Diversity in the German parliament still falls short

Who has a seat in the Bundestag – and who doesn’t? The German parliament does not accurately represent society. Women, young people and people from migrant communities are underrepresented – and this could well have implications for decision-making, levels of political participation, and societal division. Maja Bisanz and Samuel Brielmaier from the Brand New Bundestag initiative have examined the reasons for this, proposing possible ways to ensure Germany’s population is more accurately reflected in its national parliament.
 

The newly elected parliament is far from an accurate reflection of German society. The representation gap – in other words the discrepancy between the share of different groups in the wider population and their respective representation in the national parliament – is huge and, in certain areas, has even widened. The share of women in the Bundestag is a mere 32.4 percent, whereas women make up 50.7 percent of the German population. This means that another 115 women parliamentarians would be needed for the parliament to be representative in terms of gender. When it comes to young people, the representation gap is even bigger. Although those under 35 make up 36.5 percent of the population, they account for just 16.2 percent of Bundestag members – leaving the parliament 128 young parliamentarians short.
 

Compared to the wider population, the German parliament has a shortfall of 114 parliamentarians from migrant communities

The situation for people from migrant backgrounds is just as serious.[1] Their share in the Bundestag currently stands at 11.6 percent despite making up 14.4 percent of the electorate. Although this represents a slight increase over the level at the time of the 2021 parliamentary elections (11.3 percent), German electoral reform has seen the absolute number of parliamentarians from migrant communities fall from 83 to 73 – a decline of ten seats. This discrepancy becomes even more evident if we consider that this group makes up 29.7 percent of the population overall. Based on these figures, there are in fact 114 parliamentarians too few to ensure more accurate representation.

A comparison of the parliamentary parties reveals a number of differences when it comes to representation. The SPD still has the largest number parliamentarians that come from a migrant community, with the share even increasing slightly since 2021 (from 17 to 17.5 percent). That said, in light of the party’s poor election results and the reduction in size of the Bundestag itself, the SPD lost 14 members of parliament with a migrant background. While the Greens, the Left and the SPD boast greater diversity in their ranks, the CDU/CSU and the AfD have a particularly small share of people with a migrant background. Currently, it is difficult to estimate the representation gap for other groups such as blue-collar workers, people with disabilities or people of colour because there is no publicly available data on these groups.
 

Lack of diversity creates bias in political decision-making

The matter of who is represented in parliament and to what extent goes beyond mere symbolism. In fact, the makeup of the Bundestag affects major policy decisions. Or to put it more simply: The more accurate the parliamentary representation of a particular socio-demographic group, such as women or young people, the greater the chance of their fundamental interests being reflected in the political process [2–6].

Political scientist Dr Pola Lehmann had the following to say on the subject: “Studies clearly show that the preferences of people with lower incomes and lower levels of education are not as well represented” [7]. And one of the reasons for this is that these groups are underrepresented in parliament. In other words, the unbalanced makeup of parliament leads to one-sided policymaking.
 

Why the representation gap is growing

The declining diversity in the Bundestag has a number of structural causes. One of the more important factors here is the outcome of the recent elections. While two of the parties (the SPD and the Greens) with more diversity when it comes to both their list and their constituency candidates lost seats, the CDU/CSU and the AfD – two parties whose lists were less diverse – increased their presence. Although the Left’s electoral success sees a party with a high share of women gain seats in parliament, even the Left’s share of parliamentarians with a migrant background is on the decline (from 28.2 percent in 2021 to 18.8 percent in 2025).

Moreover, Germany’s electoral reform is exacerbating a number of existing problems. Constituency seats (Direktmandate) are becoming more important, at least numerically (in 2021, 40.8 percent of all seats were taken by directly elected candidates; in 2025, the corresponding share is 43.8 percent) – and it is here that the proportion of women is especially low (a mere 22.1 percent in 2025 compared with 26.1 percent in 2021). Moreover, the share of constituency seats is similarly small when it comes to other dimensions of diversity.

There also seems to be a pattern when it comes to the party-list seats, with women, people from migrant communities and younger candidates often being placed lower down the list, meaning their election chances are poor. Further, in light of the reduced number of party-list seats, the likelihood of these candidates being elected is now even slimmer.

There are also a number of deeply rooted barriers. Politics remains a male-dominated arena – be that due to opaque networks, male-centric rituals or inflexible working hours – which place women at a disadvantage, especially those with care responsibilities.
 

How to remedy the representation gap

Closing the representation gap requires dedicated measures on multiple levels.

Direct support for diverse candidates

Candidates often find themselves facing specific barriers, and initiatives such as internal party mentoring programmes for women, young people and those with diverse viewpoints, or the support for candidates provided by Brand New Bundestag, can make a difference.

Quotas for party lists

Gender quotas or more general quotas (such as for newcomers) for party-list nominations have so far been the most effective way of closing the representation gap. However, they only work if the constituency seats are also occupied by a more diverse range of parliamentarians. A representative list is not much use if a party like the CSU in Bavaria or the SPD in Lower Saxony wins almost all its seats through direct elections. In such cases we need to look to other binding rules to address this issue.

Stronger networks and strategic coordination

Ensuring diversity among the candidates selected for party lists can be achieved by organising majorities. Of enormous importance here are self-organised networks such as the Greens’ BuntGrün für People of Colour, the CDU/CSU’s LGBTQ+ Lesben- und Schwulen-Union für Queere in der Union, or the SPD’s Arbeitsgemeinschaft Migration und Vielfalt for people from migrant communities. These networks can directly influence the nomination processes and can strengthen candidacies.

A Bundestag that does not reflect society’s diversity cannot represent all viewpoints and needs equally. We therefore urgently need to close the representation gap – but this will not happen automatically. It needs targeted measures, structural changes and the political will to foster genuine diversity. This is the only way we can ensure our democracy remains fair, just and sustainable in the long term.

[1]We use the definition employed by the Federal Statistical Office of Germany (Destatis): “A person has a migrant background if they themselves or at least one parent did not acquire German citizenship by birth”.

Sources:

[1] Griffin, J. D. (2014). When and why minority legislators matter. Annual Review of Political Science, 17(1), 327-336.

[2] Mansbridge, J. (1999). Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent "Yes". The Journal of Politics, 61(3), 628–657. https://doi.org/10.2307/2647821

[3] Campbell, R., Childs, S., & Lovenduski, J. (2010). Do Women Need Women Representatives? British Journal of Political Science, 40(1), 171–194. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123409990408

[4] Campbell, R. (2012). What Do We Really Know about Women Voters? Gender, Elections and Public Opinion. Political Quarterly, 83(4), 703–710. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.2012.02367.x

[5] Brunsbach, S. (2011). Machen Frauen den Unterschied? Parlamentarierinnen als Repräsentantinnen frauenspezifischer Interessen im Deutschen Bundestag. Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen. 42(1), 3–24. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24240338

[6] Magni, G., Leon, Z. P. de (2021). “Women Want an Answer! Field Experiments on Elected Officials and Gender Bias.” In: Journal of Experimental Political Science 8.3, pp. 273–284.

[7] Schubert, K. (2021) https://zdfheute-stories-scroll.zdf.de/politik-bundestag-abgeordnete-divers/index.html