Descriptive and substantive representation of disability in parliaments is low. Local district disability representatives represent one of the decentralised and non-parliamentary efforts to enhance representation of disability following the UNCRPD. However, their position and role poses theoretical, normative, and empirical questions as we lack evidence on how they represent disabled people and interact with them. To address these gaps, this paper theoretically builds on shared experiences to caution that non-parliamentary disability representatives might be more likely to respond to respective inquiries by disabled people, but simultaneously incentivized to inflate policy responses as shared experiences make representatives aware of how crucial positive policy information is to disabled people's livelihood. To assess this ambivalence this paper investigates whether German district disability representatives are more responsive toward a disabled requester using a randomised experiment. I measure the effect of disclosing a physical disability at contact or at survey start on representatives' response rates and policy scores. I find medium descriptive representation with 48 percent disabled representatives and increased responsiveness from respondents informed about the requester's disability at initial contact, evidenced by a 3.74 percentage point rise in survey participation, although not statistically significant. Moreover, representatives consistently over-reported the popularity of their positions when informed about the disability. Treated representatives who are disabled themselves show upward reporting across all policy areas, emphasising the role of shared experiences. The study suggests that minority representing institutions may enhance descriptive representation and responsiveness but minority representatives might be induced to present minority related policy as more effective than it is.
Read full article here.
Raykowski, M. (2026). Disability Representation in Germany: The Role of Shared Experiences in District Disability Representatives. Representation, 1–36. doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2026.2718083