An Introduction to Volume 59, Issue 4

Several articles examine dimensions of representation in urban democracies. In a study of local government hearings in Massachusetts, Einstein et al. (2023) ask whether meeting structure—namely if a meeting is held in-person or on Zoom—can increase the diversity of participants. The answer, it seems, is no: In the planning and zoning board meetings held on Zoom in nearly one hundred Massachusetts cities, there was no significant difference in the representativeness of participants on Zoom compared to in-person meetings. Like in-person hearings, nearly all residents who offered comments by Zoom opposed affordable housing. Older people, white people, and homeowners were vastly overrepresented. Although online meeting formats reduced some barriers to participation, they did not attract a broader range of people or ideas. Two additional articles probe questions related to the relationship between gender and urban democracy. Tolley, Lawlor, and Fortier-Chouinard (2023) consider how voters assess women and men running for mayor in Canadian cities. Contrary to the idea that local office would be more hospitable to women, as they would be perceived as “well-suited” to local issues, voters assessed women mayoral candidates more negatively than male candidates. The authors describe a double-bind: voters’ negative comments about women candidates employed masculine terms such as “assertive” or “aggressive;” yet these same terms were viewed positively when attached to male candidates. At the same time, when voters perceived women candidates as having “feminine” traits such as kindness or approachability, those traits were not perceived as valuable for leadership positions. The authors suggest that voters’ assessments change when they know more about the candidates, but that the low visibility and generally low media coverage of local Letter from the Editors