A longstanding political debate revolves around the significance of descriptive representation and its effects on substantive representation (Phillips, 1995; Young, 2000). Phillips (1998) has been a prominent advocate of “descriptive representation,” which emphasizes the importance of examining “who” individuals in parliamentary positions are and “how” their demographic characteristics resemble that of the voters. She emphasized the importance of this resemblance, particularly concerning marginalized groups, as she believes that this may play a crucial role in representing their interests effectively. In addition, Pitkin (1967) stressed the need to observe “what” it is that representatives do and what policies they introduce instead of focusing too much on “who” they are and “who” they represent. She has defined “substantive representation” as the actions where the representative “acts in the interest of the represented, in a manner responsive to them” (Pitkin, 1967). From a more issue-specific perspective, Mansbridge (1999) laid out several reasons why disadvantaged groups (in this case, people of color and women) should be represented by politicians with the same demographic characteristics. However, she ultimately agreed with the stance that a balance should be achieved between substantive and descriptive representation and that overemphasizing the latter can be problematic. An agreement is yet to be reached regarding which is more effective or whether descriptive representation positively affects substantive representation. In the following section, we introduce previous studies that have attempted to decipher the aforementioned puzzle, focusing on the role that female politicians play as both descriptive and substantive representatives of women.

Many attempts have been made to answer the question of whether descriptive representation have any effect on substantive representation. Studies have explored the differences between the priorities and preferences of female and male politicians when introducing domestic policies (Davis, 1997; Lloren & Rosset, 2017). These studies argue that female politicians tend to support policies that are softer¹ in nature (Swigonski, 1994). O’Brien and Piscopo (2019) contributed to the literature by advocating for increased political interest in women’s issues and policies for vulnerable populations. Chen (2013) found mixed evidence in her study of Taiwanese female politicians, with female mayors contributing a higher portion of the budget to social welfare and female council women doing the opposite. Chattopadhyay and Duflo (2001) drew similar results in their study of India, with female politicians investing more in public goods relevant to women and male politicians doing the opposite.

The interaction between female policymakers and policy outcomes has been a subject of interest for many scholars. The results vary, with some finding a positive correlation between women in politics and policy implementation, whereas others find no such correlation. Gago and Carozzi (2020) did not find any indication that female politicians in Spanish municipalities were more actively engaged in the implementation of gender-sensitive policies. Instead, their research reveals that right-wing political leaders exert a negative influence on the adoption of gender-specific policies. In a paper published in 2023, these scholars provided supporting evidence for their previous findings that the gender of political leaders matters less than their political ideology in implementing gender-sensitive policies (Carozzi & Gago, 2023).

By contrast, Jovani, Subono, and Suyanto (2020) found that female legislative members in East Nusa Tenggara introduced more gender-responsive policies and allocated more budgets for gender issues. Costa, Sawer, and Sharp (2013) concluded that increased representation of women in parliament in Timor-Leste was crucial for passing a resolution on gender-responsive budgeting. Wang (2013) demonstrated the positive effect of women in the Ugandan parliament on the passage of the Domestic Violence Act in 2010, promoting gender equality. This contrasts with the experiences of other African countries, where no positive correlation has been found between women in parliament and policy output (Devlin & Elgie, 2008).

Other studies examined the role of female leaders in the health sector. Female representation is crucial to reduce gender bias and discrimination in healthcare. Bhalotra and Clots-Figueras (2014) found a causal relationship between female political representation and neonatal survival, assuming that female leaders were more likely to promote infant health-related policies. In a set of randomized trials, Downs, Reif, Hokororo, and Fitzgerald (2014) showed that female leaders implemented different policies, focusing on children and women. Coscieme et al. (2020) found that during the COVID-19 crisis, countries led by female leaders performed better in terms of total deaths and daily peaks, attributing their success to leaders’ focus on social equality, human needs, and generosity. However, Windsor et al. (2020) found little evidence of COVID-19 fatality differences between countries led by female and male leaders.

