One factor that can
influence the implementation of voluntary party quotas is the electoral system.
Proportional representation systems in particular are claimed to facilitate the
election of a diverse pool of representatives.
In single-member
constituencies (which are common in majority/plurality electoral systems), each
party organisation can generally nominate only one candidate. In practice,
parties tend to select the candidate to whom they attribute the greatest
chances of winning: in practice, this is often a man and often a member of the
majority group. This makes it more difficult to implement voluntary quotas, and
women and members of minority groups are often nominated only in constituencies
where the party does not see any chance of winning. Therefore, quotas in
majority/plurality systems tend to produce fewer elected women and minority
candidates than quotas in proportional
systems.[1]
Political parties compete
for a larger number of seats per constituency in a proportional representation
system and can therefore “balance the party ticket” between competing factions
inside the party (ibid). Otherwise disadvantaged party members often benefit
from this balancing process. Given that the seats in proportional representation
systems are allocated to the party in proportion to their share of the national
vote, the party can also, under some PR systems, decide over the rank ordering
of the candidates. Certain candidates can be placed in more promising party
list positions than others. This makes voluntary party quotas work better in
proportional representation systems where a share of the candidacies can be
allocated to under-represented groups. To make voluntary party quotas even more
effective, political parties often have a placement criteria (also called
“double quota”) that ensures that persons who take advantage of the quota are
not only placed on the candidate list, but placed in winnable positions – i.e.,
in positions the party expects to win. If a party expects to win five seats in
a fifteen-seat constituency, positions one through five on the party’s
candidate list are “winnable” while positions six through fifteen are not.
Another important factor
for the implementation of voluntary party quotas is the political culture in
the country. If greater representation is encouraged by the political elite,
media, and ultimately the voters, political parties are more likely to see the
advantages of voluntary party quotas. The openness of a political culture
determines the opportunities underprivileged social group members have to gain
influence over political decisions.
Party culture has an impact
on the implementation of quotas. Positive discrimination in favour of underprivileged
groups by quota systems is said to be more consistent with certain political
parties than with others, for instance with Labour or welfare state parties.
Their party culture or main policy of intervention and redistribution to combat
social or economic inequalities is very similar to the intervention by a quota
system and its allocation rules.
