There is a long-standing debate over the extent to which parliament must be a copy of society as a whole. More research is needed, however, that looks at citizens’ attitudes towards the representation of minority or marginalized groups and how these attitudes might vary by the type of marginalized group. Given that public opinion is directly linked to the preferences of the voting public, it is crucial to understand these attitudes. Therefore, the main aim of our study is to investigate to what extent and how respondents’ identity and political attitudes affect their attitudes towards the representation of women and indigenous Māori in New Zealand. Identity arguments indicate that women and those of Māori descent should support increased representation of their respective groups. It is, however, not clear to what extent this support is due to assumed issue alignment. Pulling from issue-alignment theoretical arguments, voters may favour an increase of candidates due to the assumption that they will align on relevant policies. In this case, voters’ support for a women’s rights issue (i.e., abortion rights), a Māori rights issue (i.e., the Treaty of Waitangi), or social policy investment will matter separately from their identity in shaping their support for women and Māori candidates. Using data from the 2014 New Zealand Election Survey (NZES), our analyses indicate that identity plays a major role: Women support more women MPs and Māori support more Māori MPs. The link does not translate across marginalized groups, indicating support does not emerge out of a broad-based concern for minority/marginalized groups. Nevertheless, policy issue positions also matter. Both identity and substantive reasons thus seem to be crucial for citizens’ support for descriptive representation of marginalized groups.
