Title

性別相關制度與政策對於兩性政治涉入的效果:33個民主國家的經驗研究

Translated Titles

The Effects of Gender-Related Institutions and Policies on Political Engagement: An Empirical Study of 33 Democracies

DOI

10.30390/ISC.201312_52(4).0002

Authors

李冠成(Kuan-Chen Lee);楊婉瑩(Wan-Ying Yang)

Key Words

政治涉入 ; 性別平等政策 ; 性別差異政策 ; 轉化政策 ; 世界價值調查 ; political engagement ; gender equality policy ; gender difference policy ; transformation policy ; world values survey

PublicationName

問題與研究

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

52卷4期(2013 / 12 / 01)

Page #

33 - 69

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

本研究試圖由比較制度的角度,來解釋兩性政治涉入的差異。制度內化並規範了特定的性別關係與安排,透過認可特定價值以及資源分配,對於兩性政治涉入產生不同的影響。本研究將具有性別規範意涵的制度/政策,區分為平等、差異、以及轉化三種類型,並利用2005年第五波「世界價值調查」(world values survey, WVS)的資料,來檢視不同的制度對於男女政治涉入的不同影響。針對33個民主國家的制度分類和個體資料分析,我們利用階層線性模型來估算政策對於男性及女性政治涉入的邊際效果,分析結果顯示:平等政策強調性別中立的相同機會,如同工同酬政策,對男性和女性的政治涉入並未產生顯著影響;肯認差異政策強調兩性差異的結果平等,如配額制度對於兩性的政治涉入影響則是相對負向或是不顯著的;而轉化政策試圖改變兩性分工的傳統性別關係,如父母共享有給薪的親職假,相較於無親職假規定,則是同時提升了男性和女性的政治涉入感。

English Abstract

This study attempts to explain the gender differences in political engagement with a comparative institutional perspective. Institution internalizes and regulates the gender relationship through value recognition and resource redistribution, thereby inducing different political attitudes and behaviors among men and women. We first categorize the gender-related institution/policy into equality, difference, and transformation, then utilize the fifth wave of World Values Survey data of 2005, to examine the varied impacts of different gender institutions upon the political engagement of men and women. Comparing the gender-related institutions and individual-level data across 33 democratic countries, the hierarchical linear model is applied to infer the marginal effects of different institution/policy on the political engagement of both sexes. The results of the analysis show: first, the equality policy which emphasizes equal opportunity in a gender-neutral way, e.g. equal-pay policies, has no significant impact on the political engagement of both sexes. The difference policy which pursues the outcome equality by taking gender differences into account, e.g. gender quota policies, has negative or insignificant effects on the political engagement of women and men. Finally, the transformation policy which attempts to change the traditional gender roles and relationships, e.g. parental leave policies, increases simultaneously the political engagement of both sexes.

