Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Report on the 2007, 2010, and 2013 municipal elections Prepared for St. Albert Mayor Nolan Crouse January 2014 Angelia Wagner
The project
Activists and scholars alike have been concerned for decades about the lack of gender parity in Canadas federal, provincial, and municipal legislative bodies. In recent years, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, Equal Voice, and the Alberta Urban Municipalities Associations Women in Municipal Government committee have been active in encouraging more women to run at the municipal level. To compliment his own efforts in this area, St. Albert Mayor Nolan Crouse commissioned a report on the current state of womens representation on Alberta municipal councils. The analysis presented here is based on a series of documents posted online by Alberta Municipal Affairs and downloaded by the author at the time of the 2007, 2010, and 2013 civic elections. The report goes beyond a simple accounting of how many women have run and won office in the three most recent elections to offer a deeper analysis that looks at their candidacy in different types of municipalities and for different types of municipal jobs. The goal is to provide a longitudinal analysis of the progress of women in Alberta municipal politics. Angelia Wagner is a PhD candidate in the University of Albertas department of political science. She is currently writing her dissertation on the political communication strategies of women and men municipal candidates in Canada.
Table of contents
1. Rates of candidacy .................................................. 2. Where are women running? ................................ 3. What offices do women seek? ............................ 4. Rates of incumbency .............................................. 5. Rates of success ........................................................ 6. Electoral success by municipality type ............ 7. Electoral success by office type .......................... 8. Methodology ............................................................ 3 5 6 6 7 11 12 13
Rates of candidacy
Women make up about 49 percent of the Alberta population (Statistics Canada, 2012)1 but only about a quarter of all those seeking municipal office in the last three elections. As Figure 1 shows, womens rate of candidacy has been slowly inching forward in the last six years. Women comprised 24.6% of candidates in 2007, 25.3% in 2010, and 27% in 2013 for an overall rate of 25.7%. In raw numbers, 659 women across the province put their name on the municipal ballot in 2007, 747 in 2010, and 823 in 2013 for an overall total of 2,229 out of almost 8,700 candidates.2 In comparison to the provincial average, women have been more active as municipal candidates in the 24 member municipalities of the Capital Region Board in the Edmonton area. Women were 24% of the candidates in the region in 2007, 27.4% in 2010, and 31.9% in 2013 for a three-election average of 28.1%. Table 1 (on the next page) provides a breakdown of candidacy rates for women and men in each member municipality.
Figure 1: Summary of women and mens rate of candidacy both overall and in the 2007, 2010, and 2013 Alberta municipal elections, by percentage
Women Men
2007 election
80
2010 election
80
75.4%
74.7%
70
70
60
60
50
50
Won 64%
25.3%
40
40
30
24.6%
30
20
20
10
10
2013 election
80
All elections
80
73.0%
74.3%
70
70
60
60
50
50
40
40
30
27.0%
30
25.7%
20
20
10
10
The lack of significant progress in womens participation in Alberta municipal elections is in keeping with trends at the provincial and federal level in Canada. In elections held between 2009 and 2012, womens rate of candidacy ranged from a low of 20% in Yukon to 34% in Quebec. Women constituted 31% of the political hopefuls in the 2011 federal election.3
0
0
Statistics Canada. 2012. Population by sex and age group, by province and territory (Proportion of, female). http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/ cst01/demo31f-eng.htm. Accessed November 16, 2013. 2 The candidate lists provided by Alberta Municipal Affairs for each election are extensive but not necessarily exhaustive; see the Methodology section for a fuller explanation. 3 Trimble, Linda, Manon Tremblay, and Jane Arscott. 2013. Conclusion: A few more women. In Stalled: The Representation of Women in Canadian Governments, eds. Linda Trimble, Jane Arscott, and Manon Tremblay. Vancouver: UBC Press, p. 297.
