Ana Catalano Weeks, Ph.D.
a.c.weeks@bath.ac.uk
Associate Professor
University of Bath
About Me:
I am a Senior Lecturer (Associate Professor) in Comparative Politics at Department of Politics, Languages, & International Studies at the University of Bath. Before joining Bath, I was a College Fellow in the Department of Government at Harvard University and a Research Fellow in the Women and Public Policy Program (WAPPP) at the Harvard Kennedy School. I have a PhD in Political Science from Harvard University, an MSc in Comparative Politics (Europe) from the LSE, and an AB in Government from Dartmouth College.
My research interests include gender and politics, political representation, gender quotas, and political parties, with a regional concentration in Western Europe. I am the author of Making Gender Salient: From Gender Quota Laws to Policy, published by Cambridge University Press in 2022. My work has appeared in journals including the American Journal of Political Science, American Political Science Review, Comparative Political Studies, European Political Science Review, and Political Behavior. For more, please see my website.
Research Interests
Gender and Politics
Political Parties and Interest Groups
Representation and Electoral Systems
European Politics
Public Policy
Gender Quotas
Gender Gap
Work-family Policies
Gender And Ambition
Mental Load
Countries of Interest
United States
United Kingdom
Italy
Portugal
Publications:
Journal Articles:
Radical right populist (RRP) parties are often described as Männerparteien, predominantly led by, represented by, and supported by men. Yet recently, these parties have elected more women. Under what conditions do we see this increase in women MPs? This paper presents a novel argument of strategic descriptive representation: electorally struggling RRP parties with large gender gaps in voter support increase their proportion of women MPs to attract previously untapped women voters. To test this argument, we develop the most comprehensive dataset to date on women MPs and gender differences in voter support across Europe and over time, covering 187 parties in 30 countries from 1985 to 2018. Our analyses confirm that RRP parties engage in strategic descriptive representation when they are both struggling electorally and suffering from a gender gap in support. Additional models reveal that this tactic is largely unique to RRP parties.
Far right parties often attack efforts to promote equality for historically marginalized groups like women, ethnic minorities, and LGBTQIA+ people, suggesting that “identity politics” takes away valuable resources from native working class populations. Do mainstream parties respond to far right challenges by shifting which groups in society they give attention to? Our main argument is that mainstream parties facing a rising far right party accommodate by de-emphasizing historically marginalized identity groups and emphasizing the working class. Using a mixed methods approach, we demonstrate that mainstream parties threatened by the far right shift positive attention away from non-economic identity groups and towards the working class. Their response is conditioned by party ideology (Social Democratic parties driving the decline) and electoral fortunes. Qualitative evidence from Denmark and Sweden sheds light on how far right party growth is shifting the content of manifestos: we find that mainstream parties threatened by the far right increasingly sideline ascriptive identity-related issues. When they do give attention to identity groups like women, it is often to promote nativist, anti-immigrant agendas.
Do corporate board gender quotas increase attention to gender equality in workplace policies? Existing research examines the link between quotas, financial performance, and women's promotion, but we lack an understanding of how quotas impact the structural determinants of gender imbalance in the workplace. We compare the case of Italy, which adopted a quota in 2011, to a counterfactual country with no quota: Greece. Using a difference-in-difference approach, we analyze the corporate reports of publicly listed companies in both countries over time. We find a 50% increase in post-quota Italian companies' attention to gender equality issues, especially relating to leadership and family care. This increase is not exclusively driven by the share of women on boards, suggesting that quotas influence the importance that both women and men within firms give to gender equality. Qualitative analysis finds that observed changes are not window dressing: companies developed new equality initiatives after the quota.
Are ambitious women punished in politics? Building on literature from negotiation, we argue that women candidates who are perceived to be ambitious are more likely to face social backlash. We first explore what the term ‘ambitious’ means to voters, developing and testing a new multidimensional concept of perceived ambition, from desire to run for higher office to scope of agenda. We then test the link between these ‘ambitious’ traits and voter support for candidates using five conjoint experiments in two countries, the U.S. and the U.K. Our results show that while ambitious women are not penalized overall, the aggregate results hide differences in taste for ambitious women across parties. We find that in the U.S. left-wing voters are more likely to support women with progressive ambition than right-wing voters (difference of 7% points), while in the U.K. parties are not as divided. Our results suggest that ambitious women candidates in the U.S. face bias particularly in the context of non-partisan races (like primaries and local elections), when voters cannot rely on party labels to make decisions.
In light of increasing numbers of women in politics, extant research has examined the role of women in the parliamentary party on agenda-setting. This paper complements that literature by exploring the effect of a gendered institution theorized to promote both numbers of women and awareness of women’s interests: gender quota laws. I suggest that after a quota law, parties could have incentives to either reduce (backlash effect) or increase (salience effect) attention to women’s policy concerns. Using matching and regression methods with a panel data set of parties in advanced democracies, I find that parties in countries that implement a quota law devote more attention to social justice issues in their manifestos than similar parties in countries without a quota. Furthermore, the paper shows that this effect is driven entirely by the law itself. Contrary to expectations, quota laws are not associated with increases in women in my (short-term) sample; it is thus no surprise that no evidence of an indirect effect through numbers of women is found. I interpret the findings as evidence of quota contagion, whereby quotas cue party leaders to compete on gender equality issues.
