Explanations concerning why and how women’s political underrepresentation matters to politics and policymaking have varied in both normative claims and empirical evidence. In Representation, Maria Escobar-Lemmon and Michelle M. Taylor-Robinson attempt to better specify what representation “means” not only for women but also for similarly historically underrepresented groups. The editors effectively demonstrate that the variance in our knowledge of women’s representation derives in large part from differences in research questions, research venues, and the ways in which we define women’s interests (p. 5). They seek to “build a broader and generalizable understanding of representation of groups and their interests that have historically been excluded from or marginalized in politics” by recognizing the contingent and complex nature of representation, while establishing more systematic and empirical measures by which it can be studied (p. 245).

The volume is most successful in making the case that established approaches to the study of representation are in need of disruption and in offering multiple avenues toward rethinking representation in concept and measures. Where it struggles most is in resisting the measurement traps and theoretical limitations about which it warns in its opening chapters. These contradictions demonstrate the complications that the editors discuss in translating complex and inclusive theories of representation to effective empirical approaches. Grappling with these complications, this volume offers evolutionary thinking to provoke further discussion and debate about women’s representation and, more broadly, the representation of underrepresented groups.

This 12-chapter analysis of representation includes four parts. Part I includes three chapters that address the theoretical aspects of representation, grappling particularly with the ways in which women’s interests are defined. Parts II and III provide seven distinct empirical analyses of women’s descriptive, symbolic, or substantive representation across countries and venues. The editors summarize major conclusions and offer proposals for future research in Part IV. The volume relies on three general propositions about representation and testable implications for each as threads throughout its chapters. Most importantly, these propositions emphasize the complexities and contingencies of representation by addressing the influences of group organizational strength and unity, limitations in the translation of descriptive to substantive representation, and the multiple venues and stages of the policy process in which representation can occur. While sometimes feeling forced, the contributors’ application of these propositions and implications to their analyses help to maintain the focus of the book on representational concepts. More importantly, the authors engage in a dialogue across chapters to an extent uncommon in many edited volumes. This dialogue is a point of strength for the book and makes explicit the distinct contributions of each chapter in addressing the volume’s objectives.

In responding to the questions of Karen Celis and her colleagues (2008) about who represents women, on which issues, where, when, and how, this volume deconstructs aspects of representation to provide greater specificity and clarity of what is being studied and in what ways (Celis et al., “Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation,” Representation 44 [2]: 99–110). While its empirical chapters provide the most concrete applications of representational definitions and measures, the volume’s theoretical chapters are among its greatest contributions. Focused on the complications and hazards of defining “women’s interests,” Karen Beckwith, Ange-Marie Hancock, and Drude Dahlerup each grapple with a fundamental dilemma in women and politics scholarship. Beckwith’s distinction among women’s interests, women’s issues, and women’s preferences allows researchers to better distinguish between measures of women’s representation while reducing essentialist claims. Hancock problematizes existing intersectional approaches to representation research by proposing “paradigm intersectionality” as an analytic framework that better captures categorical multiplicity and categorical intersections. Finally, Dahlerup effectively addresses the feminist foundations of representation scholarship and argues for greater complexity in analyses and measurement. Of particular note is her claim that scholars have too frequently “stretched” Hannah Pitkin’s (1967) concept of representation to link descriptive and substantive representation, disrupting the ease with which much scholarship on women’s representation relies almost exclusively on one reading of this canonical source. In fact, each of these chapters provides scholars with alternative theoretical foundations for their work, contesting monolithic definitions of “women’s interests” and promoting multiple measures of women’s representation that are more inclusive of and accurate to the diversity among women as a political group.

The application of these recommendations are most evident in Part III, where scholars examine the relationship between women’s descriptive and substantive representation by adopting multiple measures of women’s interests or issues. Escobar-Lemmon, Leslie Schwindt-Bayer, and Taylor-Robinson (Chapter 11) are most explicit in testing whether different definitions of women’s interests yield differences in the extent to which women are represented in Latin American legislatures and cabinets. Beth Reingold and Kerry Haynie (Chapter 10) also adopt multiple measures of women’s interests to demonstrate that definitional decisions significantly influence research outcomes.

In addition to expanding the definition of women’s interests, multiple chapters expand the sites for where representation occurs. Whether looking at women’s representation on high courts (Valerie Hoekstra, Miki Kittilson, and Elizabeth Bond, Chapter 6), in cabinets (Escobar-Lemmon, Schwindt-Bayer, and Taylor-Robinson, Chapter 11), or in civil society (Alice Kang, Chapter 8), the contributions to this volume consider the ways in which women’s interests are advanced outside of legislatures. In some of these venues, representation occurs at a different stage of the policy process and helps to illuminate the multistage nature of representational processes.

Lastly, and addressing an essential weakness of much literature on women’s representation, multiple chapters grapple with who is represented and by whom. Contending monolithic claims of women’s representation, Mala Htun’s (Chapter 7) analysis of Afro-descendant women in Latin American legislatures and Kang’s (Chapter 8) evaluation of conflicting goals of feminist and Catholic civil society groups do a particularly effective job in reminding readers that representational claims can be made by multiple actors who share different positions and goals. Their work reaffirms the importance of clearly defining what counts as representing women and, more importantly, specifying which women earn representation within existing institutional structures.

Authors recognize the institutional constraints on representation, including identity-based conflicts, unequal power structures and access, contradictory political-incentive structures, or varying degrees of political opportunity by venue, time, or actor. For example, Richard Matland and Emelie Lilliefeldt (Chapter 5) find different effects of preferential voting on women’s descriptive representation in Norway and Latvia, and Michele Swers (Chapter 9) demonstrates that party dynamics and institutional incentives mediate the impact of U.S. Senators’ gender on legislative behavior (p. 178). By recognizing these cross-pressures and interventions in representational pathways, this volume demonstrates where and why representational realities fall short of representational goals.

Some chapters fall into the measurement traps or theoretical narrowness the volume seeks to contend, including “stretching” Pitkin, adopting limited definitions of women’s issues or interests, and/or including minimal discussion of which women are among the representatives and represented (and which are not). Most evident is the dominant focus on legislators as representational actors and on bill sponsorship as the measure for studying substantive representation of women’s interests, a measure that does not adequately meet the demand for studying the multiple stages, and thus sites, for representation that is outlined in the introduction.

Whether used in parts or in its entirety, this volume is of great utility for teaching the fundamentals and complexities of representation at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Moreover, the theoretical contributions serve as necessary points of progress in scholarly work on representation of women and other historically underrepresented groups. All scholars can and should look to this work to inform the questions they ask, measures they adopt, and contributions they make to representation research.