Gender-responsive budgeting in

public fiscal management.

Alna P Binu, Akhil Das, Roshan S Chacko, Shibin Varghese
1st Year MBA
Marian Academy of Management Study, Puthupady,
Kothamangalam
Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam

Abstract

The concept of gender budgeting, which advocates for integrating a gender

perspective into governmental budgetary processes, has received considerable
attention in academic literature. This attention spans various disciplines and
geographical regions, reflecting its interdisciplinary nature and global relevance.
Despite this extensive coverage, the literature on gender budgeting remains
fragmented, with gaps and inconsistencies in understanding and implementation.

A comprehensive literature review can provide valuable insights into the current
discourse on gender budgeting and highlight areas for future research. Such a review
reveals that existing studies tend to concentrate on specific regions, particularly
emerging economies like India and South Africa, or on countries within Europe.
This geographical focus implies variations in socio-economic contexts and policy
environments under which gender budgeting initiatives are implemented, leading to
diverse findings and challenges.

Keywords: Gender budgeting, Geographical range, Fragmented, Europe,

Emerging economies
 Ex ante.

Introduction

The concept of incorporating gender considerations into public finance,

especially within the budgeting process, is not novel, with many
governments globally adopting gender budgeting practices. This is
evidenced by recent empirical studies found in edited volumes and special
issues (Ng, 2016; O’Hagan, 2015, 2018). As early as the 1980s, feminists
in Australia advocated for gender equality in budgeting (Galizzi, 2010;
Sharp and Broomhill, 1990, 2002), while scholars have actively
contributed to this discourse through various channels, including books,
conference proceedings, and academic journals (Budlender and Hewitt,
2002; Budlender et al., 2002; Elson and Sharp, 2010; Ng, 2016; O’Hagan,
2018; Judd, 2002; Himmelweit, 2002; Rubin and Bartle, 2005; Steccolini,
2019).

Gender budgeting, as defined by the Council of Europe (2005: 10),

involves a 'gender-based assessment of budgets' that integrates a gender
perspective across all stages of the budgetary process. This approach
empowers stakeholders, such as citizens, to hold governments accountable
for promoting gender equality and material equality among individuals of
all genders (Sharp and Broomhill, 2002).

The academic discourse on gender budgeting is interdisciplinary, drawing

from fields such as accounting and finance, education, feminist
economics, and non-profit studies (Budlender, 2002; Elson and Sharp,
2010; Morrissey, 2018; Nolte et al., 2021; Steinthórsdóttir et al., 2020).
This interdisciplinary approach underscores the importance of integrating
diverse perspectives to advance feminist knowledge (Pearse et al., 2019:
116). Furthermore, research in this area varies in its aims, including
normative studies proposing implementation strategies for gender
budgeting instruments (Budlender et al., 2002; Elson, 2000), descriptive
studies offering insights into country-specific gender budgeting plans
(Downes et al., 2016), and interpretive analyses critiquing traditional
budgeting processes for perpetuating gender-based power dynamics
(Marx, 2019).

Despite its significance in promoting gender equality, gender budgeting

has received relatively less attention from public administration scholars,
prompting calls for increased research focus (Steccolini, 2019). Existing
discourse within public administration encompasses diverse topics related
to gender, such as representative bureaucracy, participatory budgeting,
and accounting for marginalized groups like displaced persons and
refugees (Bearfield, 2009; Escobar, 2021; Riccucci et al., 2014).

For instance, Riccucci et al. (2014) examine representative bureaucracy in

a hypothetical police unit dealing with domestic violence, highlighting
how gender representation influences trustworthiness, fairness, and
performance. Other scholars emphasize the importance of participatory
budgeting in enhancing gender budgeting effectiveness, advocating for a
transformative approach that includes marginalized groups often excluded
from traditional definitions of citizenship (Klatzer, 2016; Escobar, 2021).

Recommendations from Sharp and Broomhill (2002) and Rubin and Bartle
(2005) emphasize the need to not only describe gender budgeting but also
derive policy implications from research findings. Despite ongoing
research efforts, a comprehensive overview of the academic discourse on
gender budgeting remains lacking, particularly in reviews of public
financial management where gender features are often overlooked
(Anessi-Pessina et al., 2016; Van Helden and Uddin, 2016). Responding
to calls for increased attention to gender in public sector accounting
(Khalifa and Scarparo, 2020; Steccolini, 2019), this review focuses on the
intersection of gender equality and public financial management. Given
the fragmented nature of the literature and limited understanding of gender
budgeting's development as a subarea of gender mainstreaming, this
review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis and outline avenues for
future research, particularly in public financial management.
 Conclusion

Based on our review and identified gaps, here are four avenues for future research
on gender budgeting:

1. **Comparative Analysis Across Governance Levels and Countries:**

- Investigate differences in the implementation of gender budgeting between
centralized and decentralized/federal systems.
- Conduct comparative studies across different regions and countries to understand
implementation contexts and draw conclusions applicable to diverse settings.

2. **Evaluation of Outcome and Impact:**

- Shift focus towards assessing the outcomes and impacts of gender budgeting,
particularly during the concurrent and ex post stages.
- Utilize survey-based research to evaluate concrete outcomes, economic impacts,
changes in gender performance indicators, and stakeholder awareness.
- Collect more gender-disaggregated data from governments to support
quantitative research, while also addressing implementation barriers through
qualitative approaches.

3. **Organizational Diffusion and Institutionalization:**

- Explore how governments prioritize gender budgeting during stable times versus
crises or resource scarcity.
- Investigate the risks faced by gender budgeting initiatives during times of reform,
crisis, or austerity, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
- Study how gender budgeting can be integrated as both a managerial and political
practice to advance gender mainstreaming agendas.

4. **Integration of Accounting Perspective:**

- Incorporate perspectives from accounting and accountability disciplines to
enhance understanding of gender budgeting.
- Assess whether public budgets contribute to closing gender gaps, emphasizing
data-centered approaches.
- Recognize the interdisciplinary nature of gender budgeting and its implications
for promoting gender equality.
Methodological considerations for future research include expanding beyond peer-
reviewed studies to include non-reviewed materials and adopting cross-disciplinary
perspectives to analyze the link between gender budgeting efforts and economic
impact.