnic majority groups, and socioeconomic elites. This has fueled debates regarding meritocracy within political recruitment. While meritocracy is desirable, its definition and measurement are contested. The criteria used in theoretical and empirical academic studies differ from those of political parties and voters, as discussed below. Furthermore, there is bias in favor of the male status quo, with all groups preferring the qualities of existing elites. The definition of a “good” politician is therefore highly subjective. Nonetheless, political traditionalists claim that the “best” candidate should be selected even if this leads to significant gender imbalance in parliaments. Yet, if political recruitment is biased in favor of social elites, the overrecruitment of men may not derive solely from merit (Murray 2014). Without definitive criteria for evaluating prospective candidates and judging those already elected, we cannot determine whether political recruitment is meritocratic.

Type
Critical Perspectives on Gender and Politics
Information
Politics & Gender , Volume 11 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 770 - 776
Copyright
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2015 

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

Alexander, Deborah, and Andersen, Kristi. 1993. “Gender as a Factor in the Attribution of Leadership Traits.” Political Research Quarterly 46 (3): 527–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bacchi, Carol. 1996. The Politics of Affirmative Action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Baltrunaite, Audinga, Bello, Piera, Casarico, Alessandra, and Profeta, Paola. 2014. “Gender Quotas and the Quality of Politicians.” Journal of Public Economics 118: 62–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besley, Timothy, and Reynal-Querol, Marta. 2011. “Do Democracies Select More Educated Leaders?” American Political Science Review 105 (3): 552–66.Google Scholar
Bjarnegård, Elin. 2013. Gender, Informal Institutions and Political Recruitment. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Brookman, David E. 2013. “Black Politicians are More Intrinsically Motivated to Advance Blacks’ Interests.” American Journal of Political Science 57 (3): 521–36.Google Scholar
Campbell, Rosie, and Cowley, Philip. 2014a. “What Voters Want: Reactions to Candidate Characteristics in a Survey Experiment.” Political Studies 62 (4): 745–65.Google Scholar
Campbell, Rosie, and Cowley, Philip. 2014b. “Rich Man, Poor Man, Politician Man: Wealth Effects in a Candidate Biography Survey Experiment.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 16 (1): 56–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Rosie, and Lovenduski, Joni. 2014. “What Should MPs Do? Public and Parliamentarians’ Views Compared.” Parliamentary Affairs, Advance Access. doi: 10.1093/pa/gsu020.Google Scholar
Cowley, Philip. 2013. “Why Not Ask the Audience? Understanding the Public's Representational Priorities.” British Politics 8 (2): 138–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dovi, Suzanne. 2007. The Good Representative. Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eulau, Heinz, Wahlke, John C., Buchanan, William, and Ferguson, Leroy C.. 1959. “The Role of the Representative: Some Empirical Observations on the Theory of Edmund Burke.” American Political Science Review 53 (3): 742–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franceschet, Susan, Krook, Mona Lena, and Piscopo, Jennifer M., eds. 2012. The Impact of Gender Quotas. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galasso, Vincenzo, and Nannicini, Tommaso. 2011. “Competing on Good Politicians.” American Political Science Review 105 (1): 79–99.Google Scholar
Górecki, Maciej A., and Marsh, Michael. 2012. “Not Just ‘Friends and Neighbours’: Canvassing, Geographic Proximity and Voter Choice.” European Journal of Political Research 51 (5): 563–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazan, Reuven Y., and Rahat, Gideon. 2010. Democracy within Parties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddy, Leonie, and Terkildsen, Nayda. 1993. “Gender Stereotypes and the Perception of Male and Female Candidates.” American Journal of Political Science 37 (1): 119–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kittilson, Miki Caul. 2006. Challenging Parties, Changing Parliaments. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Lawless, Jennifer, and Fox, Richard L.. 2010. It Still Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don't Run for Office. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2003. “Rethinking Representation.” American Political Science Review 97 (4): 515–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, Rainbow. 2010a. “Second among Unequals: A Study of Whether France's ‘Quota Women’ are Up to the Job.” Politics & Gender 6 (1): 93–118.Google Scholar
Murray, Rainbow. 2010b. Parties, Gender Quotas and Candidate Selection in France. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Murray, Rainbow. 2014. “Quotas for Men: Reframing Gender Quotas as a Means of Improving Representation for All.” American Political Science Review 108 (3): 520–32.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa, and Lovenduski, Joni. 1995. Political Recruitment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
O'Brien, Diana Z. 2012. “Quotas and Qualifications in Uganda.” In The Impact of Gender Quotas, ed. Franceschet, Susan, Krook, Mona Lena, and Piscopo, Jennifer M.. New York: Oxford University Press, 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitkin, Hanna. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Reingold, Beth. 2008. “Women as Office Holders: Linking Descriptive and Substantive Representation.” In Political Women and American Democracy, ed. Wolbrecht, Christina, Beckwith, Karen, and Baldez, Lisa. New York: Cambridge University Press, 128–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swers, Michele L. 2005. “Connecting Descriptive and Substantive Representation: An Analysis of Sex Differences in Co-Sponsorship Activity.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 30 (3): 407–33.Google Scholar
Taylor, Bron R. 1991. Affirmative Action at Work. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Verge, Tània. 2011. “Cuotas de Género y Reclutamiento Político. Análisis del Parlament de Catalunya, 1980–2010.” Revista Española de Ciencia Política 26: 87–104.Google Scholar
Vivyan, Nick, and Wagner, Markus. 2015. “What do Voters Want from their Local MP?” Political Quarterly, Early View. doi: 10.1111/1467-923X.12128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 2000. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Weeks, Ana Catalano, and Baldez, Lisa. 2015. “Quotas and Qualifications: The Impact of Gender Quota Laws on the Qualifications of Legislators in the Italian Parliament.” European Political Science Review 7 (1): 119–44.Google Scholar