Topic Category 社會科學 > 政治學
Reference
  1. 彭渰雯、李秉叡(2007)。比利時的性別主流化。臺灣國際研究季刊,3(4),111-134。
    連結:
  2. 黃信豪(2007)。量化研究的比較問題邏輯:因果異質性與縣市長選舉投票模型的建立。問題與研究,46(3),125-154。
    連結:
  3. 楊婉瑩(2007)。政治參與的性別差異。選舉研究,14(2),59-69。
    連結:
  4. 中華民國行政院勞委會(http://www.bli.gov.tw,瀏覽日期:2011 年12 月16 日)。
  5. 世界銀行(http://wbl.worldbank.org/GenderLibrary/elibrary.aspx?libid=17,瀏覽日期:2011 年,11 月6 日)。
  6. 自由之家(http://www.freedomhouse.org/reports,瀏覽日期,2011 年7 月20 日)。
  7. 消除對婦女一切歧視公約,中文版公約內容(http://gender.wrp.org.tw/Page_Show.asp?Page_ID=341,瀏覽時間2011 年11 月16 日)。
  8. 消除對婦女一切歧視公約,英文版公約內容(http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/text/econvention.htm,瀏覽日期:2011 年11 月16 日。)
  9. 聯合國資料庫,簽署及批准「消除對婦女一切歧視公約」國家(http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-8&chapter=4&lang=en,瀏覽日期:2011 年11 月16 日)。
  10. Kam, Cindy and Robert Franzese, Modeling and Interpreting Interactive Hypotheses in Regression Analysis: A Brief Refresher and Some Practical Advice, unpublished manuscript(Michigan: University of Michigan, 2003).
  11. 全球性別配額制度計畫資料庫(quota project: global database of quotas for women)(http://www.quotaproject.org/aboutProject.cfm#quotas,瀏覽日期:2011 年12 月16日)。http://www.quotaproject.org/aboutProject.cfm#quotas
  12. 國際勞工組織(ILO)母職保護規定的資料庫網站(http://www.ilo.org/dyn/travail/travmain.byCountry2,瀏覽日期:2011 年12 月16 日)。http://www.ilo.org/dyn/travail/travmain.byCountry2
  13. Atkeson, Lonna R.(2003).Not All Cues are Created Equal: The Conditional Impact of Female Candidates on Political Engagement.The Journal of Politics,65(4),1040-1061.
  14. Beckwith, Karen(1986).American Women and Political Participation.Santa Barbara:Greenwood Press.
  15. Brambor, Thomas,Clark, William R.,Golder, Matt(2006).Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses.Political Analysis,14(1),63-82.
  16. Burns, Nancy(2007).Gender in the Aggregate, Gender in the Individual, Gender and Political Action.Gender & Politics,3(1),104-124.
  17. Burns, Nancy,Schlozman, Kathy L.,Verba, Sidney(2001).The Private Roots of Public Action: Gender, Equality, and Political Participation.Cambridge, Mass.:Harvard University Press.
  18. Campbell, Andrea L.(2003).How Policies Make Citizens: Senior Political Activism and the American Welfare State.New Jersey:Princeton University Press.
  19. Chang, Mariko L.(2000).The Evolution of Sex Segregation Regimes.American Journal of Sociology,105(6),1658-1701.
  20. Chappell, Louise(2010).Comparative Gender and Institutions: Directions for Research.Perspectives on Politics,8(1),183-189.
  21. Chappell, Louise(2006).Comparing Political Institutions: Revealing the Gendered Logic of Appropriateness.Politics & Gender,2(2),223-234.
  22. Christy, Carol(1987).Sex Difference in Political Participation: Processes of Change in 14 Nations.New York:Praeger.
  23. Collins, Patricia H.(1998).It's All in the Family: Intersections of Gender, Race, and Nation.Hypatia,13(3),62-82.
  24. Crenshaw, Kimberle(1989).Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics.University of Chicago Legal Forum,139,139-167.
  25. Dahlerup, Drude(ed.)(2006).Women, quotas and politics.London:Routledge.
  26. Dahlerup, Drude,Freidenvall, Lenita(2005).Quotas as a 'Fast Track' to Equal Political Representation for Women. Why Scandinavia is No Longer the Model.International Feminist Journal of Politics,7(1),26-48.
  27. Dalton, Russel J.,Anderson, Christopher(2011).Citizens, Context, and Choice: How Context Shapes Citizens' Electoral Choice.New York:Oxford University Press.
  28. Dolan, Kathleen(2006).Symbolic Mobilization?: The Impact of Candidate Sex in American Elections.American Politics Research,34(6),687-704.
  29. Fraser, Nancy(1996).Social Justice in the Age of Identity Politics: Redistribution, Recognition, and Participation.The Tanner Lecture on Human Right,Standford, LA.:
  30. Fraser, Nancy(1994).After the Family Wage: Gender Equity and the Welfare State.Political Theory,22(4),591-618.
  31. Fuwa, Makiko,Cohen, Philip N.(2007).House Work and Social Policy.Social Science Research,36(2),512-530.
  32. Hansen, Susan B.(1997).Talking about Politics: Gender and Contextual Effects on Political Proselytizing.The Journal of Politics,59(1),73-103.
  33. Hobson, Barbara(ed.)(2002).Making Men into Fathers: Men, Masculinities and the Socail Politics of Fatherhood.UK:Cambridge University Press.
  34. Inglehart, Ronald,Norris, Pippa(2003).Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the World.Cambridge, U.K.:Cambridge University Press.
  35. Jennings, Kent M.,Niemi, Richard(1981).Generations and Politics: A Panel Study of Young Adults and Their Parents.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