Another body of research has delved deeply into how descriptive representation affects the interests of those being represented, either positively or negatively. Studies on women and politics in Latin America have found that numbers alone are not sufficient to guarantee gender-sensitive policies (Peschard, 2003; Sacchet, 2008). Sacchet (2008) argued that female political coordination, rather than the number of women in parliament, is crucial for the high representation of women in Brazil’s national policies². Peschard (2003) emphasized the need for a large number of female politicians accompanied by a more equal social environment in terms of female and male education, healthcare, and employment. Zetterberg (2009) criticized gender quotas for disempowering women because of factors that limit their actions in parliament.

Alternatively, Piscopo (2014), using critical mass theory³, found that an increase in the absolute number of female politicians had an impact on promoting gender-friendly policies. This is due to the fact that women have traditionally been a marginalized group, which influences the policymaking process (O’Brien & Piscopa, 2019). Jones (1996) argued that the gender of political representatives affects policies related to women’s rights, family issues, and children’s issues in Argentina. Cunial (2021) also provided new evidence linking an increase in female political participation to a reduction in the infant mortality rate in Argentina. This study aimed to contribute to the existing body of literature on the effect of the descriptive representation of women in increasing their substantive representation by examining the gender-sensitive policies introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This study attempts to understand the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation of women by examining the proportion of females participating in politics and its effects on policy outcomes. In particular, their participation has contributed to gender-sensitive measures in the context of the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic. During the first year since COVID-19 was first introduced, studies have found the negative impacts that this pandemic has had on women, especially in terms of economic impact, health, unpaid work, and violence against women and girls (VAWG) during lockdowns (Azcona et al., 2020). In this regard, we propose the following basic argument. Due to the negative side effects of COVID-19 on women, countries that have more women in parliament––descriptive representation––tend to introduce more gender-sensitive policies-substantive representation.

For this research, we used cross-sectional data retrieved from the UNDP and UN Women’s COVID-19 Global Gender Response Tracker Policy Measures Dataset, updated on November 11, 2021. The analyzed period ranged from January 4, 2020, to October 5, 2021, during the pandemic. The dataset includes policies from 224 countries. However, this study draws upon 179 country observations for its analysis, with 45 countries excluded either because of insufficient data availability or the absence of gender-sensitive policies within those countries.

The dataset compiles COVID-19 response policies in the areas of economic and financial support, the labor market, social protection, and violence against women. Of the 4,968 policies, 1,605 were classified as gender sensitive, meaning that they directly target women’s needs, such as economic security, unpaid care, and protection from physical violence (Table 1).

Table 1 summarizes the non-gendered and gender-sensitive policies in the COVID-19 Global Gender Response Tracker Policy Measures Dataset. Of the 4,968 policies, 17% were gender sensitive, with the largest share being violence against women. Notably, 20% of the social protection policies and 14% of the economic support policies were gender sensitive.

Table 2 presents descriptive statistics for the number of policies introduced by each of the 179 countries. Gender-sensitive policies were further categorized into the following subcategories: business and entrepreneurs, labor market, social protection, VAWG, women’s economic security, and policies directly supporting unpaid care. The main dependent variables in this study are the total number of gender-sensitive policies and their subcategories, as the aim is to examine which countries have implemented the most gender-sensitive policies.

On average, these countries have introduced 8.64 gender-sensitive policies (Table 2). However, there is a large variation in the number of gender-sensitive policies among countries, with some countries having only one, whereas another country (Argentina) has 36. The standard deviation was 6.32. For each of the policy categories, business, labor market, social protection, and VAWG––the average number of policies introduced was 0.78, 0.84, 2.37, and 4.65, respectively––with the highest being for policies targeting VAWG. However, there was more variation among countries in terms of policy implementation than in the other three categories.

Our main independent variable was the proportion of seats held by women in national parliament. Data for this variable were obtained from the World Bank database for the latest year available for the countries of interest. According to the World Bank, this variable is the percentage of parliamentary seats held by women within a single chamber or lower. We found large variations in the main independent variables for the countries in our sample. The standard deviation for the proportion of women in national parliaments is 12.26. While there are three countries with no women in their national parliaments––Micronesia, Papua New Guinea, and Vanuatu––on the opposite pole, Rwanda has up to 61.25%.

Figure 1 shows the relationship between the percentage of women in the national parliament and the total number of gender-sensitive policies introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic. We observed a positive correlation between these two variables. For this study, we have added the labels of countries with both high gender-sensitive policies and a high proportion of women participating in politics (Argentina, Costa Rica, South Africa, Belgium, Bolivia, Mexico, and Spain, among others), which are located on the upper right side of the scatter plot. Additionally, we labeled those with a high number of gender-sensitive policies introduced but with low female political participation (Chile and Colombia). In the case of Rwanda and Cuba, we observed a high proportion of seats held by women in parliament, yet these two countries failed to introduce a significant number of gender-sensitive policies during the period analyzed. Interestingly, these findings illustrate the variation that exists within Latin America, either supporting or contradicting our hypotheses. The results of these preliminary findings will be briefly addressed in the following sections to provide the groundwork for further research on the causal relationship between women in parliament and gender sensitivity in policymaking.

Figure 1. 
Correlation between proportion of seats held by women in national parliaments (%) and gender-sensitive policies introduced during COVID-19.

Figure 2 shows the relationship between the proportion of women in national parliaments and the number of gender-sensitive policies in the following subcategories: business and entrepreneurs, labor market, social VAWG, and policies dealing with women’s economic security and unpaid care. The countries in our sample vary in the number and type of policies introduced. However, the findings show a positive and significant correlation for all categories, except for policies destined for businesses and entrepreneurs, which show a negative correlation. These preliminary results suggest that countries with a high proportion of women in parliament have, in fact, introduced a high number of policies in the areas of labor market, social protection, VAWG, and unpaid care during the period studied.

Figure 2. 
Correlation between the proportion of seats held by women in national parliaments (%) and the subcategories

The results of the empirical analysis showed that countries with a high proportion of women in parliament introduced more gender-sensitive policies during the pandemic. This finding supports the idea that a higher representation of women in parliament leads to greater consideration of gender issues and the implementation of laws that better address women’s needs and rights. Furthermore, it was observed that Latin American countries introduced a larger number of gender-sensitive policies than other regions, which may be due to a more severe or disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on women in the region or a lack of institutional preparedness.

The regression models for specific policy categories indicate that after controlling for other factors, Latin American countries have adopted more gender-sensitive policies in the areas of the labor market, violence against women, and women’s economic security. However, few policies directly supporting unpaid care have been introduced. This highlights the complexity and variability of gender-sensitive policy responses during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The high number of gender-sensitive policies in the labor market and women’s economic security may be due to the disproportionate loss of jobs and income experienced by women in Latin America during the pandemic. According to a report published by the United Nations ECLAC, the pandemic has had a disproportionate impact on women’s employment in the region, as women are overrepresented in industries such as tourism and hospitality that were severely affected. This has led to greater job losses and income insecurity among women. Furthermore, the increase in unpaid care work within households because of social distancing measures has added to the burden on women and had a negative impact on their participation in the labor force (OECD, 2020).

The large number of policies related to violence against women in this region may be partly attributable to the high number of domestic workers. Domestic workers often have limited access to resources and support networks, particularly during a pandemic. They may also have limited legal protection and may be afraid to report abuse for fear of losing their jobs or facing retaliation (ECLAC, 2020). Power imbalances in employer–employee relationships also make it difficult for domestic workers to assert their rights and escape abusive situations, making them more vulnerable to domestic violence. Therefore, laws and policies have been implemented to protect women from violence.