In nearly every case of quota law adoption, the support of party elites is critical. But this raises a puzzle: What can motivate predominantly male elites to put these policies in place? This article uses a comparison of two sets of matched pair countries—similar on background characteristics except for quota adoption—to explore the motivations and role of male party elites in quota reform. The cases of Belgium and Austria, and Portugal and Italy highlight two key explanations. First, quota laws are likely to be supported and passed by parties threatened by a new, more progressive competitor on the left, as a way of claiming women voters back from the encroaching party (interparty competition). Second, quotas can be employed as a mechanism for party elites to gain power over candidate selection within their own parties in the face of entrenched local party monopolies (intraparty competition).
This article addresses concerns that candidates nominated because of gender quota laws will be less qualified for office. While questions of candidate quality have long been relevant to legislative behavior, quota laws requiring a certain percentage of candidates for national office to be women have generated renewed interest. Gender quotas are often perceived to reduce the scope of political competition. By putting gender identity center stage, they preclude the possibility that elections will be based on ‘ideas’ or ‘merit’ alone. Other electoral rules that restrict candidate selection, such as the centralization of candidate selection common in closed list PR systems, have been found to reduce the quality of candidates. Rules that open selection, such as primaries, result in higher quality candidates. We exploit the institutional design of Italy’s mixed electoral system in 1994, where quotas were applied only to the PR portion of the list, to compare the qualifications of men, women, and ‘quota women’. We estimate regressions on several measures of deputies’ qualifications for office and performance in office. We find that unlike other rules limiting candidate selection, quotas are not associated with lower quality on most measures of qualifications. In fact, quota women have more local government experience than other legislators and lower rates of absenteeism than their male counterparts. Contrary to critics, quota laws may have a positive impact on legislator quality. Once the quota law was rescinded, quota women were less likely to be re-elected than non-quota women or men, which suggests that discrimination – not qualification – limits women’s status as candidates
This study undertakes a quantitative analysis of second reading bill debates in the British House of Commons. The analysis considers debates on health care (a “soft” policy area considered “women’s interest”) and finance (a “hard” policy area considered more masculine) over a two-year period of the current legislature (May 2005–August 2007). It addresses two questions. First, does sex makes a difference in the likelihood of an MP contributing his or her voice to the formal policy discussion of different issue areas? Second, if sex does make a difference, does this indicate that women are using debate as a forum to achieve greater substantive representation in areas of perceived women’s interests? The results of analyzing representatives’ participation in health care and finance second-reading bill debates in the British House of Commons 2005–2007 give additional, empirical proof to the growing consensus that women MPs are making a difference for women’s substantive representation. Sex makes a difference in the likelihood of an MP contributing his or her voice to the formal policy discussion of different issue areas. Women MPs participate disproportionately in debates on issues of health care, suggesting that women MPs are using debate as a forum to achieve greater substantive representation in areas of perceived “women’s interest.”
Books Written:
Do gender quota laws – policies that mandate women's inclusion on parties' candidate slates – affect policy outcomes? Making Gender Salient tackles this crucial question by offering a new theory to understand when and how gender quota laws impact policy. Drawing on cross-national data from high-income democracies and a mixed-methods research design, the book argues that quotas lead to policy change for issues characterized by a gender gap in preferences, especially if these issues deviate from the usual left/right party policy divide. The book focuses on one such issue, work-family policies, and finds that quotas shift work-family policies in the direction of gender equality. Substantive chapters show that quotas make gender more salient by giving women louder voices within parties, providing access to powerful ministerial roles, and encouraging male party leaders to compete on previously marginalized issues. The book concludes that quotas are one important way of facilitating congruence between women's policy preferences and actual policy outcomes.
Media Appearances:
Radio Appearances:
- Would Theresa May Be in the same situation if she were a man?
Gender Quotas on the March: On this edition of Global Journalist, a look at gender quotas in international politics and whether they've worked as intended.
BBC GNS Interviews: 100 year anniversary of first woman MP being elected
Newspaper Quotes:
"Corporate board diversity quotas improve gender equity for lower-ranking women in the workforce too, according to new research"
Good news for Kamala Harris: Voters are fine with ambitious women. So why do party gatekeepers still care?
Ambition has always been 'ladylike'
"American voters don’t hate ambitious women, after all"
Why male political leaders pursue gender quota laws: A new study looks at the motivations of those who enact such laws and finds that there is often a surprising strategic purpose at play
FEMMINISMO, UN’IDEA CHE TENTA I PROGRESSISTI (MA NON IN ITALIA)