Abstract
This comparative analysis investigates formal parliamentary bodies ‘for women’ and informal networks and parliamentary groups (‘gender equality bodies’). These are evaluated to determine the extent to which they contribute to a ‘good’ collective process of women's substantive representation. Focusing on three countries, Belgium, the United Kingdom (UK) and New Zealand (NZ), we explore which venues are responsive to women and which are inclusive of a wide variety of claims. The UK and NZ cases score better than Belgium on the responsiveness criterion given that linkage with the women's movement is more or less guaranteed while Belgium and the UK appear more promising on inclusiveness, predominantly because of their rules concerning the composition of the gender equality bodies. However, in none do the various bodies constitute a strong site for quality substantive representation of women (SRW). Rather, it appears SRW remains dependent on the role of critical actors.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
