Brazil occupies the 133rd place in the global ranking of women’s parliamentary representation, point to data from the Interparlation Union (UIP), the global organization of national parliaments, and UN Women, an organization of the united nations of gender equality.
Following the trend of previous years, Brazil is still below countries such as Saudi Arabia (125th), Egypt (86th), and Iraq (76th), which have more conservative customs and legislations compared to women.
The data, based on the situation of 189 countries on January 1, 2025, show that only 18.1% of the women is composed of women (93).
They also place Brazil below the average of the American continent, which records the highest proportion of parliamentary women in the world (35.4%), and the world average (27.2%). The analysis took into consideration only the percentages of the low chambers – in Brazil, the House of Representatives – to accommodate countries that have unicameral parliaments (which do not have Senate, for example).
Brazil also has a setback compared to the position it occupied ten years ago, points out Ana Carolina Querino, interim representative of UN Women in Brazil.
In 2015, the country occupied the 117 ranking position, when it had 46 women in the House. Despite the increase in the number of deputies, today the country occupies a worse position, because, according to the representative, other nations advanced faster by implementing “structural measures” of parity and encouraging the participation of women.
Since 1997, anas lists of parties and coalition candidates for federal and state elections. The parties, however, have only been able to comply with the minimum percentage of 30% of vacancies in national claims in 2014, according to experts, and to this day the measure is not considered efficient.
“Although Brazil has quotas for application, the quota does not guarantee the election, especially without complementary mechanisms such as proportional financing or closed lists with gender alternation,” says Querino.
An UN report women who analyzed the financing of election campaigns in Latin America last year showed that Brazilian women face great difficulties in accessing electoral funding, which limits their visibility and competitiveness.
The document points out that countries that have reviewed mechanisms to ensure parity record greater proportion of parliamentary women.
Thomas Fitzsimons, director of communications of the Interparlament Union, points out that Brazilian law that requires political parties to allocate 30% of their public electoral funds for women “is often disrespected, with resources being wasted or poorly targeted.”
In 2023, Sheet It showed that it was, even by the self -titled party of the Brazilian woman.
Fitzsimons relates the stagnation of Brazilian results to the proportional election system of an open list adopted in the Legislative Power, in which the vacancies won by the party or party coalition are occupied by the most voted candidates until the number of chairs intended for association is completed.
This system, he says, disadvantages the construction of and the visibility of women, because he would prioritize individualized campaigns. He also points to as another factor for Brazil’s bad position in the ranking, as he would dissuade many women to apply or stay in politics.
The ranking also evaluates the participation of women in government ministries. In this list, Brazil occupies 53rd position, with 10 of the 31 folders commanded by women, equivalent to 32.3% of ministerial positions.
Only nine countries accounted for 50% or more of ministers (Andorra, Chile, Spain, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Nicaragua, the United Kingdom).
Globally, the female presence in parliaments rose only 0.3%, totaling 27.2%. Already in the ministries, there was a drop of 0.4%. Only 25 nations have women occupying the highest positions of national leadership, whether as heads of state or government, and Europe concentrates most of these cases (12 countries).
In assessment by types of folders, women tend to head ministries related to human rights, gender equality and social affairs.
According to Querino, this is because there is a distribution of symbolic and stereotypical power, where women are seen as “natural” to take care of social themes or as health, education, culture and human rights.
“On the other hand, men dominate folders of greater political prestige and budget, such as economy, defense and foreign relations. This phenomenon is called the horizontal segregation of political power and reflects gender stereotypes rooted in political culture,” he says.