1
2010 Men Women 22.2% 33.3% 14.3% 25.0% 33.3% 20.3% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 36.4% 21.4% 43.8% 57.1% 50.0% 50.0% 42.9% 26.7% 18.2% 30.0% 33.3% 10.0% 37.5% 40.0% 20.0% 20.0% Men 77.8% 66.7% 85.7% 75.0% 66.7% 79.7% 91.7% 100.0% 100.0% 63.6% 78.6% 56.3% 42.9% 50.0% 50.0% 57.1% 73.3% 81.8% 70.0% 66.7% 90.0% 62.5% 60.0% 80.0% 80.0%
2013 Women 40.0% 20.0% 42.9% 44.4% 47.4% 21.5% 20.0% 33.3% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 47.1% 42.9% 40.0% 61.5% 42.9% 22.2% 36.4% 20.0% 29.2% 14.3% 33.3% 41.7% 40.0% 15.5% Men 60.0% 80.0% 57.1% 55.6% 52.6% 78.5% 80.0% 66.7% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 52.9% 57.1% 60.0% 38.5% 57.1% 77.8% 63.6% 80.0% 70.8% 85.7% 66.7% 58.3% 60.0% 84.5%
All Women 28.9% 22.2% 34.8% 37.0% 37.8% 22.5% 18.9% 23.1% 10.7% 26.7% 27.9% 41.7% 45.0% 38.5% 48.7% 40.9% 20.4% 21.2% 26.5% 27.0% 13.3% 37.5% 29.2% 33.3% 19.2% Men 71.1% 77.8% 65.2% 63.0% 62.2% 77.5% 81.1% 76.9% 89.3% 73.3% 72.1% 58.3% 55.0% 61.5% 51.3% 59.1% 79.6% 78.8% 73.5% 73.0% 86.7% 62.5% 70.8% 66.7% 80.8%
Women 21.4% 14.3% 44.4% 40.0% 22.2% 26.9% 30.0% 28.6% 8.3% 11.1% 21.4% 33.3% 33.3% 14.3% 33.3% 37.5% 12.5% 9.1% 28.6% 19.0% 14.3% 42.9% 0.0% 40.0% 22.0%
78.6% 85.7% 55.6% 60.0% 77.8% 73.1% 70.0% 71.4% 91.7% 88.9% 78.6% 66.7% 66.7% 85.7% 66.7% 62.5% 87.5% 90.9% 71.4% 81.0% 85.7% 57.1% 100.0% 60.0% 78.0%
Town of Gibbons Lamont County Town of Lamont City of Leduc Leduc County Town of Legal Town of Morinville Parkland County Town of Redwater City of St. Albert City of Spruce Grove Town of Stony Plain Strathcona County Sturgeon County Village of Thorsby Village of Wabamun Village of Warburg City of Calgary
2010
Women Sex Type Men Sex Type
2013
Women Sex Type Sex Men Type Women Sex Type
All
Men Sex Type
9.6% 21.8% 11.2% 78.2% 42.0% 26.5% 38.3% 73.5% 18.7% 17.6% 28.5% 82.4% 27.5% 32.0% 19.1% 68.0% 2.3% 20.5% 2.9% 79.5%
11.8% 21.7% 14.3% 78.3% 40.6% 27.6% 36.0% 72.4% 23.2% 21.8% 28.0% 78.2% 21.6% 29.9% 17.1% 70.1% 2.9% 17.7% 4.6% 82.3%
10.9% 23.1% 13.5% 76.9% 43.1% 31.7% 34.4% 68.3% 19.1% 20.8% 26.9% 79.2% 19.6% 32.1% 15.4% 67.9% 7.3% 21.6% 9.8% 78.4%
10.8% 22.2% 13.1% 77.8% 41.9% 28.6% 36.2% 71.4% 20.3% 20.2% 27.8% 79.8% 22.6% 31.3% 17.1% 68.7% 4.4% 20.4% 5.9% 79.6%
Note: The type column compares women and men within each type of municipality (i.e., the percentage of city candidates who were women and men) while the sex column examines the distribution of candidates across municipality types within each gender group (i.e., among women, the percentage who ran in cities as opposed to towns and so on). The other category includes specialized municipalities, special area boards, improvement districts, and summer villages. Figures might not add up to 100% due to rounding.
