Regional presidents are insiders and incumbents (but few are women): evidence from Czechia and Slovakia

Summarising a recent article in Regional & Federal Studies, a comparative study of regional presidents by Michal Pink in the Czech Republic and Slovakia shows that electoral rules shape who wins office -but less dramatically than we might expect. While proportional, indirectly elected systems are somewhat more conducive to women’s representation, and majoritarian, directly elected systems strengthen incumbency and allow more independents to compete, both systems remain dominated by experienced political insiders. In other words, changing the rules alters the pathways to power, but not the underlying profile of those who attain it. Institutional design matters: but it operates within persistent elite constraints.

When new political institutions are created, one of the most important questions is simple: who ends up in charge? Are these positions captured by established political elites, or do they open doors for newcomers? Do electoral rules shape whether insiders or outsiders win? And do they affect women’s chances of reaching top office?

A recent comparative study of regional presidents (governors) in Slovakia and the Czech Republic provides fascinating answers. Drawing on elections between 2000 and 2022, the research analyzes how institutional rules influence who becomes the head of regional government. Although the two countries share history, geography, and similar regional powers, their political systems differ in one crucial respect: how regional leaders are elected. Those differences turn out to matter. Both countries introduced regional self-government around the turn of the millennium. Regions in both states manage regional development, transport infrastructure, healthcare and social services, education, and cultural policy. Yet despite these similarities, the way regional presidents are selected differs sharply: 

• In the Czech Republic, governors (hejtmani) are indirectly elected. Citizens vote for regional assemblies using a proportional representation system, and the assembly then selects the governor. Governors depend on assembly majority support and can be removed. This resembles a parliamentary system at the regional level.
• In Slovakia, governors (župani) are directly elected by voters through a majoritarian system (runoff until 2017; plurality thereafter). Governors are not accountable to regional assemblies and cannot be removed by them. This more closely resembles a separation-of-powers model

These institutional differences create distinct political environments — and shape who gets elected. One of the clearest findings concerns gender representation. Across two decades of elections, women were significantly underrepresented in both countries. In the Czech Republic, six out of 78 governors were women. In Slovakia, only two out of 48 governors were women. While women are underrepresented in both systems, they were considerably more likely to succeed under the Czech proportional system than under Slovakia’s majoritarian one. Majoritarian systems tend to favor candidates perceived as broadly acceptable, and parties often select male candidates as “safe” choices. Proportional systems, by contrast, allow parties to structure candidate lists more inclusively.

Importantly, the supply of female candidates was similar in both countries (around 9–10%). The difference emerged in who actually won. Institutional design filtered candidates differently. Another key question is whether directly electing governors opens the door to political outsiders. One might expect that Slovakia’s direct elections would produce more newcomers. However, the results challenge this assumption. The study distinguishes between political insiders — those with prior experience as mayors, MPs, ministers, senators, or regional executives — and political outsiders, who lacked such experience. The findings show that 77% of Czech governors and 80% of Slovak governors were insiders. In other words, direct elections in Slovakia did not significantly increase the share of political outsiders.

A major reason is the power of incumbency. In both countries, incumbents have a much higher probability of re-election. The effect is especially strong in Slovakia. Once someone captures the office, they tend to hold onto it, particularly in a system where the governor is not dependent on assembly confidence. The study also examines whether regional leaders are extensions of national political elites. In the Czech Republic, governors are strongly embedded in party structures. Independent or regional-only movements almost never secure governorships. Party control of regional politics is strong.

In Slovakia, independent candidates have been more successful, and roughly one-third of elected governors had no formal party membership. Nevertheless, Slovak regional presidents more often have prior experience as Members of Parliament, suggesting stronger ties between national and regional political careers. The relationship between government and opposition dynamics also differs. In the Czech Republic, government-backed candidates often perform worse in regional elections, which sometimes function as referendums on the national government. In Slovakia, by contrast, government-backed candidates tend to have a higher probability of success.

Age and career patterns also reveal differences. Czech governors tend to be younger at first election (mid-40s), while Slovak governors are typically older (around 50). Czech governors are more closely connected to local politics, frequently having served as mayors. Slovak governors show stronger connections to the national parliamentary arena. The broader lesson of this research is clear: institutions shape political elites. Proportional systems are more favorable to women. Majoritarian systems strengthen incumbency. Indirect elections reinforce party control. Direct elections create space for independent candidacies — but not necessarily for political outsiders.

Even in two countries with shared history and similar regional powers, small differences in electoral rules produce measurable differences in political outcomes. Regional politics may not always attract national attention, yet these offices are crucial for public services and regional development. The design of electoral systems and executive-legislative relations quietly shapes who rises to power, whether women succeed, how strong parties remain, and how entrenched incumbents become.

In short, rules matter — and they matter in ways visible in the biographies of those who govern. Understanding institutional design is not abstract theory. It is key to understanding who leads, who gets excluded, and how democratic systems evolve.

Michal Pink is Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science, Masaryk University.

Note: this blog represents the views of the author, and not those of Regional & Federal Studies, the Centre on Constitutional Change, or the University of Edinburgh. It summarises the article ‘Executive recruitment and the role of institutional factors: explaining profiles of regional presidents in Slovakia and the Czech Republic’ by Petr Dvořák, Michal Pink, and Marek Rybář.

Image credit: By Tadeáš Bednarz - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0.