The low number of policies supporting unpaid care work may be due to the traditional view that care work, such as cooking, cleaning, and caring for children and elderly relatives, is a private and personal responsibility rather than a public issue. This has limited the recognition of the importance of unpaid care and the need for policies to support it. In many Latin American countries, traditional gender norms assign women a primary role in care work, perpetuating the idea that it is not a public issue requiring policy intervention.

As shown in Figure 3, the results of the regression analysis indicate that most Latin American countries fit the model reasonably well; however, there are two deviations: Argentina and Cuba. Although both countries have a high proportion of women in national parliaments (40.9% in Argentina and 53.2% in Cuba), Argentina has introduced a greater number of gender-sensitive policies in comparison to other neighboring countries and the total samples analyzed. However, despite having the highest proportion of women in national parliaments, Cuba has implemented only eight gender-sensitive policies. The following section offers potential, but not definitive, explanations for this deviation from the regression model’s predictions for the two countries.

Figure 3. 
Regression results of LAC countries by number of gender-sensitive policies introduced.

The higher proportion of women in parliament and the Global Freedom Index score contributed positively to the introduction of gender-sensitive policies in Argentina. Based on the results of our analysis, Argentina is a country in which the descriptive representation of women has increased substantially. However, these variables alone do not fully explain the large number of gender-sensitive policies in the country. Additional factors may play important roles.

In 1991, Argentina became the first country to introduce the National Electoral Quota (Law 24.012), with strong support from then-President Carlos Menem (Craske, 1999). This quota law was the first of its kind in Latin America and led other countries to follow. The Ley de Cupos (Law of Quotas) increased female political participation from an average of 4% in 1983-1991 to 28% in 1995. This law played a significant role in increasing women’s political representation by mandating that a minimum of 30% of women be elected and placed in electable positions (Jones & Navia, 1999). However, some scholars have criticized the impact of increased representation on overall society and the implementation of gender-sensitive policies in the region (Peschard, 2003; Sacchet, 2008; Zetterberg, 2009).

The increase in female representation in Argentina’s politics can be attributed to several factors, including the gender quota law (Jones & Navia, 1999). According to Jones and Navia (1999), the closed-list system and a mandate for women elected to be placed in “electable” positions, not just “ornamental positions,” helped increase female representation. Additionally, the collective action of women’s groups in Argentina, such as the National Women’s Council and the President’s Cabinet of Women Advisors, is said to have had a positive impact on women’s political representation (Jones & Navia, 1999).

Another significant event that has driven the women’s rights movement in Argentina was the murder of 14-year-old Chiara Páez, who was pregnant at the time and was killed by her boyfriend. The Ni Una Menos (Not One Less) movement was formed after her death and placed gender issues at the forefront of Argentine politics. This movement, which initially aimed to address the issue of femicides in the region, expanded to encompass reproductive health and rights. It is credited with contributing to the Senate’s passing of the Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy Bill in 2020.

The actual number of gender-sensitive policies introduced in Cuba was far lower than that predicted by the regression model. The proportion of women in parliament is a contributing factor; however, other factors seem to negatively affect the substantive representation of women in Cuba.

Although Cuba does not have a gender quota law, women still have high political representation, with 53% of parliamentary seats held by women. However, high representation does not necessarily lead to increased female empowerment. Luciak (2005) argued that a glass ceiling exists for women rising to key positions of power, such as the Council of States.

The lack of political participation by women in Cuba compared to Argentina may be due to the absence of legislation or institutions that specifically empower women in politics or the political system itself. Cultural factors, such as patriarchal values and the traditional role of women as caretakers, have also been cited as obstacles to women’s political participation. The National Survey for Gender Equality in 2016 found that women in Cuba continue to perform most of their domestic work and care for children and family members. Luciak (2005) found that this high level of domestic work reduced women’s participation in politics due to the time constraints involved. This situation was exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially for women in rural areas and specific ethnic groups (Maqueira & Torres, 2021). The example of Cuba clearly shows that the capacity required to increase the substantive representation of women varies significantly by country and region, making it difficult to generalize a sole strategy that will be beneficial for enhancing women’s power.