  36. Karp, Jeffrey A.,Banducci, Susan A.(2008).When Politics is Not Just a Man's Game: Women's Representation and Political Engagement.Electoral Studies,27(1),105-115.
  37. Kittilson, Miki C.(2010).Comparing Gender, Institutions and Political Behavior: Toward an Integrated Theoretical Framework.Perspectives on Politics,8(1),217-222.
  38. Kittilson, Miki C.(2008).Representing Women: The Adoption of Family Leave in Comparative Perspective.Journal of Politics,70(2),323-334.
  39. Kittilson, Miki C.,Schwindt-Bayer, Leslie(2010).Engaging Citizens: The Role of Power-Sharing Institutions.The Journal of Politics,72(4),990-1002.
  40. Korpi, Walter,Ferrarini, Tommy,Englund, Stefan(2009).Egalitarian Gender Paradise Lost? Re-examining Gender Inequalities in Different Types of Welfare States.EMPLOY-FAMNET Workshop Equalsoc conference,Berlin:
  41. Lorber, Judith(ed.),Hess, Beth(ed.)(1999).Revisioning Gender.London:Sage.
  42. Lovenduski, Joni(1998).Gendering Research in Political Science.Annual Review of Political Science,1,333-356.
  43. Lovenduski, Joni,Norris, Pippa(1993).Gender and Party Politics.London:Sage.
  44. March, James G.,Olsen, Johan P.(1989).Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics.New York:The Free Press.
  45. McDonagh, Eileen(2010).It Takes a State: A Policy Feedback Model of Women's Political Representation.Perspectives on Politics,8(1),69-91.
  46. Mettler, Suzanne(2002).Bringing the State Back in to Civic Engagement: Policy Feedback Effects of the G.I. Bill for World War II Veterans.American Political Science Review,96(2),351-365.
  47. Mettler, Suzanne,Soss, Joe(2004).The Consequences of Public Policy for Democratic Citizenship: Bridging Policy Studies and Mass Politics.Perspectives on Politics,2(1),55-73.
  48. Nanivadekar, Medha(2006).Are Quotas a Good Idea? The Indian Experience with Reserved Seats for Women.Politics & Gender,2,119-128.
  49. Norris, Pippa(2008).Driving Democracy: Do Power-Sharing Institutions Work?.New York:Cambridge University Press.
  50. Philips, Anne(ed.)(1998).Feminism and Politics.New York:Oxford University Press.
  51. Phillips, Anne(1995).The politics of presence.Oxford, UK:Clarendon.
  52. Pierson, Paul(1993).When Effect Becomes Cause: Policy Feedback and Political Change.World Politics,45(4),595-628.
  53. Rabe-Hesketh, Sophia,Skrondal, Anders(2008).Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata.College Station:Stata Press.
  54. Raudenbush, Stephen W.,Bryk, Anthony S.(2002).Hierarchical Linear Models: Application and Data Analysis Methods.Thousand Oaks:Sage.
  55. Rees, Teresa(2005).Reflections on the Uneven Development of Gender Mainstreaming in Europe.International Feminist Journal of Politics,7(4),555-574.
  56. Sacchet, Teresa(2008).Beyond Numbers: The Impact of Gender Quotas in Latin America.International Feminist Journal of Politics,10(3),369-386.
  57. Sainsbury, Diane(ed.)(1994).Gendering Welfare States.UK:Sage Publication.
  58. Schwindt-Bayer, Leslie A.(2009).Making Quotas Work: The Effect of Gender Quota Laws On the Election of Women.Legislative Studies Quarterly,34(1),5-28.
  59. Schwindt-Bayer, Leslie A.,Mishler, William(2005).An Integrated Model of Women's Representation.Journal of Politics,67(2),407-428.
  60. Soss, Joe,Schram, Sanford F.(2007).A Public Transformed: Welfare Reform as Policy Feedback.American Political Science Review,101(1),111-127.
  61. Squires, Judith(2005).Is Mainstreaming Transformative? Theorizing Mainstreaming in the Context of Diversity and Deliberation.Social Politics,12(3),366-388.
  62. Stoker, Laura,Jennings, Kent M.(1995).Life-cycle Transitions and Political Participation: The Case of Marriage.American Political Science Review,89(2),421-433.
  63. True, Jacqui,Mintrom, Michael(2001).Transnational Networks and Policy Diffusion: The Case of Gender Mainstreaming.International Studies Quarterly,45(1),27-57.
  64. Verba, Sidney,Nie, Norman H.(1972).Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality.New York:Harper & Row.
  65. Verba, Sidney,Nie, Norman,Kim, Jae-on(1978).Participation and Political Equality.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
  66. Walby, Sylvia(2005).Gender Mainstreaming: Productive Tensions in Theory and Practice.Social Politics,12(3),321-343.
  67. Wilensky, Harold L.(2002).Rich Democracy: Political Economy, Public Policy, and Performance.Berkeley, Calif.:University of California.
  68. Zetterberg, Par(2009).Do Gender Quotas Foster Women's Political Engagement? Lessons from Latin America.Political Research Quarterly,62(4),715-730.
Times Cited
  1. 陳衍希(2016)。以空間分析探討政治捐獻的性別差異--以臺灣2012年總統選舉為例。臺灣大學國家發展研究所學位論文。2016。1-96。 
  2. 張詩予(2017)。青年世代選民政治參與之研究。淡江大學公共行政學系公共政策碩士在職專班學位論文。2017。1-102。