Gender Representation and Legislation for People with Disabilities

• In Event: Issues in Public Administration

Abstract

This study focuses on legislation as the most visible and ultimate act of representation. It investigates whether a more representative institution contributes to a more responsive and inclusive society by creating laws and rules that prioritize the welfare of the most disadvantaged members—people with disabilities. There have been few efforts to investigate whether and how a more representative government, encompassing legislative and executive branches, addresses discrimination and mistreatment against marginalized groups in rulemaking (with some exceptions, e.g., English, 2019).
Focusing on gender representation in the legislative and executive branches, this study answers three questions: first, whether a higher representation of women within the legislature and bureaucracy is a precursor of lawmaking that promotes the interest of people with disabilities; second, how the interplay between political and bureaucratic representations facilitates or hinders legislative actions for people with disabilities. Finally, it examines whether rulemaking and representation have actually improved the socioeconomic conditions of people with disabilities. Sexism or discrimination against women has an affinity for ableism that values certain characteristics and discriminates against those who are less able or impaired (Ostrove et al., 2019; Parsons et al., 2017; Wolbring, 2008).
The empirical context of this study is the enactment and revision of disability-related Acts in Korea, where ableism is prevalent, and disability issues and people with disabilities have long been (and still are) neglected. Using the case of the national-level legislation of Disability Acts in Korea over four decades (1978-2022), we examine the links using three dependent variables: law enactment/revision, number of laws enacted/revised, and the unemployment rate of people with disabilities in the public and private sectors. Analytic strategies include event history analysis, negative binomial, and time-series regression.
Preliminary findings suggest extended active representation, indicating that women as minority representatives extend their advocacy beyond women to include the interests of other minorities. This aligns with the potential for contagion, spillover, and indirect effect of representative bureaucracy (Favero & Molina, 2018; Li, 2021; Vinopal, 2018). Improved gender representation aids people with disabilities in recognizing the pervasiveness of discrimination against a specific group, acting as a significant barrier to their personal, social, and professional lives in the context of ableism. This also helps people with disabilities realize and strengthen their group identity, encouraging collective actions and allyship from out-group members. The findings suggest that women are likely to form an allyship with people with disabilities, especially when women are well-represented in the political arena. The evidence supports meaningful interactions between bureaucratic and political representation in legislative activities, leading to favorable social outcomes for people with disabilities.

English, A. (2019). She Who Shall Not Be Named: The Women That Women’s Organizations Do (and Do Not) Represent in the Rulemaking Process. Politics & Gender, 15(03), 572–598. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X18000375
Favero, N., & Molina, A. L. (2018). Is Active Representation an Organizational-Level Process? The Indirect Effect of Bureaucrats on Clients They Don’t Directly Serve. The American Review of Public Administration, 48(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016660614
Li, D. (2021). Spillover Effects of Minority Representation on Majority Bureaucrats’ Behavioral Change. Public Administration Review, 81(6), 1071–1091. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13428
Ostrove, J. M., Kornfeld, M., & Ibrahim, M. (2019). Actors against Ableism? Qualities of Nondisabled Allies from the Perspective of People with Physical Disabilities. Journal of Social Issues, 75(3), 924–942. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12346
Parsons, A. L., Reichl, A. J., & Pedersen, C. L. (2017). Gendered ableism: Media representations and gender role beliefs’ effect on perceptions of disability and sexuality. Sexuality and Disability, 35(2), 207–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11195-016-9464-6
Vinopal, K. (2018). Understanding Individual and Organizational Level Representation: The Case of Parental Involvement in Schools. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mux036
Wolbring, G. (2008). The Politics of Ableism. Development, 51(2), 252–258. https://doi.org/10.1057/dev.2008.17

Author

• Sanghee Park, Indiana University Indianapolis