2007
Office sought Mayor Councillor Women Sex Office Sex Men Office
2010
Women Sex Office 8.4% 22.4% Men Sex Office 9.9% 77.6%
2013
Women Sex Office 8.8% 26.9% Sex Men Office
All
Women Sex Office 8.4% 23.0% Sex Men Office
8.8% 73.1%
9.7% 77.0%
* p < 0.05; Independent single sample t-tests used to assess differences in means between women and men. Note: The office column compares women and men within each type of office (i.e., the percentage of mayoral candidates who were women and men) while the sex column examines the distribution of candidates across office types within each gender group (i.e., among women, the percentage who ran for mayor compared to councillor).
Rates of incumbency
Ideally, we would assess potential gender differences in the rates of incumbency among Alberta municipal candidates to determine whether female incumbents and challengers are getting re-elected to office to the same degree as their male counterparts. Unfortunately, limitations in the data prevent such an analysis. The Alberta Municipal Affairs documents that the researcher has access to only indicate the incumbency status of the winners and then only for the 2010 election.4 The figures from that year follow the same pattern as rates of candidacy: women were 23.1% of all winning incumbents with men constituting the remaining 76.9%. Looking within gender, 52.1% of all female winners were incumbents compared to 53.3% of male winners.
4
A winning candidates incumbency status was indicated when she or he was referred to as mayor, mayor elect, councillor, or councillor elect.
Rates of success
Women are generally getting elected to municipal office in Alberta at the same rates as men. As Figure 2 shows, almost the same percentage of women and men candidates won (either by acclamation or by vote) in the 2007 election, while the difference between the two groups in 2013 was not significant. In contrast, men were much more likely to emerge triumphant than were women in the 2010 election. As a result of the 2010 vote, the cumulative numbers for the three elections show men having a modest but still significant edge on women in terms of gaining a seat on municipal council. Looking at electoral outcomes within each gender group, Table 4 (on the next page) shows that a greater percentage of male candidates were acclaimed to office in all three elections (23.3% in 2007, 18.8% in 2010, and 23.9% in 2013) than were female candidates (21.1%, 15.5%, 20.5%). A larger share of female candidates were voted into office in 2007 (44.3% compared to mens 40.8%) while male candidates had greater success in 2010 (41.7% compared to womens 38.6%). Both groups got voted into office at almost the same rate in 2013 (men, 38.7%; women, 39.2%). Across the three elections, a larger percentage of male candidates were acclaimed (22% to womens 19%) while more female candidates lost the election (40.4% to mens 37.6%). A near equal percentage got voted into office
Women
Men
Won 65.6%
Lost 35.8%
Won 64.2%
2010 election **
Lost 45.9%
Won 54.1%
Lost 39.5%
Won 60.5%
2013 election
Lost 40.2%
Won 59.8%
Lost 37.4%
Won 62.6%
Lost 40.4%
Won 59.6%
Lost 37.6%
Won 62.4%
* p < 0.05; ** p = 0.01; Independent single sample t-tests used to assess differences in means between women and men.
2007
Electoral outcome Acclaimed Voted in Not elected Women Sex Type Sex Men Type
2010
Women Sex Type Men Sex Type
2013
Women Sex Type Men Sex Type Women Sex Type
All
Sex Men Type
21.1% 22.9% 23.3% 77.1% 44.3% 26.2% 40.8% 73.8% 34.4% 24.0% 35.7% 76.0%
15.5% 21.8% 18.8% 78.2% 38.6% 23.8% 41.7% 76.2% 46.9% 28.2% 39.5% 71.8%
20.5% 24.1% 23.9% 75.9% 39.2% 27.3% 38.7% 72.7% 40.2% 28.5% 37.4% 71.5%
Note: For a handful of cases in 2007, it was not possible to determine if a candidate had won office by acclamation or election, so they have been excluded from this analysis. The type column compares women and men within each type of electoral outcome (i.e., the percentage of acclaimed candidates who were women and men) while the sex column compares electoral outcomes within each gender group (i.e., among women, the percentage who were acclaimed, voted in, or not elected to office. Figures might not add up to 100% due to rounding or incomplete information about type of electoral success.
