This research investigates the persistent gender inequality in political power within two understudied democracies in the gender politics scholarship: South Korea and Taiwan. Analyzing data from eight electoral cycles between 1992 and 2024, this study aims to deepen our understanding of the unequal pathways to power between male and female legislators in these countries. Despite three decades since their democratic transitions, and apparent advancements in gender politics such as a fourfold increase in the number of female legislators, the election of female presidents, and the adoption of mandatory gender quotas, women in politics continue to face significant marginalization and the phenomenon of the "leaky pipeline." For instance, fewer women make up top party, legislative, and government positions; female politicians are much less experienced in politics and much less likely to be re-elected; women have shorter careers overall.
This project identifies and examines three key mechanisms contributing to the marginalization of elected female politicians: policy specialization, institutional structures, and political networks.
Firstly, the research highlights a policy specialization double bind faced by female legislators. There are high expectations for female legislators to focus on women's issues, yet this specialization hinders their ability to build expertise and mobilize resources in areas valued by the electorate, such as construction, agriculture, and budget. This disconnect reduces their chances of re-election.
Secondly, the electoral system itself poses significant disadvantages to women. Both South Korea and Taiwan employ a mixed electoral system where voters cast two votes: one for a district representative (under a first-past-the-post rule) and one for a party (under a proportional representation rule). A majority of women enter politics through the party tier but cannot remain there in subsequent elections. To continue their political careers, they must transition to the district tier, a move that is challenging due to their lack of established school, blood, and regional ties compared to their male counterparts. Additionally, the expectation for legislators to be on a 24/7 standby mode is particularly disadvantageous to women, who often bear family obligations.
Thirdly, female legislators struggle to build political networks with powerful politicians who control party resources and nominations for the next election. Due to homosocial capital, male legislators are more likely to form networks with other male legislators, including those in leadership positions, further marginalizing female legislators.
The study employs both quantitative and qualitative methods to investigate these mechanisms. Quantitatively, it analyzes over 100,000 bill sponsorships and related co-sponsorship networks using regression and social network analysis. This quantitative analysis is complemented by qualitative evidence from 30 elite interviews conducted with elected legislators from key parties.
This research aims to contribute to the broader understanding of gender politics by exploring the structural and systemic barriers that continue to hinder women's full participation and influence in politics. It raises critical questions about the effectiveness of gender quotas, PR electoral system, and other measures designed to promote gender equality in political representation. Moreover, the study calls for more nuanced and targeted approaches to addressing gender inequality in political power and influence.
