Cabinet ministers are among the most important politicians in presidential democracies, and ministerial appointments are central to presidents’ abilities to enact their policy aims, ensure the survival of legislative coalitions, and adapt to unforeseen shocks during their terms in office. Although a growing body of research examines Cabinet formation and partisan portfolio allocation, few works systematically consider who receives ministerial posts and how ministers are treated once in office. This is a major oversight for executive politics scholars, and especially significant for those studying historically marginalized groups that have traditionally been excluded from these powerful posts. Maria Escobar-Lemmon and Michelle Taylor-Robinson address this gap in the literature with their new book, Women in Presidential Cabinets: Power Players or Abundant Tokens?

Focusing on the characteristics, credentials, and connections of cabinet appointees—what the authors term political capital resources (PCRs)—Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson analyze male and female ministers in five presidential democracies. They begin with a typology of gender and ministerial appointments that focuses on two dimensions: minister background and treatment/effectiveness in cabinet(s). They argue that if female ministers have backgrounds similar to those of men, and experience equal treatment in their posts, they can then be viewed as integrated into male norms. Alternatively, bringing different backgrounds and encountering unequal treatment indicates tokenism.

The authors empirically test their theoretical predictions using meticulously gathered data on the PCRs and experiences of 447 Cabinet ministers from recent administrations in Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, and the United States. To examine the first dimension of their typology (background), the authors compare men and women with respect to a number of PCRs, including ministers’ employment and educational training, political experience and connections, and client links to their departments. Additional analyses delve more deeply into the data, accounting for portfolio remit, initial versus replacement ministers, and country-level differences. To assess the second dimension (treatment/effectiveness), Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson compare male and female ministers’ portfolio assignments, duration in (and means of exit from) their posts, and legislative records. In each case, they control for the PCRs that men and women bring to their positions.

Overall, the authors find a great deal of evidence of women’s integration into presidential cabinet(s). Women’s numbers are growing in these posts, and they increasingly hold high prestige, high visibility, and nonfeminine portfolios. Women in cabinet(s) look very similar to men in terms of their backgrounds and credentials, and are as likely as their male counterparts to have multiple PCRs. Controlling for these PCRs, once in office female ministers are as likely as their male colleagues to remain in their posts, and few systematic differences exist with respect to mode of exit. Female Cabinet ministers are also as likely as men to have their bills become laws.

At the same time, some important differences remain between men and women. Women remain underrepresented in cabinet(s) overall and are disproportionately allocated positions that conform to gender stereotypes. Women are especially underrepresented in economics posts, and the female ministers occupying these portfolios are less likely to have prior links to business. With respect to their experiences in office, women are also more likely than men to retire from cabinet(s). Importantly, even when accounting for PCRs, women introduce less legislation than their male counterparts.

Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson’s theoretical framework, empirical strategy, and results each represent a significant contribution, and Women in Presidential Cabinets will no doubt become required reading for scholars of gender and politics, Latin American politics, executive politics, and political ambition. For gender and politics scholars, the book’s central finding—that women are integrated into male norms—is especially important. On the one hand, the fact that female Cabinet ministers are just as qualified and competent as men provides cause for optimism, particularly given that female politicians often face increased scrutiny concerning their capabilities. On the other hand, the results suggest that women’s entrance into office is unlikely to alter the (often highly gendered) requirements for accessing the Cabinet. In order to receive a portfolio, women will have to conform to masculine norms and expectations.

In addition to their contribution to the gender and politics literature, Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson’s work on PCRs represents a major advance in the study of executive politics more broadly. The authors make many important observations about ministerial backgrounds. Most ministers, for example, do not have personal ties to presidents. Those who do have political connections, moreover, are as likely to have extensive experience related to their posts as ministers without them. The authors’ work on ministers’ treatment in office is also important, particularly their effort to use PCRs to explain subsequent variation in appointees’ experiences. The book provides these overarching analyses while at the same time highlighting country-level differences in the norms concerning qualifications for Cabinet appointments.

Just as the theoretical framework and findings represent an important step forward for the literature, Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson’s empirical approach also advances the scholarship on executive politics. The authors provide a novel way to determine the prestige of ministerial portfolios, for example, in their use of survey data to assess the visibility of the post. Likewise, their typology and coding of ministers’ exit from office is especially useful to Cabinet scholars.

The book further contributes to the literature by laying the foundation for a new body of scholarship on gender and executive politics. Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson supplement their quantitative analyses with illustrative examples drawn from across their five cases. Additional research, including interviews with (and/or surveys of) former ministers and their staffs, would further elucidate the ways in which ministers’ backgrounds affect their experiences in office. This includes whether, and in what ways, male and female ministers deploy similar PCRs differently, as well as men’s and women’s beliefs about their treatment within the Cabinet. This additional research could shed further light on the authors’ findings, including their observation that female ministers introduce less legislation than do their male counterparts.

Another rich area of research suggested by this work relates to selectors and the government formation process. Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson show variation in the types of ministers selected across time and place. Subsequent scholarship could explain this variation, focusing in part on the incentives faced by selectors. In their 2005 article (“Women Ministers in Latin American Governments: When, Where, and Why.” American Journal of Political Science. 49(4): 829-844) Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson show that demand-side factors—including the president’s party and partisan competition—affect women’s presence in office. Their newest work raises the question of the ways in which demand-side factors further affect presidents’ prioritization of different PCRs when assembling their cabinet(s).

Finally, the results from this research are likely applicable to other well-established presidential democracies that have comparatively high levels of women in cabinet(s). Future work should consider their generalizability to other systems, particularly parliamentary regimes and countries in which women are not already well represented in cabinet(s). Thankfully, Escobar-Lemmon and Taylor-Robinson’s book provides a template for conducting this kind of research elsewhere. The significance of their results, combined with the road map they provide for others, makes Women in Presidential Cabinets a major contribution that will be read and cited for years to come.