(mens 40.4% to womens 40.5%). As well, a smaller share of women are getting voted into office over time, dropping to 39.2% in 2013 from 44.3% in 2007. Overall, women comprised 25% of the winning candidates in 2007, 23.2% in 2010, and 26.1% in 2013 for a three-election average of 24.8%. Comparing women and men by category of electoral outcome, Table 4 reveals that women were generally about one-fifth of all candidates who were acclaimed and around one-quarter of those who were voted in or not elected to municipal office in each of the last three elections while men constituted the rest. Women are less likely to be acclaimed than elected to office in comparison to men, but they are slowly becoming a larger share of both types of winners over time. Women went from being 22.9% of acclaimed candidates in 2007 to 24.1% in 2013, and from 26.2% of elected candidates in 2007 to 27.3% in 2013. Women are also constituting an ever larger share of the losing candidates in municipal elections. Women jumped from being 24% of those who failed to get elected in 2007 to 28.5% in 2013.
Table 5: Summary of women and mens overall electoral outcomes in the member municipalities of the Capital Region Board both overall and in the 2007, 2010, and 2013 municipal elections, by percentage
2007
Electoral outcome Acclaimed Voted in Not elected Women Sex Type Sex Men Type
2010
Women Sex Type Men Sex Type
2013
Women Sex Type 9.3% 34.4% Men Sex Type 8.3% 65.6% Women Sex Type
All
Sex Men Type
12.7% 25.7% 11.6% 74.3% 43.7% 24.8% 41.8% 75.2% 43.7% 23.0% 46.2% 77.0%
17.3% 28.0% 16.8% 72.0% 39.5% 28.3% 37.9% 71.7% 43.2% 26.5% 45.3% 73.5%
Note: For a handful of cases in 2007, it was not possible to determine if a candidate had won office by acclamation or election, so they have been excluded from this analysis. The type column compares women and men within each type of electoral outcome (i.e., the percentage of acclaimed candidates who were women and men) while the sex column compares electoral outcomes within each gender group (i.e., among women, the percentage who were acclaimed, voted in, or not elected to office. Figures might not add up to 100% due to rounding or incomplete information about type of electoral success.
Figure 3: Summary of women and mens rate of success in the Capital Region both overall and in the 2007, 2010, and 2013 municipal elections
2007 election
Women
Men
Lost 43.7%
Won 56.3%
Lost 46.2%
Won 53.8%
2010 election
Lost 43.2%
Won 56.8%
Lost 45.3%
Won 54.7%
2013 election
Lost 57.6%
Won 42.4%
Lost 55.6%
Won 44.4%
Lost 49.6%
Won 50.4%
Lost 49.3%
Won 50.7%
Independent single sample t-tests used to assess differences in means between women and men; no significant differences found.
2007 Municipality name Town of Beaumont Town of Bon Accord Town of Bruderheim Town of Calmar Town of Devon City of Edmonton
City of Fort Saskatchewan
2010 Men Women 28.6% 40.0% 14.3% 20.0% 28.6% 30.8% 14.3% 0.0% 0.0% 28.6% 14.3% 57.1% 40.0% 28.6% 71.4% 42.9% 14.3% 14.3% 28.6% 44.4% 14.3% 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 20.0% Men 71.4% 60.0% 85.7% 80.0% 71.4% 69.2% 85.7% 100.0% 100.0% 71.4% 85.7% 42.9% 60.0% 71.4% 28.6% 57.1% 85.7% 85.7% 71.4% 55.6% 85.7% 60.0% 60.0% 80.0% 80.0%
2013 Women 42.9% 20.0% 42.9% 40.0% 42.9% 7.7% 28.6% 42.9% 0.0% 28.6% 28.6% 28.6% 40.0% 28.6% 57.1% 42.9% 28.6% 14.3% 28.6% 44.4% 28.6% 20.0% 20.0% 40.0% 13.3% Men 57.1% 80.0% 57.1% 60.0% 57.1% 92.3% 71.4% 57.1% 100.0% 71.4% 71.4% 71.4% 60.0% 71.4% 42.9% 57.1% 71.4% 85.7% 71.4% 55.6% 71.4% 80.0% 80.0% 60.0% 86.7%
All Women 33.3% 20.0% 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% 23.1% 19.0% 23.8% 0.0% 23.8% 20.0% 42.9% 40.0% 23.8% 52.4% 38.1% 19.0% 14.3% 28.6% 44.4% 19.0% 26.7% 20.0% 33.3% 20.5% Men 66.7% 80.0% 66.7% 66.7% 66.7% 76.9% 81.0% 76.2% 100.0% 76.2% 80.0% 57.1% 60.0% 76.2% 47.6% 61.9% 81.0% 85.7% 71.4% 55.6% 81.0% 73.3% 80.0% 66.7% 79.5%
Women 28.6% 0.0% 42.9% 40.0% 28.6% 30.8% 14.3% 28.6% 0.0% 14.3% 16.7% 42.9% 40.0% 14.3% 28.6% 28.6% 14.3% 14.3% 28.6% 44.4% 14.3% 20.0% 0.0% 40.0% 33.3%
