Abstract
While gender diversity on boards of directors (BODs) has recently increased, gender diversity on major board committees (MBCs), which influence board decision‐making directly, has advanced more slowly. Our study therefore delves into the antecedents of gender diversity on MBCs. We look at two key drivers: national quotas (policies mandating a minimum percentage of women to be appointed to BODs) and firm ownership (state, institutional, and family ownership). Our results show, contrary to theoretical predictions that are currently prevailing in the literature, that quotas trigger emancipatory rather than tokenistic behaviour in relation to women's appointments to MBCs. More specifically, quotas have a positive effect on gender diversity on MBCs, even when controlling for gender diversity on the BOD. Quota‐based measures can thus be a stepping stone towards positions of real influence on BODs. Furthermore, we find that states and institutional investors are ‘emancipatory’ owners, which support relatively higher gender diversity on MBCs. In contrast, family firms are ‘conservative’ owners, which support relatively lower gender diversity on MBCs. Our study informs the literatures on gender diversity on BODs and ownership‐based perspectives on corporate governance.