Women disproportionately placed in high-risk seats ahead of federal election

While some progress has been made towards gender equality in Australian elections, women remain underrepresented among candidates in the 2025 federal election, a new report from The Australian National University (ANU) shows.
 
The report published today by the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at ANU shows fewer women than men running in the election. They’re also more likely to be running in ‘glass cliff’ seats that are hard to win and precarious to hold.

While women make up more than half (56 per cent) of the candidates being put forward by the Australian Labor Party (ALP), less than a third (32 per cent) of the Coalition’s candidates are women. 
 
According to report co-author, Dr Elise Stephenson, there has been a notable increase in women’s representation for Labor this election compared to the last one, when 46 per cent of its candidates were women. 

“The Coalition, however, continues to lag behind, with only a marginal improvement from the previous election, where only 29 per cent of candidates were women compared to 32 per cent this election,” she said.
 
“It’s not just about the number of women running, but also the type of seats they are contesting.
 
“Across both major parties, women candidates are more likely to be placed in more challenging, ‘glass cliff’ seats compared to men.

The report finds that the Coalition is running twice as many men as candidates than women and, of the women running, the majority are contesting for unwinnable or precarious seats.
 
Of these Coalition women, only one in six (16 per cent) are in safe or fairly safe seats, compared to more than a quarter of men (28 per cent).
 
By contrast, Labor has made strides in improving the positioning of its women candidates compared to the last election.
 
Half of the women running under Labor this election are contesting safe or fairly safe seats, a significant increase from 24 per cent in 2022. However, despite these gains, Labor women continue to be overrepresented in less secure electorates.
 
“While 57 per cent of men who are Labor candidates are running in safe or fairly safe seats, only 50 per cent of women have the same advantage. Despite being outnumbered overall, Labor men still have a better shot at winning their seats.”

The report findings highlight the broader political landscape ahead of the election. As the incumbents, Labor is generally in a stronger position than in 2022, while contesting from opposition necessarily means Coalition candidates are coming from a more challenging starting point to win seats.
 
However, despite this, women Coalition candidates are 13 per cent more likely to be running in ‘glass cliff’ electorates than Coalition men, while Labor women are 7 per cent more likely than Labor men.
 
“The persistent ‘glass cliff’ effect continues to disadvantage women candidates, with men candidates across both major parties still having a higher likelihood of contesting safer electorates than women. There is still work to be done to ensure equal opportunities for all candidates,” Dr Stephenson said.
 
The report also highlights the ongoing issue of diversity in Australian politics. While 21 per cent of candidates in the upcoming election identify as belonging to diverse or underrepresented groups, this figure remains lower than current representation in Parliament.
 
Women running in this election are less likely to be from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, have a disability, or belong to the LGBTIQA+ communities than male candidates.
 
These findings reflect the added challenges diverse women and non-binary people face, particularly when in the public eye. 
 
“Achieving true gender and diversity parity in politics requires more than increasing candidate numbers – it demands a fundamental shift in how, and where, women and diverse candidates are positioned to compete,” Dr Stephenson said.
 
“Without addressing these systemic barriers, representation in Parliament will continue to fall short of reflecting the electorate’s diversity.”
 
The full report is available online.