Women’s Political Representation and Its Different Forms

Paxton and Kunovich (2003) assert that women’s representation in the political system politics has not improved much, despite advancement made by the feminist movement on education, suffrage, etc. Olaitan (2024a) expands that the representation of women in politics is still low considering that BPfA called for increased women’s participation in politics in 1995. Paxton (1997) adds that a persisting problem with gender stratification is the underrepresentation of women in political institutions worldwide. Scholars highlight three justifications often given for the slow progress in women’s political representation; they are social-structural, political and ideological (Kenworthy and Malami 1999; Reynolds 1999). Political explanations emphasise how accessible the political system is to women, while social-structural explanations concentrate on the pool of eligible women, and ideological explanations emphasise the public perceptions of women in politics and their viability as candidates and leaders. Randall (1987) and Norris (1997) affirm the social cultural explanation for low representation of women in political institutions; they argue that the underrepresentation of women in politics is believed to be caused by two factors: the supply of female candidates and the demand for female candidates. Paxton and Kunovich (2003) argue that structural factors dictate supply, given that political elites are disproportionately drawn from highly educated classes and specific professions. Consequently, if women lack access to educational and professional opportunities, they will lack the financial and human resources necessary to run for public office. This explanation posits that women’s educational and professional level affect their representation or underrepresentation in politics.