Where Quotas Fall Short: Parties, Voters, and Women’s Representation in Open-List PR

Do candidate gender quotas in open-list proportional representation systems increase women’s chances of being elected? Evidence is mixed, with studies suggesting that quotas often struggle to overcome entrenched party and voter biases. This article examines Luxembourg, where a legislated candidate quota has failed to substantially increase women’s parliamentary representation. Drawing on data from four national elections (2009–2023)—two before and two after the quota’s introduction—we identify where in the electoral process quotas fall short. First, we find that women remain systematically underrepresented in top list positions, even under the quota. Second, women receive fewer preferential votes than men, with the gap most pronounced among high-visibility candidates at the top of the list. This gap among top candidates persists in the first post-quota election, but diminishes in the second, suggesting a gradual normalization of women’s presence in prominent political roles. These findings highlight both the short-term limitations and the potential longer-term symbolic effects of candidate quotas in OLPR systems.