Municipal Electoral Inequality Map

Joyce Luz

Henrique Curi

The importance of municipal elections is often underestimated or, in a way, neglected due to their magnitude. The discussion of ideas is, by nature, fragmented throughout the country. The challenges of Borá, in the interior of the state of São Paulo, are different from those of Sobral, in the interior of Ceará. Those who propose to solve public problems are also, by assumption, different people – each municipality has its own candidates, its own names, its own leading figures.

This perception should be revised for two reasons. The first is that, even under different contexts, it is at the lowest level of dispute that people – in fact – coexist and build their daily lives. “No one lives in the Union or the State; people live in the municipalities” – Franco Montoro's simple statement reveals an obvious fact that is rarely reflected upon and minimized: if people live in the municipalities, the challenges are there too. And they need to be resolved here.

The second reason considers the candidate's perspective: it is also in the municipality that their career tends to begin. With a few exceptions, including several found in the RBR Alumni Network, most politicians begin their careers at the municipal level.

In municipal politics, candidates for office have distinct possibilities: they can become either city councilors or mayors. During the election campaign, we know who takes center stage. You rarely see debates or conversations about proposals for members of the Legislative branch. However, for the Executive branch, even at the municipal level, the political debate revolves around the candidates vying for the top position.

For the winners, the representative obligations to the electorate also differ. In the legislative branch, the expectation is that the seat represents a sector of society. The proportional system works precisely so that diverse niches of civil society are represented – in short, a city councilor does not act for the entire population. The seat in the legislature represents a part of the population. The executive branch, elected under a majority system (regardless of whether it has a single round or two), has the representative obligation to govern for everyone. Regardless of your vote, the mayor is there, by definition, to represent you. That is, from the pre-election period until the elected government takes office, the mayor's image is highlighted in the contest.

Notice that, up to this point, we have only used the word in the masculine gender: mayor. If this went unnoticed, you are not alone. According to a survey conducted by RenovaBR, between 2000 and 2024, women's candidacies for municipal executive positions never exceeded 15% of the total. It is true that there has been a gradual increase in female presence over the years, but it is slow and insufficient in the face of persistent inequality. On average, only 12.4% of the candidacies for mayor were from women between the municipal elections of 2000 and 2024, compared to 87.6% of men. In other words, Brazilian municipal politics continues to be a space predominantly dominated by men, where the exception of women still confirms the rule of gender inequality.

Do these figures bother you? Apparently, they don't bother a large portion of Brazilian political parties yet. Law No. 9.504/1997, already mentioned on this blogThis seems to resonate unevenly across different positions and political parties, revealing that the commitment to gender equality is still far from being realized in practice.

Despite occasional variations between parties and years, the graph confirms a persistent structural pattern of underrepresentation of women in candidacies for municipal executive positions. Even among the ten most "inclusive" parties each year, the percentages rarely exceed 201 to 251, highlighting a low ceiling for female participation. In other words, even in the best-performing parties, women remain a significant minority in mayoral races, revealing that gender inequality remains deeply rooted in the structure of Brazilian political competition.

This finding directly relates to the role of political parties as central actors in mediating between society and the State. Among their most important functions are: (1) mobilizing and channeling social interests, acting as the main link between citizen preferences and public power decisions; (2) ensuring that the decision-making process is representative and orderly, converting social demands into government agendas and, subsequently, into public policies; and (3) structuring electoral competition through the selection and recruitment of candidates. It is precisely this last function that gains special relevance here. The persistent underrepresentation of women is not only a reflection of voter behavior, but above all of how parties define who can—and who cannot—occupy prominent positions in the disputes for local power.

Ultimately, political parties have a responsibility to represent civil society. However, this is not what happens in practice. The inclusion of women in politics will necessarily depend on their leadership, first and foremost, within the party. Parties and their members need to prepare female leaders so that, during elections, they receive their support and are prepared to compete in a vote.

Recently, there has been much talk about political parties being the guardians of democracy – mainly acting to stop authoritarian leaders. Well, guarding democracy also means improving it so that it is not challenged. And including women in leading candidacies and supporting them to be competitive is an excellent step in this direction.