Long queues of citizens wait to register for new voter identity cards at the District Election Office in Sunsari, Nepal (Photo by Nabin Gadtaula / iStock Editorial / Getty Images Plus via Getty Images)
Understanding voter attitudes toward women's political leadership in Nepal
Why do so few women hold political leadership positions in Nepal despite gender quotas? New survey data from Nepal reveal that while voters generally favour incumbent male ward chairs, women show clear support for female leaders when explicitly comparing candidates. The findings raise important questions about male-dominated party nomination processes, which risk ignoring these preferences.
Over the past few decades, electoral gender quotas have been adopted in over 130 countries to improve women’s representation in politics. A large body of research documents the benefits of women’s political leadership gained as a result of these quotas, from more representative policy outcomes to shifting social norms.
Yet electoral gender quotas cannot guarantee that women representatives are able to substantively participate in politics, particularly in leadership positions – especially as quotas are increasingly undermined or weakened by political elites seeking to maintain power.
How have gender quotas changed women's political representation in Nepal?
Nepal illustrates both the promise and limitations of quotas as a means to create pathways for women’s leadership. As the world’s youngest federal democracy, Nepal introduced quotas in its 2015 constitution. At the lowest tier of government, each of the country’s 6,743 wards elects a five-member committee: four ward members and a separately elected ward chair.
Two of the four member seats are reserved for women – one of them specifically for a Dalit woman 1. In the first round of local elections, this constitutional reform dramatically boosted women's representation, with women going from 0.6% of local representatives in 1992 to 40% in 2017. Despite their entry into local government, few women contest or win leadership positions with the authority to shift local policies: as of the second round of elections, only 1% of ward chairs are women.
Understanding barriers to women’s political leadership
Why does women’s representation in leadership positions remain limited? In ongoing IGC-supported research, we evaluate the importance of three forces that determine the equilibrium level of female candidacy in order to design effective policy responses: (i) structural and social constraints that limit the supply of female candidates, (ii) party elites who discriminate against women in candidate selection, and (iii) voter attitudes that reduce demand for female representatives.
In the spring of 2025, we surveyed 1,760 voters (880 men and 880 women) across 55 local areas in Nepal to understand whether they display biases against female candidates. We measured voter attitudes across two measures: first, we asked them to rank their own currently elected ward representatives; second, we asked them to explicitly express preferences between ‘male ward chairs’ and ‘female ward chairs’.
We specifically measure preferences for ward chairs, the most powerful role at the ward level, which holds all decision-making and implementation authority and is not subject to reservation, and account for the potential influence of social desirability bias on self-reported preferences.
When choosing between existing local politicians, voters pick men for ward chair...
When asked to rank current local politicians as potential candidates for ward chair, voters of both genders overwhelmingly chose men: 88% of male respondents and 83% of female respondents selected a male representative as their first choice. More than half of all respondents picked the sitting ward chair – almost always a man – a predictable outcome given the authority and visibility of the role.
On leadership traits, voters again favoured men. When asked to identify the “best leader” among current representatives, 92% of men and 87% of women selected a male politician. A large majority also rated male representatives most highly for being hard-working, honest, dedicated, aligned with ward priorities, and capable of delivering services. Much of this reflects incumbency: the current ward chair ranked highest across most traits.
Figure 1: Voters’ rankings of their current ward representatives as potential ward chairs
Figure 1: Voters’ rankings of their current ward representatives as potential ward chairs
...but preferences based on leadership qualities diverge by gender
When asked who they would prefer as ward chair on the basis of leadership qualities, if all else were equal, most men were indifferent (53%), with the remainder slightly more likely to choose a female chair (25%) over a male chair (22%). However, women leaned more clearly toward female leadership: 41% preferred a female chair, 17% a male chair, and 42% were indifferent.
On traits, both women and men viewed female ward chairs as more honest and male ward chairs as more corrupt, while also crediting men with having more time to dedicate to the position. Beyond these shared views, gender differences stood out. Voters were more likely to believe that a ward chair of their own gender would share their priorities, and women in particular were more likely than men to describe female ward chairs as hard-working and capable of delivering services.
Figure 2: Voters’ preferences and perceptions of male and female ward chairs
Figure 2: Voters’ preferences and perceptions of male and female ward chairs
What do these findings mean for women in politics?
Lack of ambition among female politicians, party gatekeeping, and voter attitudes can all limit women’s access to leadership positions. Evidence from an earlier survey of female ward members shows that many women aspire to higher office, yet few are ultimately selected by their parties.
This voter survey adds that citizens' attitudes are more nuanced than nominations suggest: while both genders favour male incumbents when evaluating familiar politicians, their preferences diverge when comparing men and women directly.
Taken together, the evidence suggests that party nomination processes, dominated by male selection committee members, may underweight female voters’ preferences and overstate the risks of fielding women in leadership positions. If women’s support for female leadership is not reflected in the candidates put forward by party elites, party gatekeeping may itself be a critical barrier to women’s advancement.
A question that remains unanswered is how party selection processes contribute to the underrepresentation of women in leadership. As a next step, we are surveying selection committee members of Nepal’s major political parties to understand how they perceive voter preferences. Coupled with the voter surveys described here, this dual-survey design will allow us to compare what citizens actually want with what party elites believe they want, revealing whether party behaviour reflects accurate voter assessment or independent discrimination.
[1] The Dalit community makes up the lowest strata of the traditional Hindu caste system, and has historically faced social marginalisation and caste-based discrimination.