Candidate gender quotas have proliferated on the strength of several arguments including claims that they help achieve gender-equal participation in democracy and, with it, both role models for girls and better representation of women’s interests. Moreover, feminist scholars and practitioners have identified many discriminatory practices on the part of gatekeepers, or those who select candidates to appear on the ballot, and quotas were designed to overcome these barriers. However, only limited empirical evidence exists of whether or not quotas’ goals of gender-equal participation in the democratic process, creating role models, and overcoming discrimination have actually been met. When quotas are successfully implemented, do male and female citizens participate equally throughout the political recruitment process? That is, do men and women obtain the qualifications necessary to run for office at equal rates? Are qualified men and women equally prone to aspiring to elected positions? Quotas have increased the percentages of women who appear on the ticket, but have they truly leveled the playing field, giving aspiring male and female politicians equal chances of being groomed as candidates by their parties and appearing on the ballot in winning places? Based on the forthcoming book A Glass Half Full: Gender Quotas and Political Recruitment, this paper introduces a new methodology (the pathway case research design) for studying quotas and political recruitment and presents empirical evidence on the subject derived from a mail survey of potential candidates in Germany.