71.4% 100.0% 57.1% 60.0% 71.4% 69.2% 85.7% 71.4% 100.0% 85.7% 83.3% 57.1% 60.0% 85.7% 71.4% 71.4% 85.7% 85.7% 71.4% 55.6% 85.7% 80.0% 100.0% 60.0% 66.7%
Town of Gibbons Lamont County Town of Lamont City of Leduc Leduc County Town of Legal Town of Morinville Parkland County Town of Redwater City of St. Albert City of Spruce Grove Town of Stony Plain Strathcona County Sturgeon County Village of Thorsby Village of Wabamun Village of Warburg City of Calgary
*** 59.0%
71.1% 53.9%
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; Independent single sample t-tests used to assess differences in means between women and men. Note: The other category includes specialized municipalities, special area boards, improvement districts, and summer villages.
Women
Men
2007 election
66.2% 65.9% 57.7% 39.7%
**
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 80 70
Councillor candidates
Mayoral candidates
2010 election
55.4% 61.4%
** **
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 80 70
Councillor candidates
Mayoral candidates
2013 election
63.6% 62.3%
**
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 80 70
Councillor candidates
Mayoral candidates
63.6%
30 20 10 0
Councillor candidates
Mayoral candidates
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; Independent single sample t-tests used to assess differences in means between women and men.
42.8%
40
51.9%
50
61.1%
60
34.7%
*
53.8%
52.3%
49.8%
Methodology
This study is based on a statistical analysis of documents that Alberta Municipal Affairs posted on its website around the time of the 2007, 2010, and 2013 elections. In the last two elections, the author downloaded the candidate lists soon after nominations closed and the lists of winning candidates soon after election day. The candidate lists for 2007 were accessed some months after that election. The winners were determined using a list of council members acquired at the same time as the candidate lists. The candidate lists include the following information for each candidate: municipality name, ward number where relevant, position sought, an honorific (Ms. or Mr.), first and last names, and whether the individual was acclaimed to office. The honorific was used to identify the candidates gender, though various attempts were made to verify gender when questions arose or when the honorific was missing. In the case of the 2010 winner lists, the position name was used to determine whether the winner was an incumbent (mayor, councillor) or a challenger (mayor elect, councillor elect). This information was not provided in the 2007 council list or 2013 winner lists, or in any of the candidate lists. As for electoral outcomes, the 2007 and 2010 lists simply stated acclaimed while the 2013 lists indicated whether a candidate was acclaimed or not through a simple Y or N. Despite the extensiveness of the election lists, discrepancies were discovered as the researcher compared the candidate lists with the winner lists. Specifically, some names in the winner lists were not included in the previously posted candidate lists. This problem mainly arose in relation to those who had been acclaimed to office, though there are some cases in the 2007 election where it was not possible to determine whether a winning candidate had been acclaimed to or voted into office because of the use of a list of council members to determine electoral outcome. The possibility that these lists are not a complete catalogue of who sought municipal office in Alberta over the last three elections led to the use of tests of significance (independent single sample t-tests) to determine whether differences between women and men politicians were important indicators of gender discrepancies or simply minor variations of little real consequence. SPSS 21 (Statistical Program for the Social Sciences) was used to conduct the statistical analysis.
Slow progress: