UNIFEM-OECD-Nordic Council of Ministers-Belgium Government High

Level Conference

‘STRENGTHENING ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL

GOVERNANCE THROUGH GENDER RESPONSIVE
BUDGETING’

Egmont Palace, Brussels

16-17 October 2001

CONFERENCE REPORT

Dr. Nathalie Holvoet

Institute of Development Policy and Management
University of Antwerp
e-mail: nathalie.holvoet@ua.ac.be

1
PREFACE

This report highlights the outcomes of the High-Level International Conference

‘Strengthening economic and financial governance through gender responsive
budgeting’. This conference, which took place in the Egmont Palace in Brussels on the
16th and 17th of October, was organised by the Government of Belgium, the United
Nations Development Fund for Women, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) and the Nordic Council of Ministers.

The conference brought together ministers, experts, parliamentarians, civil society

actors and high-level policy makers from international institutions and ministries of
budget, finance, employment, industry, gender, social affairs, transport, development
co-operation and agriculture from over 43 countries in the world.

Different key-note speakers pointed out that gender-responsive budgeting is especially

relevant in the context of the increasing importance that is attributed to the
intertwined objectives of efficiency, equality and accountability. There is mounting
evidence that closing the present gap of persistent gender inequalities would produce a
substantial development dividend.

Gender inequality is to a large extent determined at the household level, which does
however not operate as an isolated unity. Both parental preferences and decision-
making processes are largely influenced by environmental factors that are influenced
and shaped by a government’s own priorities and budgetary allocations. The
composition and level of governmental expenditures and revenues and the way in
which expenditures are allocated and revenues are raised are clearly not producing
gender-neutral effects. Gender budget analysis contributes in highlighting the
magnitude and direction of these effects and in suggesting corrective measures.

Diverse experts strongly pointed out that gender responsive budgeting is not only
about the content of budgets but also about underlying budgetary processes. Here,
advocates clearly find synergies with the discourse of good governance, which
promotes budgetary processes that are transparent, participatory, results-oriented and
medium-term. Within the present context of increasing legitimacy gaps between
governments and citizens, gender-sensitive budget analysis may also help mobilise the
participation and ownership of citizens, both men and women. The expanding practice
of gender budgeting shows that it offers an instrument for accountability of
governments towards their own citizens and towards the international community. It is
in this respect important to make reference to the commitments that were made in the
context of the Beijing Platform for Action and in the Commission on the Elimination of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

The practice of gender responsive budgeting is relatively new but rapidly expanding. As
different experts pointed out, a clear-cut uniform model of gender-responsive
budgeting does not exist. Initiatives to date vary among others in terms of the
coverage, the stage in the budget cycle, the political location and in the way results of
the analysis are reported. Starting from the observation that experiences and
knowledge about gender responsive budgeting are scattered and diverse, the
conference assembled different actors from various settings in order to take stock of

2
past experiences and to build a common understanding about approaches, concepts,
tools and instruments.
Different experts and practitioners contributed to assessing lessons learned,
documenting good practices, highlighting potential errors and weaknesses and distilling
features that have proved critical to success. Lessons learned focused both on in-
country practices and on the development of the methodology in terms of overall
conceptual models, frameworks and tools. We may hope that cross-fertilisation of
different actors’ experiences and perceptions will help improving future work in the
field of gender-responsive budgeting.

The conference further realised to mobilise the interest of a larger group of

governments to support the incorporation of gender analysis within their own budget
processes. About 30 representatives of national governments and international
organisations highlighted in their statements the achievements realised in the past and
commented on their future plans. With support of the Government of Belgium, the
OECD, the Nordic Council of Ministers, the Commonwealth Secretariat and UNIFEM a
conference communiqué was elaborated and discussed with all country
representatives. It proposes a global vision for gender-budget initiatives fashioned to
enlist reiteration of commitments made by most United Nations Member States to
undertake gender sensitive budget analysis1, and to add a deadline date: 2015. This
conference communiqué will also be a key input to the preparations for the upcoming
March 2002 Financing for Development Conference in Mexico.

Finally, different speakers highlighted and recognised the innovating work of the
United Nations Development Fund for Women and its partners of the Commonwealth
Secretariat and the International Development Research Centre in the field of gender-
responsive budgeting. Our challenge for the future is to respond to the increasing
demands for supporting new initiatives throughout the world. It is thus hoped that the
conference helped in convincing OECD and Nordic Member countries to financially
support the gender-responsive budgeting initiative housed within UNIFEM so that
countries that need help with budget initiatives can turn to UNIFEM and its partners.

1
See for instance the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (1995), article 345, which clearly
indicates the importance of integrating a gender perspective in budgetary decisions.

3
TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. CONFERENCE COMMUNIQUE ........................................................................ 4

II. OPENING SESSION SPEECHES (day 1) .......................................................... 6

Eddy Boutmans, State Secretary for Development Co-operation, Belgium... 6

Noeleen Heyzer, Executive Director, UNIFEM............................................ 9
Tony Hutton, Director of Public Management Directorate, OECD ...............12
Sigurdur Helgason, Deputy Secretary General, Nordic Council of Ministers.15

III. SESSION 1: THE CONTEXT AND FUTURE CHALLENGES .................................17

IV. SESSION 2: TOOLS AND APPROACHES.........................................................24

V. SESSION 3: LESSONS LEARNED IN PRACTICE ..............................................32

VI. OPENING SESSION SPEECHES (day 2) .........................................................49

Laurette Onkelinx, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Employment and

Equal Opportunities ...............................................................................49
Eddy Boutmans, State Secretary for Development Co-operation, Belgium..53
Noeleen Heyzer, Executive Director, UNIFEM...........................................57
Sigurdur Helgason, Deputy Secretary General, Nordic Council of Ministers.59
Winston Cox, Deputy Secretary General, Commonwealth Secretariat.........62

VII. INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE AND CALLS TO ACTION .....................................67

APPENDIX

A. AGENDA AND SPEAKERS...................................................................................75

B. SHORT BIOS OF SPEAKERS AND CHAIRS...........................................................78
C. OVERVIEW OF COUNTRY STATEMENTS .............................................................89
D. LIST OF CONFERENCE PAPERS..........................................................................91
E. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ....................................................................................92

4
I. CONFERENCE COMMUNIQUE
1. As support to strengthening economic and financial governance through gender
responsive budgeting, the Government of Belgium hosted a High Level conference in
Brussels on
16-17 October 2001 - sponsored by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) and supported by the Nordic Council of Ministers, the
Government of Italy, the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), the
Commonwealth Secretariat, and the International Development Research Centre-
Canada (IDRC).

2. The conference brought together ministries of budget, finance, employment, industry,

gender, social affairs, transport, development cooperation, and agriculture from
governments worldwide, as well as experts and international institutions. The goal is to
mobilize political and financial support to strengthen the capacity of governments as
well as civil society organizations to carry out these initiatives and to support the global
vision of gender responsive budget initiatives in all countries by 2015.2

3. Gender responsive budget initiatives are an important tool for strengthening economic
and financial governance and for promoting accountability and equality. National
budgets reflect how governments mobilize and allocate public resources, and how they
aim to meet the social and economic needs of their people. Gender responsive
budgeting analyses the impact of government policies on men and boys as compared
with women and girls within and across any given socio-economic category. Gender
analysis is an important part of accountable and responsive budget procedures. Fiscal,
financial and economic policies help reduce poverty and redress inequalities in the
distribution of resources.

4. Governments world wide made a commitment, in the 1995 Beijing Platform for Action
(1995), to “incorporate a gender perspective into the design, development, adoption
and execution of all budgetary processes as appropriate in order to promote equitable,
effective and appropriate resource allocation and establish adequate budgetary
allocations to support gender equality and development programmes that enhance
women’s empowerment.”

2
The support for gender budgeting and good economic governance has been found internationally through the
following initiatives:
• The Nordic Council of Ministers decision to apply gender mainstreaming to areas traditionally considered ‘gender
neutral’ such as economic and finance policy, both in Member states and in their development co-operation
activities (see Nordic Co-operation Programme on Gender Equality 2001-2005);
• The 22nd Annual Meeting of the Senior Budget Officials of the OECD in Paris (2001) noted that new analytical tools
which illustrate how the budget impacts different population groups are becoming increasingly common in OECD
Member countries;
• The communiqué by the 2000 Commonwealth Ministers Responsible for Women’s Affairs Meeting in New Delhi
encourages Governments to integrate, where appropriate, a gender analysis into the national budgetary process …
and to consider integrating a gender perspective into macroeconomic policies such as debt management and
structural adjustment policies, and international trade policy”;
• The United Nations ECOSOC Resolution E/RES/1998/26 requests “the governing bodies of the United Nations
funds and programmes to monitor the implementation of gender mainstreaming in their programme of work,
including in the budgeting of their organizations”;
• The 2001 United Nations – Inter Agency Meeting on Women and Gender Equality and the OECD/DAC Working
Party on Gender Equality communiqué from the joint workshop on governance, poverty reduction and gender
equality (Vienna) states that “accountability, transparency, participation and legitimacy are core elements” of good
governance” and that “gender responsiveness is essential to all of these, and is a measure of good governance”.
It also underscored the principle of including citizen participation;
• At the Millenium Summit, all members of the United Nations endorsed a set of development goals which include
the achievement of gender equality and the empowerment of women. The Millenium development goals build on
the International Development Targets composed by the OECD in 1996.

5
 5. Gender responsive budget initiatives can make an important contribution to the growing
practice of civic consultation and participation in the preparation of budgets and in the
monitoring of their outcomes and impact, at local, regional and national levels. In
particular, they can ensure that women and girls are not marginalised from such
processes. This strengthens economic and financial governance by promoting
transparency.

6. Mounting evidence shows that gender inequality leads to major losses in social
cohesion, economic efficiency and human development. Budgetary policy can
increase, reduce, or leave unchanged the losses to society from gender inequality
through changes in expenditure and revenue, primarily through adjustments in fiscal
policy. Thus gender responsive budget policies can contribute to achieving the
objectives of gender equality, human development and economic efficiency.

7. Gender responsive budgeting can enable governments, that are parties to the
Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, to better fulfil their
obligations therein. It is a means to reduce discrimination, direct or indirect, against
women in policies governing taxation and expenditure. It is also a means to ensure that
the requisite resources are taken into account and made available to implement
legislation that advances gender equality and the fulfilment of the human rights of
women.

The conference therefore urges governments, international and intergovernmental

organizations, multilateral institutions and non-governmental organizations to:

I. Encourage the examination of budget processes and objectives to ensure that

women’s and men’s needs and priorities are considered equally;
II. Encourage women to participate in this examination, including as elected
representatives and members of women's organizations; and involve the
research community, development banks and civil society;
III. Encourage the incorporation of gender analysis in the preparation,
implementation, audit and evaluation of government budgets at all levels; and
show commitment to transparency and accountability by encouraging the
application of gender analysis in government budget reports, including by
setting out and reporting on the impact of past budgets and the expected
impact of the proposed budget on gender equality objectives;
IV. Recognize the use of gender responsive budget initiatives as a tool to enhance
the way civil society preferences and needs are incorporated into the budget,
to improve transparency and equality, reduce poverty and achieve good
economic and financial governance;
V. Encourage and support gender responsive budget initiatives worldwide and
call on the Nordic Council of Ministers, the OECD, and UNIFEM in cooperation
with the Commonwealth Secretariat and the International Development
Research Centre -Canada and other relevant bodies, to continue to provide
research, technical or methodological support for these initiatives;
VI. Promote the catalytic and supportive role of international and development
cooperation, including through increasing support for gender budget
initiatives.

6
II. OPENING SESSION SPEECHES

Eddy Boutmans, State Secretary of Development Co-operation, Belgium

It is a privilege for me to welcome you all to this international conference on gender

responsive budgeting. In particular, I would like to welcome the co-organisers of this
conference: Ms. Noeleen Heyzer, Executive Director of the Nations Fund for
Development of Women (UNIFEM), Mr. Tony Hutton, Director of the Public
Management Service Directorate of the OECD, Mr. Sigurdur Helgason of the Nordic
Council of Ministers. Despite our various backgrounds and diverse settings from where
we operate, we managed to organise this conference jointly.

I’m honoured that Belgium was chosen as the meeting place for experts and
practitioners from around the world. I’m sure that this was not a coincidence but
rather the deliberate outcome of various influencing factors. First and for all, Belgium
currently takes the presidency of the European Union and has included gender as one
of the issues on the agenda. The European Union and the European Commission in
particular are becoming increasingly aware of the importance of an active gender
policy in its own member states and in its development policy. It is not by accident that
the Gender Equality Unit of the European Commission is organising a brainstorming
session about the integration of gender issues in public finance, labour markets,
financial and capital markets this very week.

Coming back to my own department, this conference is certainly not to be considered

as an isolated event. It is in fact completely in line with the chosen policy of the
Belgian Development Co-operation, which places gender at the top of its priorities.
Evidence of the latter is the fact that Belgium, as the first together with Italy, has in
2000 taken the decision to support the Gender Budget Initiative programme of UNIFEM
and its partners of IDRC and the Commonwealth Secretariat. We have done this for a
period of five years and through a financial contribution of 1.98 million euro
(approximately 2.3 million $). We did opt for this very programme because we
completely subscribe the two-edged approach it takes: global thinking and local
practical practice going hand in hand. UNIFEM and its partners produce global public
goods through the development of conceptual frameworks and tools and they are
supporting those local political entrepreneurs who want to apply gender responsive
budgeting in their own countries.

Careful budget impact analysis along gender lines and reprioritisation of budgets from
a gender perspective is crucial for a number of reasons. I will not go into this in detail
as the experts will explain this much better than I can but I nevertheless want to
highlight a number of aspects, which seem important to me.

Firstly, there is evidence from all over the world gathered in various reports of,
among others, UNIFEM, UNDP, the World Bank indicate that despite progress, there is
still a male bias in terms of access and control over human capital goods as education
and health care, productive resources as land and working capital and basic human
rights. The latest Human Development Report e.g. indicates that worldwide 24 % of
girls of primary age are not in school as against 16% of boys.

7
The persisting presence of inequalities is the result of biased allocative decisions taken
within several institutions such as the household, the market and the State. These
institutions do not operate in isolation from each other but interact in a rather complex
way. When studying allocation and how one might intervene to alter this allocation, it
is important not to forget the importance of the various intermediating institutions.

Decisions about allocation are first and for all taken at the household level. Evidence
from diverse settings shows that parents do invest more in education and health care
of sons than of daughters. Parents however do not take decisions as an isolated unity
(and often not even as an unity because preferences of mothers and fathers do not
necessarily coincide) but they are strongly influenced by extra-household
environmental factors. These are factors, which might be, at least partly, influenced by
governmental policy and by budgetary allocations. Government itself, however, most
of the time, does not weaken but rather reinforces the already existing biased
allocation at the household level. This is e.g. the case if more public spending goes to
facilities, services that are primarily used by men and boys. Large public spending for
tertiary education e.g. at the expense of investments in primary and secondary
education will in most cases mean that a larger portion of public spending goes to boys
as it are in particular boys who are enrolled in tertiary education. By investing more in
facilities primarily used by girls, most of the time these are the basic social services,
and by allocating more resources to increase the supply of appropriate facilities for
girls, a government may intervene in the allocation process and may help to close
down the existing gap.

____________________________________________________________
One should however not forget that there is not only a supply side but also a demand
side. Even if large investments are made in appropriate schooling and health care
facilities for girls, this does not automatically mean that girls will make use of these
facilities. It is therefore important to analyse not only the impact of budgets but also to
get a clear vision of all factors underlying the gendered allocation of services.
______________________________________________________________________

Here, research on intrahousehold allocation could add some valuable insights to the
results from budget impact analysis. Research from various regions e.g. does show
that mothers and fathers do not necessarily have the same preferences and that
deliberate targeting of public spending to mothers does seem to have beneficial effects
on the portion of resources that are allocated to daughters.

Secondly, living in an international environment where terms as ‘efficiency’,

‘competitive environment’, ‘economic growth and development’ are the key-words, it is
increasingly realized that the existing biased budgetary allocations are
counterproductive and that they produce negative externalities for the overall society.
Competition is severely falsified as women are facing several barriers that prevent
them from starting from the same take-off position. Adjustment of existing inequalities
is necessary to enhance women’s full participation, which should finally lead to a win-
win situation for all. We should however be careful not to fully build the rationale for
‘gender responsive budgeting’ in terms of ‘efficiency’ and ‘economic growth’.

8
______________________________________________________________________
We should not only and not primarily strive for gender equality in outcomes because of
its potentially beneficiary effects on the overall economic growth and development.
Gender equality might indeed be instrumental in terms of reaching other objectives as
efficiency but it is first and for all a well-justified final objective in itself.

Thirdly, what I further find interesting in the initiative about Gender Responsive
Budgeting is that its implications and recommendations are not limited towards the
content of budgets. It is also talking about underlying budgetary processes and here
advocates of gender responsive budgeting are not standing alone. The same demands
and recommendations for more participatory, results-oriented, accountability-
enhancing processes are also made by advocates of pro-poor and environmental-
sensitive accounting and budgeting.

This very event itself is important for two main reasons. It offers an opportunity to
take stock of the conceptual work developed and the practical experience gained. As a
state secretary for development co-operation I find the mix and cross-fertilization of
northern and southern experiences interesting. And on this topic, it is clear that the
north may learn a lot from the south. Whereas a number of countries of the north have
already started initiatives, it seems to me that we may learn a lot from experiences
taken within and outside government in countries as diverse as South Africa, India,
Ecuador (at least at the local governmental level), Peru, Tanzania, Uganda, Brazil, the
Philippines.

_____________________________________________________________________
I personally also hope that experts from finance ministries and development agencies
which are present today and tomorrow will benefit from this encounter to take back
home knowledge about tools and approaches and lessons learned from actual
experiences. This will be important in order to convince their ministries to commit
themselves politically and financially to support this initiative. This commitment might
perhaps not be fully realized during this very conference but I hope that this gathering
delivers enough convincing material and creates enough goodwill to have the
commitment accomplished in the near future.

I wish you all an inspirational conference and I have the honour now to give the floor
to Ms. Noeleen Heyzer from UNIFEM.

9
 Noeleen Heyzer, Executive Director, UNIFEM

Mr. Secretary of State, Mr. Hutton, Mr. Helgason, Distinguished Ministers, Delegates,
Colleagues and Friends

Threats to global peace and security know no borders. We understand, each day with
greater clarity, how injustice, inequality and conflict undermine good governance. Our
presence here, under Belgian’s leadership during its presidency of the European Union,
shows our commitment to good governance. In a very modest way, I believe that our
deliberations about gender responsive budgeting can help advance this agenda.

I would like to begin by acknowledging the powerful alliance that has brought us
together: The OECD, the Nordic Council of Ministers and UNIFEM’s partners, the
Commonwealth Secretariat and Canadian International Development and Research
Centre. Together, we have convened a truly extraordinary gathering. Extraordinary, I
say, because it brings together partners not used to sitting at the same table. Partners
who use different tools to measure similar economic, social and political outcomes.
Collectively here today, we represent government, multilateral and non-governmental
partners, independent experts, north and south, finance ministries and development
cooperation. This is a unique gathering.

The idea to convene this Conference came immediately after the Government of
Belgium signalled its generous contribution to support UNIFEM’s work on gender
responsive budget initiatives around the world.
______________________________________________________________________
And after five years of piloting and experimentation, we saw immediately that we were
containing a groundswell. That a great majority of the 100 countries that we work in
were dedicated to using this tool. That 13 OECD members had already begun in some
way to support gender responsive budgets domestically. And that Denmark, Germany,
Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland have all supported gender
budget initiatives within their cooperation programmes. We know that the World Bank,
DFID, and the ECE have promoted the idea and displayed interest. We saw
immediately what it was that gender budget initiatives share in common with other
successful global campaigns. And that is universality of cause. Money matters
everywhere. In the north and in the south. The budget lines in the US are as
revealing about women’s status as they are in Morocco, Vietnam, the Netherlands or
Japan.

They can demonstrate the effectiveness of gender mainstreaming, the efficiency of

economic policy decisions, and the transparency of budget processes. Gender budgets
are not what they sound like. They are not separate budgets for women. And they
don’t aim to increase spending on women specific programmes. Gender responsive
budgeting simply refers to the analysis of government expenditure and revenue on
women and girls as compared to men and boys. Gender budget analysis helps
governments decide how policies need to be adjusted to achieve their maximum
impact, and where resources need to be reallocated.

Four driving forces explain the rising interest in gender responsive budgeting.

10
First, the political drive for accountability. The recent reviews of UN World
Conferences on Women, Social Development and on Population, all showed mixed
results. But the idea of linking political commitments to gender equality with the way a
government allocates and generates resources provided a concrete way to measure a
government’s accountability to nearly half of the population. Sweden’s commitment to
provide decent childcare at an affordable price can be seen it its budget: it spends
almost 2 per cent of GDP on publicly provided childcare and has one of the highest
rates of female employment in Europe.

Gender analysis has also shown how budget allocations may bear little resemblance to
actual expenditures. And while expenditures sometimes exceed allocations, more often
and particularly in relation to gender items – there is under-expenditure. In South
Africa, a gender budget analysis of the 2 million rand allocated for a national domestic
violence act, resulted in a series of recommendations to facilitate the implementation
strategy.

The second force is transparency. Gender budget initiatives offer a way to encourage
public participation in the budget process. Budget formulation is generally an exclusive
process, and women are typically on the periphery of political and economic discourse.
In Uganda, women parliamentarians challenged the budget process as a whole –
demanding a greater role for parliamentarians in the design. And the success of
participatory budgeting in Porto Alegre, Brazil is credited with increasing access to
water services, sewage, paved roads and a doubling of children’s enrolment in public
schools.

The third driving force is equality. Gender responsive budget analysis provides a way
to hold governments accountable for its commitments to gender equality and to
protecting women’s human rights. This is achieved by linking commitments made to
instruments like the Beijing Platform for Action, or the Convention on the Elimination of
All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, with the distribution, use and generation
of public resources. National budgets may appear to be gender-neutral policy
instruments. But government expenditures and revenues do not impact equally on men
and women. For example, most countries’ education budgets are gender neutral in
design, but because in many countries more boys than girls actually attend school,
boys can derive more benefit from educational expenditure than do girls. In Ghana,
girls received only 40% of total expenditure on secondary education. Similarly, a
budget that provides equally in the health care sector for men and for women, may not
take into account women’s additional reproductive health care needs.

The fourth driving force is efficiency. The World Bank has shown that gender
inequality leads to major losses in economic efficiency and human development. And
gender budget initiatives have provided essential information about how well a budget
achieves its intended objectives. A gender budget analysis of New Deal programmes in
the UK revealed that only 8 per cent of funding for these programmes goes to “lone
parents,” of whom 95 per cent are female. Yet 57 percent of funds go to young
people, of whom only 27 percent are female. The gender budget analysis prepared by
the French Ministry of Economy, Finance and Industry, shows that in 2000, 31 percent
of working women held part-time jobs, as compared with 5 per cent of men. It also
shows that women who worked part time did not do so by choice - especially women
raising children on their own, who headed 84 percent of single parent families in 1997.
The report concludes that these trends have resulted in the increasing feminisation of
poverty.

11
Clearly, gender budget analysis is beginning to contribute to the great international
debates of the day – around financing for development, poverty reduction strategies,
globalisation and good governance. To advance these agendas while advancing
progress for the world’s women, I am asking for your support. Our collective goal is
that all countries in the world undertake gender sensitive budget analysis by 2015.
Many donor countries and organization have stepped forward and are providing
support for those countries without the means to do so. We hope that you will join by
this growing consensus.

_____________________________________________________________________
An historian looking back will see that the next great wave of affirmation – the next
great moment of social progress came around gender responsive budgeting. And that
time is clearly now. Gender budget analysis offers tools to measure progress of the
world’s women. It is not a coincidence that this interest in gender budgets is
happening as economic discourse is shifting to one of accountability and good
governance. It is rather a signal of our collective readiness to move from an era of
standard setting into an era of application.
_____________________________________________________________________

12
 Tony Hutton, Director of the Public Management Directorate, OECD

I am delighted to open this important conference on behalf of the OECD and to

welcome you all to Brussels. The organisation of this meeting has been a joint
undertaking of the OECD, UNIFEM (the United Nations Development Fund for Women),
the Nordic Council and the Belgian Government, and I would like to thank our partner
organisations.

The importance of gender for the OECD was highlighted by our Ministers in the
Communiqué this summer when they welcomed the success of the two conferences
held in the OECD last November on Gender Mainstreaming and on Women
Entrepreneurs in SMEs. Ministers also left the OECD with a clear mandate to further
integrate gender analysis into our work.

______________________________________________________________________
At the outset, I would like to emphasise one thing: we view gender responsive
budgeting not just as a social issue. Rather, we view it as an issue of economic growth
that can help to ensure that our Member countries make full use of their resources in
this increasingly competitive world.

For better or for worse, budgets are the key decision-making structures in the
governments of Member countries. It is in the budget where policy objective are
reconciled and implemented in concrete terms, thus giving effect to countries’
economic and social priorities.

We recognise that it is of prime importance to be able to analyse the budget in terms

of its impact on specific population groups, including -- but not limited to -- women.
We need to be able to show the impacts -- good and bad, intended or otherwise -- of
government budgetary decisions. This is also very important in terms of increasing
trust in government by citizens and, as such, is at the heart of good governance
agenda.

We are not at this stage, yet. We believe there are several issues that need to be
tackled for the effective use of budget impact analysis by governments. Allow me to
discuss four of them.

First, you will notice that I do not see this exercise as being limited to women only,
but to any identifiable demographic group --- for example unemployed youth, or senior
citizens. You may disagree, but I think a term such as “Budget Impact Analysis,” or
similar, captures in a more politically-neutral way exactly what we are attempting to
accomplish here. And appearances are important!

Second, this needs to be done with a recognised methodology that is analytically

robust and can be defended as such. Otherwise, we risk that the efforts in this area
being judged as “special pleading” rather than as an objective tool for achieving more
effective resource allocation. In this context, further refinement of existing tools needs
to be made and we need to get an increased consensus on the methodology applied.
Having governments systematically produce data on the beneficiaries of their programs
by demographically disaggregated groups, such as women, is the first step. However,

13
that is in many ways the easy step; what we do with that data and how it is
interpreted are the difficult elements. Allow me to mention two examples:
1. Women are greater consumers of health care services than men (where
giving birth plays a very large role) and women live longer on average than
men --- Should this mean that women should pay higher premiums for
health care and old-age pensions?
2. Similarly, showing that programs geared towards specific groups are
ineffective does not always mean that funding should be reduced for the
programs, as would be the classic interpretation. Often it means quite the
opposite.
It’s areas like this that make this whole area very sensitive to deal with and call for
very good analytical tools.

_____________________________________________________________________
Third, this works needs to be integrated into the work of finance ministries and the
budget committees of parliament. The risk here is that gender budget analysis will be
undertaken in specialised units outside of the mainstream budget decision-making
process and be less effective as a result. Worst case: this whole exercise could be
nothing more than a public relations activity.

In this context, I am reminded of the difficulties governments face in where to locate

management reforms units. Option 1 is to have them as stand-alone units allowing
them to focus exclusively on these issues. However, the downside is often that they
have no clout to ensure the implementation of management reforms by line ministries.
Option 2 is to have them integrated with the work of finance ministries. This certainly
gives them the necessary clout to have line ministries take notice, but the downside is
that the work could be overwhelmed by other issues. However, with the political
emphasis placed on gender issues in Member countries, I do not think that should be
as cause for worry as many other areas of finance ministries work.

Fourth, the appropriate role of NGO’s needs to be acknowledged. Governments can

make “raw” information available on public expenditures and the specific beneficiary
groups. In fact, this is at the heart of the development of a robust analytical
framework. Governments would use this information in their decision-making, but it
would be unrealistic to assume that governments would automatically become an
advocacy group based on this data. How NGO’s fit into the overall design needs to be
thought through from the very beginning.

The OECD believes it can play an active role in all these areas of concern. We have
unique access to the relevant officials in our committee structures --- we have one
committee composed of the budget directors from Member countries and another one
composed of the chairpersons of parliamentary budget committees. At the last meeting
of budget directors, we devoted a session to gender budgeting. I am pleased that Ms.
Noeleen Heyzer (Executive Director of UNIFEM) was able to attend the meeting and
address the budget directors on this question. I think that marked an important
staging post --- it “opened the door” --- to further work in this field. The three key
messages that I’ve discussed emerged from that meeting and I believe addressing
them is the prior requirement for this work being accepted.

We have discussed with UNIFEM how the OECD can best carry on further work in this
field and we look forward to the discussions at this meeting. There are 2 members of
the OECD Secretariat here throughout the conference – Francesca Cook and Jon

14
Blondal – and I invite you to discuss with them further the OECD’s activities in this
area.

Again, I am delighted to welcome you to this conference on behalf of the OECD. I wish
it every success.

15
 Sigurdur Helgason, Deputy Secretary General, Nordic Council of Ministers

I am delighted to have been given the opportunity to address this forum. I want to
thank the Government of Belgium for hosting this conference.

The culture and history shared by the Nordic countries have made it possible to co-
operate closely and constructively in different sectors; including gender equality.
Gender equality means that power and influence are equally distributed. Women and
men have the same rights, obligations and opportunities in all areas of life. Achieving
gender equality and fairness in society requires a comprehensive gender equality
policy. This applies to both men and women. Gender equality is connected to
important values and factors; such as respect, equal worth, understanding, quality of
life and identity.

The basic starting point of the Nordic Co-operation Programme on Gender Equality
2001-2005, adopted this year, is that gender equality, equal value and equal
opportunities among women and men must be promoted. This must be done in an
increasingly goal-oriented manner in all areas of society. Factors that inhibit
development for women and men must be eliminated. The programme is intended to
reinforce the overall effort to incorporate the gender equality perspective into all areas
of policies. At the same time, the programme should yield concrete measures in the
most important sectors that have something new to teach us or have received less
attention previously.

The co-operation programme focus on three main target areas, which all today are in
focus in the Nordic gender equality debate:

• Gender and equality perspectives in Nordic economic policy

Incorporating a gender equality perspective into national budgets and economic policy
is a very challenging task that cannot be addressed only through the means that are
available to Nordic co-operation on gender equality. The Nordic Ministers of Finance
have also agreed to start a joint Nordic project to evaluate Nordic economic policy from
a gender equality perspective.

___________________________________________________________________________________
• Men and gender equality

It is important to involve men and the issues connected to their roles into gender
equality work. A conference Men Can financed by Nordic Council of Ministers will be
arranged in Copenhagen, Denmark on October 28 where the relationships of men,
working life and male values are discussed.

• ”Peace for women” – Violence against women

Kvinnofrid – ”Peace for Women” is the third main target area in the co-operation
programme. An extensive research programme "Gender and Violence in the Nordic
Countries" started in 2000 and will continue till 2004. Next year a campaign on
Trafficking in Women will be carried out in the Nordic and Baltic countries at the same
time.

16
In recent years, Nordic countries and the Nordic Council of Ministers have launched a
process for incorporating a gender equality perspective into every policy area. This
mainstreaming process will not replace so-called traditional gender equality work.
Without integration, gender equality experts and decision-makers will not be able to
engage in the dialogue that is so essential.
______________________________________________________________________
An international examination shows that Nordic societies have come far in achieving
gender equality. To ensure that the development remains positive, it is vital that the
Nordic countries do not have to compromise their achievements. Let us hope that the
Nordic perceptions will evoke a response within the European Union and in other
international fora.

This conference will give women and men a good possibility to exchange experiences,
create new activities and projects and start dialogue and co-operation on gender
budgeting.

17
III. SESSION 1 : THE CONTEXT AND FUTURE CHALLENGES

Winnie Byanyima outlined the underlying rationale for gender-responsive budgeting.

Being herself a member of the Ugandan parliament and of the non-governmental
organisation ‘Forum for Women in Democracy (FOWODE), she put her contribution
within the context of African countries. As Winnie Byanyima argued, in Africa gender-
responsive budgeting needs to be put within the global framework of political and
economic liberalisation.

There has been a major shift in African countries towards liberal democratic policies
that try to stimulate broad-based inclusive democratic processes. The participation of
citizens is no longer restricted to voting. Through participation and collective action in
civil society organisations, citizens are trying to influence government’s decisions.
Gender-responsive budgeting should be considered as a reflection of the evolution
towards a more participatory inclusive democracy.

‘Gender-responsive budgeting’ can be considered as a powerful political tool that has

put the political aspirations into a language which policy makers and politicians respect
and can respond to, however slowly (Winnie Byanyima, 2001).
______________________________________________________________________

The integration of a gender perspective in budgets is also intrinsically linked with

national and international efforts to eradicate poverty. Especially in Africa, where men
and women clearly play different roles and where differences in social and economic
indicators are huge, efforts to reduce poverty will not be successful unless the existing
differences are taken into account. Winnie Byanyima strongly argued for the
broadening of the understanding of underlying intrahousehold relations. Not taking into
account the existing asymmetric relationships will render policy measures ineffective. A
gendered analysis will, for instance, highlight that, while women form the majority of
the farmers, they do not control the land they work on. Reducing poverty and
increasing efficiency will necessitate redressing the existing asymmetries in rights and
obligations. Most of the time however, government’s policies rather reinforce existing
inequalities. It is through a gender budget analysis that evidence is provided about the
effects of government’s policies on men and women.

In Uganda, networking of women’s groups and female parliamentarians has led to

effective lobbying for reforming of the budgetary process. Recently, efforts have been
made to install a gender analysis subcommittee within the budget committee. This
would give the opportunity to analyse the budgets of the different ministries and
ministries from a gender perspective.

The importance of gender-responsive budgeting should also be put against the

background of previously implemented Structural Adjustment Programmes and the
recently initiated processes of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP). Structural
adjustment programmes, which were aimed at reducing the budgetary deficits through
a sharp reduction of government’s expenditures and an increase in government’s
revenues, have in practice often produced negative effects on the poor and in
particular on poor women. More specifically, gender-disaggregated time use studies
have shown that the costs of reproducing and maintaining a labour force were
transferred from the public sector to women.

18
As Winnie Byanyima pointed out, the recent shift towards PRSP offers opportunities to
question whether budgets reflect the priorities that were identified on the basis of
beneficiary assessments or in consultation with civil society organisations that
represent the marginalized groups in society, i.e. the poor, the disabled, women, etc.
In Uganda, women’s organisations have been invited to contribute to the PRSP and
they were able to remove budget items, which they did not consider to be a priority for
the poor. The use of gender budget analysis also enables to monitor more closely
expenditures and possible gaps between stated policies and effectively received
expenditures. It allows analysing to what extent actual expenditures and revenue-
raising correspond with the stated objectives in PRSP.

Winnie Byanyima finally stressed that gender-responsive budgeting is not only

instrumental in criticizing existing budgetary policies and practices. It also enables to
propose alternative policies and re-allocations of resources as to address unmet needs.

Diane Elson, of the University of Essex (UK), started her contribution by highlighting
gender responsive budgeting as an instrument to close the gap between government
commitments to objectives of gender equality and gender mainstreaming and
government’s actual fiscal policies.

______________________________________________________________________
Gender responsive budget initiatives can help ensure the realisation of gender equality
goals and improved compliance with the Convention on the Elimination of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). They can help promote greater accountability
for public resources to the people of a country, especially to women, who are generally
more marginalized than men in decision-making about public money (Diane Elson,
2001).
_____________________________________________________________________

As Diane Elson demonstrated, an overview of gender budget initiatives taken in the

past leads to the conclusion that there is no single model. Initiatives differ regarding
the political location (national versus local government level/inside versus outside
government), the coverage (the whole budget, only expenditures, only revenues),
budget classifications (line items, functional, economic, administrative, programme,
territorial), stage of the budget cycle (planning, appraisal, audit or ex-post evaluation)
and the presentation of the analysis (number of points in the main budget or
evaluation report, special annex to the main budget or evaluation report, briefing
papers for parliamentarians, press releases, research publications, popular education
publications, submissions to government task forces, planning groups, inquiries, etc…).

Which particular choice is made within each of the above categories is largely
dependent on the particular context of the country. Taking into account the
divergences in actual experiences, Diane Elson, presented a functional performance-
based framework, which is widely applicable for gender analysis of ministries’ or
programmes’ budgets.

19
A Functional Framework for Gender Budget Analysis

Step 1: The budget is re-organised and presented in terms of planned and realised
inputs, activities, outputs and impacts.

Inputs consist of the money appropriated and spent

(as presented in the Functional or Programme Classification)

Activities consist of the services planned and delivered: e.g. health services,
industrial support services, social transfers, tax collection

Outputs consist of the planned and delivered utilisation of the activities: e.g.
patients treated, businesses supported, incomes increased, taxes collected

Impacts (or outcomes) consist of planned and actual achievements in relation to

broader objectives: e.g. healthy people, competitive businesses, poverty
reduction, sustainable growth of national income

Information about the planned inputs, activities, desired outputs and desired impacts is
taken from the budget. The realised inputs, activities, outputs and impacts are presented
on the basis of other sources of information including a.o. audits, evaluations,
assessments, monitoring reports, existing databases at the level of service delivery units,
etc. It is the aim to specify as much as possible inputs, activities, outputs and impacts in
terms of objective verifiable indicators. This is not always an easy undertaking as
information in budgets, audits, evaluations, etc. is often not well-specified.

Step 2: planned and realised inputs, activities, outputs and impacts are analysed on their
degree of gender-responsiveness by asking whether planned and realised:

Impacts promote gender equality (as well as other objectives)

Outputs are fairly distributed between women and men and are adequate to
achieve gender equality (as well as other objectives)

Activities are designed to be equally appropriate for women and men (e.g. in
terms of accessibility) and are adequate to achieve gender equality (as well as
other objectives)

Inputs are adequate to achieve gender equality (as well as other objectives)

To answer these questions sex-disaggregated information is necessary and an

understanding of the relevant gender relations. A variety of tools and approaches,
including a.o. benefit incidence analysis and participatory approaches, are available to
conduct this analysis.

Step 3: if answers to the above questions are negative, changes need to be identified in
the identification of impact and output objectives, organisation of activities and
deployment of funding. It is likely that also changes need to be enhanced at the level of
the underlying decision-making processes.

To bring about change, the results of the analysis must be effectively conveyed to
policymakers and the public through reports, parliamentary questions and hearings, policy
dialogues, public meetings, etc.

Source: Diane Elson (2001).

20
Diane Elson showcased some examples of gender budget analysis that fit this
framework, referring both to the planning and appraisal phases, and the audit and
evaluation phases of the budget cycle. Examples include government-led initiatives,
(see e.g. the National Public Works Programme in South Africa, Infrastructure
Development in South Africa, Expenditure in Selected Ministries in Sri Lanka, Industrial
Support in Australia, Support for Women’s Entrepreneurship in France) as well as
analysis initiated by civil society actors (Expenditure on adult basic education and
training in South Africa, Tax Credits in the UK, Translating the Beijing Platform for
Action into Programme Activities and Budget Items in Kenya).

_____________________________________________________________________
Planning and Appraisal phase of the Budget

Gender analysis at this stage of the budget cycle requires identifying likely gender
dimensions of activities, outputs and impacts. There is often reference made to
evaluations and audits about outputs and impacts of previous budgets.

Infrastructure Development in South Africa

‘Investment in infrastructure builds economic capacity and enhances competitiveness, while

contributing to the quality of life of poor people. Energy, transport, communications and social
infrastructure bring significant benefits to women and children, particularly.
Capital expenditure financed by the national and provincial governments is expected to
increase… capital spending on water schemes and related infrastructure of R 1 537 in 1998/99,
increasing to R 1785 million in 2000/1.
………..
In late 1995 only one third of African households and less than three-quarters of coloured
households had running tap water inside their dwellings, compared to 97 per cent of Indian and
white households. Outside urban areas only 12 per cent of African households had an inside tap
and 21 per cent had a tap on the site, while 28 per cent were collecting water from a river,
stream, dam or well and 16 per cent form a bore hole. One in six African households who had
to fetch water were forced to travel at least a kilometre to do so. In 1993 the average time
spent on the task by members of rural African households who collected water was 1 hour and
40 minutes. The average time spent by individual women who collected water was over an
hour, at 74 minutes. Just over half of rural African women over the age of 18 were spending
part of their time collecting water.’

Source: Department of Finance, Government of South Africa, Budget Review 1998, Pretoria (p
1.5 and 6.58)

Audit and Evaluation phase of the Budget

This includes a.o. audit of distribution of actual inputs, activities and outputs where
expenditures actually made are linked to the actual participation in the activities
provided and enjoyment of outputs. This analysis is conditional on the presence of data
about individual participation in service delivery and individual appropriation of outputs.

New Deal Programmes for the Unemployed in UK

New Deal programmes aim to get more get people of working age who are not currently in paid
work into the market for jobs. Figures from the Department for Education and Employment
show that only 27 per cent of participants in the New Deal for young unemployed people are
female; and only 16 per cent of those in the New Deal for the long term unemployed. In the
case of the New Deal for lone parents 95 per cent of participants are female. The programmes

21
have been analysed by Katherine Rake of the UK Women’s Budget Group, a women’s Think
Tank that is regularly consulted by the UK government. She found that 57 per cent of the
funding available for New Deal programmes goes to the programme for young people, 23 per
cent goes to the programme for long-term unemployed, and only 8 per cent to the programme
for lone parents. (The rest goes on a number of other smaller schemes). Rake estimates that
double the amount of money is spent per person in the programme for young people than in
the programme for lone parents.

Source: Katherine Rake, ‘Into the Mainstream? Why Gender Audit is an essential tool for
policymakers’ New Economy, Vol 7 No 2 (pp107-110) June 2000

Another type of analysis at this stage of the budget cycle is the evaluation of adequacy
of funding for Women’s Empowerment and Realisation of Women’s Rights. This
analysis compares the actual expenditures for the promotion of women’s
empowerment and the realisation of women’s rights with the expenditures that would
be required to achieve the above mentioned overall objectives specified in terms of
objective verifiable indicators.

Shelter for Battered Women in Barbados

‘Between 1992-1996 there were 764 applications for protection orders, of this number 730
women were applying for legal protection against their male abusers….While on the whole
national levels of crime are on the decline, there has been a marked in crease in “crimes
against the person” and specifically sex crimes perpetrated on women and physical violence
against women….the establishment of a shelter for Battered Women became an urgent
requirement An NGO, the Business and Professional Women’s Club advanced the initiative ,
with start-up funds ($380,000)
provided by the Ministry of Social Transformation…..The Shelter began receiving residents in
November 1999…..However, there remains a significant number of women who need assistance
but that the Shelter is unable to accommodate….

Management at the Shelter estimate that it takes an average of $900 dollars to house one adult
Shelter Victim per month. This figure rises with the number of children and specific needs of a
family being sheltered. While financial shortfalls concerning the physical establishment and
upkeep of the Shelter (such as fencing) are important security issues, the inability of the NGO
to secure sufficient funds to underwrite the major portion of operation costs is an even more
significant problem. Currently, the Ministry discharges its responsibility to the Shelter in
contracts renewable each year. There is no clear indication whether after this first year, the
funds provided will be increased or whether they will be forthcoming past the support for the
physical infrastructure and maintenance of the facility.’

Source: Donna St Hill, Gender Analysis of the National Budget: 1998-99, Barbados Pilot,, Draft,
Commonwealth Secretariat, London, p 37-38

Source: Diane Elson (2001)

___________________________________________________________________

While it is clear that gender budget analysis shows similarities with analysis that
differentiates among individuals on the basis of other categories as race, income,
location, age, etc., Diane Elson pointed at two principles that distinguish gender
budget analysis. Firstly, it is important to assess the impact of budgets both at the
household level and the individual level. The need to look also beyond the boundaries
of the household stems from the observation that there might exist consistent patterns

22
of inequality between men and women within the household. Whereas actual fiscal
policies are often build upon the gender-blind assumption that the household acts as
an unity, it is important that gender budget analysis also looks at impact at the
individual level. Results and divergence of results of household and individual-level
analysis necessarily need to be fed in into subsequent budgetary rounds.

Secondly, gender budget analysis essentially needs to bring into the picture the
gender-blindness and partiality of existing macro-economic models on which macro-
economic policies are built. Mainstream macro-economic models and macro-economic
aggregates (as the National Product and National Income) depart from the notion of
‘economic’ activity as defined in the System of National Accounting (SNA). Unpaid
caring working, for instance, is not taken into account in the SNA and remains
consequently largely invisible in macro-economic models. Findings from time use
surveys that highlight the time spent in unpaid caring work show that women still do a
disproportionate share of these activities. A budget analysis that aims to look at the
impact on gender equality thus also necessarily needs to visualize the impact of
budgetary policies on unpaid caring work.

Moreover, gender budget analysis is not only important from the point of view of
gender equality, but also in terms of effectiveness and efficiency. Policy measures
often do not reach their intended goals because they depart from a number of gender-
blind assumptions as the unity of the household, the conceptualisation of labour (both
productive and reproductive) as a homogeneous, easy substitutable factor of
production. A ‘gendered’ analysis unveils the underlying gender-blindness of policy
measures and may suggest a number of adjustments in the design of policy measures,
which will eventually lead to increased effectiveness and efficiency.

Diane Elson finally strongly pointed out the need for the recognition of gender as a
cross-cutting issue that is important for the overall budget and not only for those
programmes that are directly targeted towards women. She referred in this context to
a number of suggestions earlier made in the UNIFEM report ‘Progress of the World’s
Women’ about a possible set of indicators for monitoring the gender sensitivity of the
whole budget3 (UNIFEM, 2000, p. 118). The shortcoming of these indicators is that
they are based on the functional, programme and line time classification of the budget
and not on the economic classification. They further only allow highlighting and
analysing part of the picture and not necessarily the most important one. It is at the
level of the overall macro-economic policy that the room for manoeuvre for changing
budgets is determined. It is therefore important to argue the need for ‘engendering’
macro-economic objectives, aggregates and models4.

Diana Rivington, Chair of the OECD Working Party on Gender Equality (WP-GEN),
briefly commented on the conference initiative from the perspective of the OECD/DAC
WP-GEN. She emphasized that the Working Party and its members welcomed the
meeting as an important step in bringing together experiences and methodological
tools on gender responsive budgeting – from the north and the south, from NGOs and
governments, from academics and practitioners.

3
See p. 118 in UNIFEM(2000). Progress of the World’s Women. New York: UNIFEM.
4
Diane Elson referred in this context to relevant research that is being produced. See a.o. the special
issue on Growth, Trade, Finance and Gender Equality in World Development (2000), Vol. 28, no. 7.

23
Today’s positive environment for ‘gender-sensitive budgeting’ as a vehicle for
improving economic and financial governance, has among others been built by the
individual and collective efforts of the members of the Working Party on Gender
Equality. It is since the early 1990s that the DAC WP-GEN and its members (separately
and collectively) carried out work in its Task Force on Economic Reform. The latter
work included points on public expenditure reviews, and budget processes and the
organisation of a.o. a ‘Workshop on Integrating Gender Issues in Programme Aid,
Sector Investment Programmes, Market Reform and other forms of Economic Policy
Assistance’ in May 1998.

In January 2001, the DAC Secretariat for the WP-GEN hosted an important workshop
organised and convened by the Commonwealth Secretariat. It was the latter workshop
that led in part to this conference, and the involvement of the OECD in it. And in May
2001, the OECD Meeting of Senior Budget Officials put budget impact analysis and in
particular gender responsive budgets on its agenda.

Finally, Diana Rivington, strongly pointed out the need for continued promotion of the
practice of gender-responsive budgeting. She indicated that the WP-GEN and its
individual members will do their best to bring the findings of the conference to the
Financing for Development Conference in March 2002.

24
IV. SESSION 2 : TOOLS AND APPROACHES

Rhonda Sharp, of the Research Centre for Gender Studies, University of South
Australia, highlighted in a videotaped intervention different guiding goals and multiple
strategies for gender responsive budget exercises. Dr. Sharp argued that the
implementation of gender responsive budget initiatives is a relatively new phenomenon
and that there exists no one ‘model’ of a gender responsive budget exercise. On the
contrary, as an increasing number of countries are taking gender responsive budgeting
initiatives, the menu of choices of tools and strategies that might be utilised is
expanding.

In order to facilitate the implementation of gender responsive budget exercises a

better understanding is needed of the central goals of these exercises and the
sympathetic discourses that might be drawn upon to devise effective strategies for
achieving these goals.

Assessing previous and ongoing gender responsive budget exercises, Dr. Rhonda
Sharp differentiated between three guiding goals that underlie gender responsive
budgets: i) raise awareness and understanding of the gender issues and impacts of
budgets and policies, ii) make governments accountable for their budgetary and policy
commitments, iii) bring about changes to budgets and policies. These goals are
characterised by interdependent and hierarchical relationships, which underpin the
transformative character of gender responsive budget exercises.

Whereas bringing about changes to budgets and policies is mostly considered to be the
ultimate goal of gender responsive budgeting initiatives, Rhonda Sharp strongly
pointed out that achieving this goal is inextricably intertwined with increasing
awareness and government’s accountability. She further indicated that the
achievement of the ultimate goal is difficult to assess whereas it is also often
impossible to make correct conclusions about the causality between the actions
undertaken within a gender budget initiative and changes to budgets and policies.

Rhonda Sharp further argued that the guiding goals shape the particular design of
gender responsive budgeting initiatives and influence the choice of strategies. She
showcased possible strategies that have been used in the past to increase awareness
and accountability and that were contributing to the successfulness of the initiatives.

_____________________________________________________________________
successful strategies for increasing awareness

• collection of gender-disaggregated data

• making results of gender impact analysis publicly available
• capacity-building within ministries and within civil society
• developing analysis of significant intersections of gender with other
categories as race, income, location, …
• developing gender-disaggregated tools of analysis
• stimulating gender budget analysis at different levels (national and
local)
• translating complex information into easy accessible language

25
 Successful strategies for increasing accountability

• developing frameworks for monitoring and evaluation of budgets (e.g.

performance-based frameworks, i.e. inputs, outputs, outcomes5)
• increasing reporting on a regular basis
• reporting of progress on spending and revenue-raising to the own
nationals
• reporting of progress on the implementation of international
commitments like CEDAW, Beijing Declaration to international bodies
• translating complex budget information into easy accessible language
• establishing of commitment at the highest level (Ministry of Finance)
• civil society’s issuing of media reports on the progress of budgetary
activities

Source: Rhonda Sharp (2001)

_____________________________________________________________________

Finally, Rhonda Sharp pointed at the importance of building strategic partnerships with
discourses that show similarities. She in particular referred to the actual discourses
about gender mainstreaming and good governance, which share common
transformative goals. The possibility of alignment with these discourses should be
explored further as part of a strategic approach to choosing among existing and
developing new gender responsive budget strategies and models.

Largely drawing on the extensive record of Commonwealth experiences6, Guy Hewitt,

of the Commonwealth Secretariat, mainly explored the expenditure tools developed in
the past by the Commonwealth Secretariat and in particular by Diane Elson. In his
contribution, Guy emphasized that the tools were firstly developed within the context
of particular countries and were never intended to serve as model or blueprint. It are
the governance framework and the resource availability of a given country which
determine which tools are selected.

Tool 1: Gender-Aware policy appraisal

Gender-aware policy appraisal is the analysis from a gender perspective of the policies and
programmes funded through the budget, which asks ‘in what ways are the policies and their associated
resource allocations likely to reduce or increase gender inequality?

Example: The South African government’s land reform programme is proceeding at an increasing pace,
with corresponding increases in expenditure for everything from owner compensation to micro-finance
programmes. However, women’s access to land as well as to the financial resources necessary for its
development is impeded by legal restrictions on women’s land ownership and rights to conclude contract.
Women who do have access to land tend to have access to smaller plots with poor irrigation, and women-
headed households typically have no wage or salary earners. As a result, women are far less able to
benefit from the reform process and related expenditures. The Department of Land Affairs has started to
integrate gender concerns into its monitoring and evaluation system and has begun providing gender
training for staff.

5
See for instance the contribution of Diane Elson to the conference.
6
Prior to the Gender Budget Initiative Programme (1995), different initiatives of gender-sensitive
budgeting were taken in individual Commonwealth countries, such as Australia (1984), Canada (1993) and
South Africa (1994).

26
Tool 2: Gender-disaggregated Public Expenditure Incidence Analysis

Gender-disaggregated Public Expenditure Incidence Analysis estimates the distribution of budget

resources (or changes in resources) among males and females by measuring the unit costs of providing a
given service and multiplying that cost by the number of units used by each group.

Example: Changes to Sri Lanka’s food ratio and subsidy programme in the 1980s revealed that despite
rapid economic growth, the real value of stamps eroded in the first half of the decade and there was a
decline in the real incomes of the poor. A gender-disaggregated analysis concluded that within poor
households, girls and women took the brunt of the increasing food deficit, citing higher levels of
malnutrition among pre-school and school girls and declining birth weights of babies born to low income
mothers.

Tool 3: Gender-Disaggregated Beneficiary Assessments

Gender-Disaggregated Beneficiary Assessment is a means by which the voice of the citizen can be
heard. In these exercises, the actual or potential beneficiaries of public services are asked to assess how
far public spending is meeting their needs, as they perceive them. This can be done through opinion polls
attitude surveys, group discussion or interviews. Questions focus on overall priorities for public spending
or upon the details of the operation of public services.

Example: In 1996, the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom initiated a Women’s
Budget Project, asking women to answer a series of questions about the choices they would make in
allocating national budget resources. They calculated the costs of various defence-related programmes
and compared them to potential social welfare expenditures. It then asked: Which would you choose?
Fund the F-22 fighter plane programme for the current year ($2.1 billion) or pay for the annual health care
expenses for 1.3 million American women? Fund ‘Sea wolf’ attack submarines for the current year ($1.7
billion) or provide low-income home energy assistance for 5.6 million households? The project estimated
the savings from proposed cuts in military spending and outlined the ways in which such savings could be
invested to benefit women, including employment and training programmes, campaigns against gender-
based violence, and services for the elderly, the majority of whom are women.

Tool 4: Sex-Disaggregated Analysis of the Impact of the Budget on Time Use

Sex-Disaggregated Analysis of the Impact of the Budget on Time Use is a calculation of the link
between budget allocations and their effect on how household members spend their time, using
household time use surveys.

Example: Between 1983 and 1985, real per-capita expenditure on health fell by 16 per cent in Zambia.
People had to travel greater distances and wait for longer period of time to get health care treatment.
Zambian women interviewed reported having to spend more time caring for sick family members,
including time spent with them in hospital providing meals and nursing care, and had less time to spend
on farming.

Tool 5: Gender-Aware Medium-Term Economic Policy Framework

Gender-Aware Medium-Term Economic Policy Framework is used to assess the impact of

economic policies on women, focusing on aggregate fiscal, monetary and economic policies designed to
promote globalisation and reduce poverty.

Example: In South Africa the government invited members of the Women’s Budget Initiative to address a
workshop on the development of the 1996 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF). The idea was to
plan expenditure on a three-year rolling basis rather than on the present year-by-year rolling basis. It is

27
noteworthy that while this did not mean that the MTEF would necessarily be gender-sensitive, it did signal
a willingness by the Ministry of Finance to engage with gender-equality issues. In fact, the National
Expenditure Survey produced by the Ministry of Finance in 1999 did incorporate more gender analysis. In
Tanzania, the Ministry of Finance is seeking to integrate gender concerns into the new MTEF and
performance budgeting system.

Tool 6: Gender-Aware Budget Statement

Gender-Aware Budget Statement is the government report that reviews the budget using some of the
above tools, and summarises its implications for gender equality with different indicators, such as the
share of expenditure targeted to gender equality, the gender balance in government jobs, contracts or
training, or the share of public service expenditure used mainly by women.

Source: Guy Hewitt (2001)7

As indicated by Guy Hewitt, most of the initiatives to date8 (except for those in the UK,
see the contribution of Susan Himmelweit) have focused on expenditure allocations
and to a lesser degree on the revenue side. In the future efforts will be made to
concentrate also on revenue tools, which will contribute to understanding the possible
gender impacts of different revenue-raising measures such as direct and indirect taxes
and user fees.

Finally, Guy reflected on a number of guiding principles with regard to the

conceptualisation and the implementation of the Gender Budget Initiative programme
at the country level.

Country ownership is thought to be critical for the successfulness of gender responsive

budget initiatives. Starting from the idea that citizens are not only the beneficiaries of a
country’s fiscal policy but also agents of development, participation of different
stakeholders in public expenditure management is necessary. For broad-based
participation to be possible and effective, transparency is needed of the consultative,
analytic and outcomes processes at the national, provincial and local levels. In order to
increase sustainability and institutionalisation of initiatives, it is necessary that
processes build on existing budgetary and public expenditure management
mechanisms. Finally, as Guy puts it, it is important to conceptualise gender budget
initiatives as iterative processes of consultation, participation, planning, implementation
and evaluation against set goals, objectives, indicators and benchmarks.

7
See also BUDLENDER Debbie, Rhonda SHARP and Kerri ALLEN (1998). How to do a gender-sensitive
budget analysis: contemporary research and practice. Canberra and London, Australian Agency for
International Development and the Commonwealth Secretariat; ELSON Diane (1999). Gender Budget
Initiative: Background Papers. London, Commonwealth Secretariat; ELSON D. (ed)(2000). Progress of the
World’s Women: UNIFEM Biennial Report. New York, UNIFEM; HEWITT Guy and Sabhita RAJU (1999).
Gender Budget Initiative. A Commonwealth Initiative to Integrate Gender into National Budgetary
Processes. London, Commonwealth Secretariat; HEWITT Guy and Tanni Mukhopadhyay (2001). Gender
Responsive Budget Initiatives: A Report on Commonwealth Experiences. London, Commonwealth
Secretariat.
8
There are a number of exceptions, e.g. the work of the Women’s Budget Group in the UK (see the
contribution of Susan Himmelweit), the South African (see the contribution of Pregs Govender) and the
Ugandan initiatives (see the contribution of Winnie Byanyima) which all included a gender analysis of
taxation.

28
In his contribution, Lionel Demery, of the World Bank, assessed the insights to be
gained from the benefit9 incidence analysis of public spending when results are
disaggregated by gender.

He started by putting benefit incidence analysis within the context of the welfarist
literature on how to measure the benefits of publicly-provided goods to individuals in
society. Benefit incidence analysis is one of the techniques, which is used to value
government spending. It combines information on the cost of providing public services
with data on their use. To date the technique has mostly been used to assess the
impact of public expenditures on individuals and households of different income
categories, and in particular on the poorer sections of the populations whom are
mostly the primarily intended beneficiaries.

How public spending is affecting the intended outcomes (mostly in terms of human
capabilities) depends on a number of linkages in between. The first link is between
total public spending and the composition. It is e.g. more likely that a larger section of
the population and in particular the poorer sections of the population will benefit from
health care expenditures if a larger portion is spent on primary health care facilities
rather than on tertiary facilities. It is this first link on which benefit incidence analyses
focuses most of the time. The second link concerns the degree to which the budget is
translated into effective health services (the issue of ‘tracking’). As Lionel Demery puts
it, if a particular sector is characterised by huge inefficiencies, the level of spending is
not a good indicator of service provision. The third link is related to the response of the
private sector (‘crowding in’ and ‘crowding out’ effects of publicly provided services)
and depends on how the total provision of effective services is affected by public
spending. The final link is between the provision of services and the outcomes at the
individual level. Here one has to take into account other factors, which interact with
the provided services to lead to the intended outcomes.
______________________________________________________________________
Benefit incidence analysis involves a three-step methodology
• estimates are obtained of the unit subsidy of a particular service. This is usually
based on officially reported recurrent public spending on the service in
question. In order to derive unit subsidies for benefit incidence, revenue from
cost recovery must be netted out of government spending.
• the unit subsidy is ‘imputed’ to households or individuals which are identified as
users of the service. Assigning the unit subsidy to individuals or households is
invariably based on information obtained through a household survey.
• the individuals or households are aggregated into sub-groups in order to
compare how the subsidy is distributed.

Source: Lionel Demery (2001)

______________________________________________________________________

Most of the benefit incidence analyses to date have used income as the classifier for
sub-groupings. Until now, gender has largely been ignored despite the fact that weak
linkages between the public expenditures and the intended outcomes are often
mediated through gender biases in the use of the government services.

9
Demery (2001) suggest to use the notion ‘beneficiary’ instead of ‘benefit’ in order to indicate that the
technique does not measure true benefits, but rather looks at whom the final beneficiaries are of
government expenditures.

29
Lionel showcased applications from the education sector in Côte D’Ivoire (1995) and
the health sector in Ghana (1992)10 to highlight the importance of gender
disaggregation for understanding findings from benefit incidence analysis. In Côte
D’Ivoire, for instance, it showed that the mistargeting of education expenditure to poor
people (only 13 percent of total government spending in education reached the
poorest 20 percent) was partly due to high spending on tertiary education facilities
(approximately one fifth of the total education budget in 1995) that are not used by
poor households and certainly not by the female members of the households.

For the population as a whole, the average female only gained one third of the total
government spending in education as compared to two thirds for the average male.
Distribution of gains clearly differs according to the level of education services. While
the relative disadvantage of females was lowest at the primary level where they gained
42 percent of the total primary subsidy, it was largest at the tertiary level, where they
only gained 29 percent.

Findings from the benefit incidence analysis for the health sector in Ghana clearly
demonstrate the usefulness of a combined gender and income disaggregation and of
decomposing expenditures into different sub-sectors. While there is overall an
advantage for females, with 56 percent of the overall health spending in 1992 going to
females, this conclusion is put in perspective when we decompose health expenditures
over different categories (from more expensive hospital in- and outpatient treatment to
primary facilities) and when we disaggregate beneficiaries according to income and
sex, thereby taking into account possible differences in health needs between the
sexes. A more detailed analysis shows that only in the top two quintiles females gained
more than males from hospital-based services while in all other sections of the
population, females were at a disadvantage for this type of services. Gender biases in
the use of health services are again explanatory of the poor targeting to the poor.
Findings demonstrate that government fails to allocate hospital-based services to the
poorest sections of the population because of the poor access of females to these
services.

Whereas benefit incidence analysis is useful, it clearly has its limitations. Lionel
convincingly argued that benefit incidence analysis needs to be coupled with analysis
on intrahousehold allocation. Observed allocative outcomes are only marginally
influenced by a government fiscal policy and primarily result from decisions taken at
the household level. It are parents, not necessarily together or unanimously, who
decide about the level and kind of resources that are invested in different household
members. Weak targeting of both education and health spending, for instance, partly
result from decisions by poor households not to use publicly-funded facilities, and
particularly to deny access to female members. Lionel argued that it is vital for policy
makers to go beyond the current accounting approach of benefit incidence and to gain
insight into intrahousehold allocative behaviour as to understand allocative outcomes
and distil those factors, which they influence to bring about changes.

10
Research findings for Côte D’Ivoire and Ghana are based on DEMERY Lionel, Julia DAYTON and Kalpana
MEHRA (1996). The Incidence of Social Spending in Côte D’Ivoire, 1986-1995 (mimeo). Washington D.C.,
World Bank, Poverty and Social Policy Department and DEMERY Lionel, Shiyan CHAO, René BERNIER and
Kalpana MEHRA (1995), ‘The Incidence of Social Spending in Ghana’, PSP Discussion Paper No. 82.
Washington D.C., World Bank, Poverty and Social Policy Department.

30
In her contribution Susan Himmelweit, of the Open University and the UK Women’s
Budget Group (WBG)11, concentrated on some tools for the gender impact analysis of
taxes and benefits. The focus on taxes and benefits rather than on the expenditures
side as in most other initiatives of budget analysis should be put against the
background of the particular budgetary process in the UK. Expenditure and revenue
raising plans are announced on different days and what is referred to as the ‘Budget’
means the annual statement of changes in taxes and benefits and the regulations
surrounding them.

Analysing the gender sensitivity of taxes and benefits involves assessing the direct and
indirect impacts of taxes and benefits on all relevant gender inequalities.

A full gender impact assessment requires examining not only a policy’s direct
distributional effects on gender inequalities, but also its higher-order impacts on men’s
and women’s behaviour. Without an understanding of its full gender-specific impact,
policy may be badly targeted and therefore at worst ineffective in achieving its goals
(Susan Himmelweit, 2001).
______________________________________________________________________

Susan Himmelweit argued that for tax and benefit policy, the most immediate effects
are on incomes, both at the individual and the household level. She further pointed out
that there are wider indirect impacts that are equally important: bargaining power and
the distribution of resources within households, labour market behaviour and the long-
term futures of men and women. She subsequently demonstrated how tax and benefit
policy can be examined for its impact at all these different levels.

The most immediate gendered impact of taxes and benefits is on the distribution of
individual incomes between men and women. A progressive income tax system does
not only prove to reduce income inequalities, it also tends to reduce gender disparities
as women, on average, start off with lesser individual incomes than men. As Susan
Himmelweit demonstrated, identifying the gendered impact of benefits is more
complicated as the manner of receipt of benefits is itself gendered. In general,
increasing the amount of those types of benefits that in general tend to go more to
women will contribute to reducing gender inequality in incomes.

Taxes and benefits on the household level, which are at first sight gender-neutral may
also contribute to reducing or strengthening gender inequality. Susan Himmelweit
pointed out that policies that increase the incomes of lone parent and singly pensioner
households, in which women predominate, will in general not only reduce income
inequality between households but also gender inequality.

Research from developing and industrial countries has indicated that households are
not necessarily unities who fully pool their resources or where all individuals have the
same preferences regarding the allocation of the resources. There might be diverging
opinions about the division over different categories of expenditure and about the
identity of the final beneficiary. Whose preferences prevail is among others determined
by a person’s bargaining power. One of the factors influencing a person’s bargaining
power is the access and control over resources. Targeting benefits or levying taxes to

11
The UK Women’s Budget Group (WBG) was set up in 1989. It is a voluntary think thank of women policy
experts which comments each year on the annual fiscal budgets produced by the UK government (Susan
Himmelweit, 2001).

31
particular household members consequently tends to influence their stake in household
decision-making and the final allocation of resources.

As Susan Himmelweit strongly pointed out taxes and benefits do not only redistribute
income, they also provide intended or unintended incentives and disincentives to
certain forms of behaviour. Taxes and benefits are, for instance, often used to
influence labour market participation. Identifying gendered effects of those taxes and
benefits is a complex undertaking as incentives and disincentives on one partner’s
behaviour may depend on what the other partner does, especially when means testing
is applied at the household level. As Susan argued, in-work benefits, if available and
means-tested on a household rather than an individual basis, tend to exacerbate
gender inequality in labour market incentives within couples.

It is obvious that employment incentives also engender effects on people’s time use
while also the already existing pattern of time use of men and women, with women
often fulfilling the largest bulk of caring responsibilities, strongly affects the
effectiveness of employment incentives.
______________________________________________________________________
The allocation of parental caring responsibilities and therefore of demands on the time
of different members of the households is another aspect of intrahousehold inequality
that gender impact assessment should consider (Susan Himmelweit, 2001).
______________________________________________________________________

As Susan puts it, tax and benefit systems do not in general count the output of unpaid
caring work as a resource. Failing to recognize the skewed time investment of men and
women in unpaid caring work within the household tends to increase gender inequality
in labour market participation or the gender inequality in free time. The latter effect
occurs when women’s labour market participation is not combined with a redistribution
of unpaid household work.
______________________________________________________________________
Gender impact analysis should encourage finance ministers, in planning tax and benefit
policy, to see themselves not only as dealing with a nation’s financial affairs but also as
the ministers responsible for time use (Susan Himmelweit, 2001).

Within a context of changing situations over a life-time cycle, gender impact

assessment needs to take a lifetime perspective on individual life courses and has to
take into account the effects of present behaviour on people’s long-term prospects.
This is in particular important for women as they often are penalised in their later lives,
through for instance lower pensions, for the time they have invested in caring work at
earlier life stages. As indicated by Susan Himmelweit, state pension provision is
therefore particularly important for women.

Gender analysis clearly is not only a tool, which highlights gendered impacts of policy
measures and helps to redress gender inequalities. It may also provide policy makers
with useful information regarding the effectiveness of policy measures and guide them
in the design of measures that contribute to reaching their goals.

32
V. SESSION 3 : LESSONS LEARNED IN PRACTICE

In her case-study about South Africa, Pregs Govender, Member of the South African
Parliament, convincingly highlighted the importance of understanding the intersection
of factors as race, class, gender, rural/urban, disability, culture and sexual orientation
to make visible the underlying assumptions in policy making.

She firstly referred to the fact that budgets, economics and financial governance are
not neutral. Basic questions are ‘who defines these and in whose interests’, ‘what are
the priorities’, ‘what is the agenda’ and ‘who determines these?’

Pregs Govender showcased the South Africa’s apartheid budget to demonstrate that
neutrality is a myth. Facts and figures demonstrate the results of the apartheid legacy
and its corresponding budgetary policy and allocations. While white South Africans who
constitute 10.9% of the population own 80% of the country’s wealth and land, about
87% of all black South African children under 12 years are nutritionally compromised,
unemployment rates nationally for black South Africans are 35 to 45%.

Budgets do not only lack ‘race’ neutrality, they also lack gender-neutrality. The
apartheid budget did not only target whites but also males while the poor are mostly
black African women. Many of the poorest households in South Africa are headed by
young black women, who are illiterate, live in rural areas and are unemployed or
employed in the informal sector.

The basic question is then how to change budgets, economics and financial
governance to ensure that the poor are addressed and that their needs are taken into
account seriously? It is this question that has driven the work on gender responsive
budgets that South Africa has engaged since 1994.
______________________________________________________________________
In 1994, prior to the first democratic elections -at the African National Congress
Conference on putting women on the agenda- there was clarity that the new
government departments ‘must indicate the impact of programmes on the status and
conditions of women when requiring funds. When making their reports they must
make specific reference to whether the objectives spelled out in this regard have been
met’

Source: Pregs Govender (2001)

______________________________________________________________________

Drawing on her own experiences as a black female parliamentarian, Pregs Govender

reflected on the role of parliament in the first democratic government of South Africa.
She indicated the importance of understanding a parliamentarian mandate as being a
public representative of a particular group. In South Africa the women’s agenda for
change was articulated through the women’s movement, which worked through broad-
based consultation to advise parliamentarians on women’s needs and priorities. In the
Women’s National Coalition’s ‘Women’s Charter’ nearly two million women spelled out
their needs and reflected on what was necessary to have gender equality.

Amongst women’s own key priorities were the eradication of poverty and violence. The
first objective is more specifically related to addressing unemployment, landlessness,

33
homelessness, developing a social security system, improving access to health care,
education, electricity, water. A first step towards gender-responsiveness is then to take
into account women’s priorities in fiscal policy and the corresponding budget.

Assessing the role of parliament, Pregs Govender strongly advocated ensuring that
parliament and its committees have the necessary powers.

______________________________________________________________________
The South African Constitution has given the Parliament extensive powers including:
• initiating legislation that promotes socio-economic rights
• ensuring that draft legislation from the executive conforms to the Constitution
and is effective in promoting socio-economic rights
• exercising oversight over socio-economic spending and budget reprioritisation
• exercising oversight over the development and implementation of policy and
legislation

Source: Pregs Govender (2001)

______________________________________________________________________

Committees, on the other hand, can monitor, enquire into and make recommendations
related to any aspect of policy formulation or any other matter it may consider relevant
from government departments falling within the category of affairs consigned to
particular committees.

The two committees that have extensively been involved in the gender-responsive
budget work in South Africa were the Joint Standing Committee on Finance (since
1994) and the Joint Monitoring Committee on the improvement of the Quality of Life
and Status of Women12 (since 1996). These committees have used budget debates,
asked for reports from ministers and held hearings with civil society on poverty, gender
and macroeconomic policy and budgets.

As a partnership to the above mentioned committees and in collaboration with NGOs

the Women’s Budget Initiative was formed. The latter included about 40 researchers
who did complete a gender analysis of all government department budgets, while
there was also an analysis of taxation and custom excises. The results of this work
were published as the Women’s Budget Books and edited by Debbie Budlender. A
popularised version and training materials to initiate projects of economic literacy were
also produced.

There were and there are substantial results at governmental level. In 1996, the
Finance Minister, in his budget speech, committed to developing gender-
disaggregated data, targets and indicators and to install a performance review
mechanism. He further committed to counting unpaid labour. In 2001 the Statistics
South Africa will produce the first study of unpaid labour in South Africa.

In 1997 the Finance Ministry in its report to the Joint Monitoring Committee on Women
noted its commitment to ‘an integrated gender analysis into macroeconomic policy.
The initial stages of the project involved a presentation on Gender and the Budget at

12
This committee was established to monitor government implementation of the Beijing Platform for
Action and CEDAW in improving the lives of the poorest women.

34
the Department of Finance’s Medium Term Expenditure Framework, which launched
the introduction of Multiyear Budgeting.

In the 1998/99 period, the Department of Finance has been part of the Commonwealth
pilot project which aims to integrate gender analysis into budgetary processes. In the
South African case, the project has built on the work that was already done by the two
Women’s Budget Project reports. Some of the analysis, which involved cooperation of
the Central Statistics department and the departments of among others Trade and
Industry, Welfare, Land Affairs, Water Affairs and Forestry, Labour, Public Works,
Agriculture, Arts Culture Science and Technology, Correctional Service, Education,
Health, Housing, Justice, Minerals Energy and Public Enterprises has been included into
the Government National Budget Review.

An immediate result of the exercise was that the Working for Water Programme,
decided that 60 % of all wages should be paid to women, that 67% should be in rural
areas and that special emphasis needed to be placed on flexible time schedules for
single parents.

Finally, Pregs Govender strongly advocated the need for understanding interactions
between the macro and the micro, the local and the global.

Devaki Jain, of the Karnataka’s Women’s Information and Research Centre (India),
started from the observation that the budget is the most important economic policy
instrument of government and as such a powerful tool in transforming the
state/district/municipality/grama panchayat economies to meet the people’s needs.
The aim of her contribution and the project she commented on was not to critique or
inform the budget, from what is called a gender perspective but rather to reflect on the
conditions and to build, construct budgets, such that the interests of women and other
subordinated groups are safeguarded.

Devaki Jain argued that within the Indian context the primary interest of gender
budgeting is to remove poverty, especially women’s poverty. It thus builds on the
space and method, which would enable poor women to move themselves out of
poverty.

She convincingly argued that gender budgeting is only meaningful if the budgetary
support is put to duty in the hands of institutions, which are representative in
character, operate at the ground level and are accessible and accountable. Devaki
pointed at three conditions, which need to be fulfilled if a historically subordinated
group like women want to influence policy.

Firstly, a linkage is needed between economic governance and political governance.

______________________________________________________________________
Women in political structures need to claim space for developing budgets which
capture the requirements and the capacity – including the capacity to mobilize human
financial and natural resources, and translate them into humane fiscal management. In
other words, economic governance has to be linked to political governance (Devaki
Jain, 2001).
______________________________________________________________________

35
Secondly, the direction for fiscal policy and the fiscal balances need to be built from
below. In the Indian context there are certain constitutionally mandated arrangements
which allow to work backwards from ground level plans all the way to the national
balance sheet. India’s Panchayati Ray Institutions (PRI) is such an institutional
arrangement, which puts political power in hands of women. In the state of Karnataka,
the Panchayat Ray Act of 1993, provided a 33 percent reservation for women. Finally,
43 percent of those elected to gram or village panchayats were women. Nationally, the
Constitutional mandate of 1993 brought in three million elected and raised the total
number of women in formal politics from 400 persons to one million. The Constitutional
mandate also directed at least 29 specified functions (subjects) and funds13 for
carrying out these functions to these bodies.

_____________________________________________________________________
The intention of the Constitutional mandate of 1993 is
• to extend the command of governance beyond the central and state levels
• to include a larger number of persons in governance
• to introduce accountability through the process of five yearly elections with
a multi party system to three tiers of government; village, clusters of
villages and the district
• to accommodate social justice through affirmative action, i.e. reservation of
seats to both women and the underprivileged castes, in the politically
elected local government structure
• to politicise development, put it back in the hands of the people; to
accommodate ‘difference’, ‘diversity’, ‘pluralism’ in every way- geographical,
social- i.e. ethnic, linguistic etc. as well as historical, a necessity in a country
like India which is so heterogeneous

Source: Devaki Jain (2001)

_____________________________________________________________________

Whereas the unique paradigm of local self-government clearly has generated a number
of successes, there are also a number of road blocks. Firstly, the central and state
governments continue to maintain highly centralised control over the entire
development programme, budget and sectoral staff, which remain, as before,
unaccountable to local representative bodies. Even World Bank’s Social Development
Projects do not use the local elected government structure but rather set up parallel
mechanisms for delivery. As Devaki strongly puts it, ‘Donors seldom like democracy, it
delays’. Secondly, despite the fact that funds are seemingly untied, the focus on social
sector schemes has been marginal. Devaki Jain referred in this context to a study of 17
Gram Panchayats in Madhya Pradesh, which revealed that expenditure on social sector
schemes has not been more than 3 percent in any of the 17 GPs. The reason behind
the skewed expenditure were the conditions linked to the government grants, which
put into perspective its stated status of being ‘untied’.

Thirdly, it is necessary to reorder the larger picture, the political economy paradigm
such that it ushers in a pattern of development, which is rooted in promoting equity
gender concerns. As indicated by Devaki Jain, there are often huge constraints at the
macro-economic and financial level, which leave overall little flexibility or space for
accommodating gender and other social sensitivities. Interest payment arising out of

13
For the year 2000-2001 these funds are approximately around 1.5 billion USD (Devaki Jain, 2001).

36
past borrowing, for instance, is the single largest component of the India’s non-plan
revenue expenditure.

Currently an exercise is being undertaken for the state of Karnataka, called Building
Budgets From Below, which suggest that the only method that can shift the
development paradigm is through a summation of the budgets prepared at local level,
pyramided upwards, finally leading to the national budget. The underlying hypothesis
is that devolving powers to raise and spend funds at the local level will yield a larger
sum of resources than when this operation is conducted at the state level and
departmentally as people tend to show a higher willingness to pay their taxes if they
are able to control more strongly the expenditures.

Devaki strongly pointed out that this exercise is not only about decentralisation but
also about enabling women to determine fiscal policy at national and sub-national
levels. It is an attempt to upturn the system rather than ask for being accommodated.
She compared with other attempts made, such as through earmarked funds or through
special programmes for women, which did not deliver the required outcomes.

In her contribution, Françoise Philippe-Raynaud, of the French Women’s Rights

and Equality Office, Ministry of Employment and Solidarity, highlighted the importance
of the (yellow) budgetary annex regarding women’s rights and equality between men
and women (‘Le Jaune Budgétaire des Droits des Femmes et de l’Egalité entre les
Femmes et les Hommes’). The obligation to include an annex to the budget, which
highlights the financial efforts for the promotion of equality between men and women
and female human rights has been voted by the French parliament in 1999 and has
been implemented since 2000.

As Françoise Philippe-Raynaud argued, this initiative is not an isolated event. It is

completely in line with the dynamic and strong policy of the French government to
stimulate gender equality (cf. a.o. the governmental actions taken by Ms. Nicole Péry,
state secretary for Women’s Rights in 1999). The ‘yellow’ budget annex can be
regarded upon as an instrument that enables the different ministerial departments to
highlight their effective efforts in the field of gender equality and it offers at the same
time an opportunity for the parliament (and the population) to control the government
on its ‘stated’ policy. The system of ‘yellow’ budgetary annexes is not exclusively used
for the topic of gender equality. It is a system that is frequently used to summarise
initiatives taken by different ministerial department on transversal issues.

The yellow budget annex on Women’s Rights and Equality between men and women
highlights the specific policy measures of the different governmental departments to
stimulate equality between men and women. It further states the resources allocated
and the indicators that are used to monitor the implementation of the actions and its
results. As Françoise Philippe-Raynaud demonstrated, the measures taken do not
necessarily influence the budget. The feminisation of the work force of the ministry of
defence, for instance, did not have any budgetary implications.

The yellow budget annex offers the opportunity to clearly identify those actions that
aim at mobilising the overall population on the issue of gender equality and those
actions that are specifically addressing women. The latter include actions where
women where identified as a group at risk or actions that have been taken to redress
existing inequalities between men and women. Examples include a special fund that

37
was created to stimulate female entrepreneurship, financial support for centres that
welcome victims of violence against women. Resources allocated for implementing
these measures however only constitute a minimal portion of the overall budget (i.e.
40 000 euros as against the overall budget of 260 thousand million euros)

What is far more difficult and important is to visualise is the impact of the overall policy
on men and women. The budget annex envisages realizing this through the use of
disaggregated statistics on the situation of men and women. It shows, for instance,
that girls constitute 55% of the secondary school population in humanities and
technology, while they only constitute 43 % of those that finally obtain a diploma of
tertiary education in these disciplines. It allows comparing funds allocated for fighting
unemployment and the evolution of the percentages of unemployed men and women.

In his contribution, Jan Vandemoortele, of the United Nations Development

Programme (UNDP), started from the observation that progress in achieving some of
the international development goals (IDG) is slow. Whereas government leaders
promised that all children would be enrolled in primary school by 2000, estimates
about current school enrolment demonstrates that the objectives are far from being
attained. At this moment there are still an estimated 120 million children in developing
countries out of school, the majority of which are girls. Failure to reach the objectives
clearly goes at the detriment of especially women and girls.

Jan Vandemoortele argued that the main reason why promises are not kept is the
under-investment of governments in basic social services. This is clear when we
compare actual degrees of investment in basic social services with the benchmark
proposed by the 20/20 Initiative. While the latter called for an allocation of 20 percent
of the national budget and 20 percent of official development assistance (ODA) to be
spent on basic social services, statistics show that governments in developing countries
spend, on average, between 12 to 14% of the national budget on basic social services.

Confronted with budgetary deficits and inadequate budgets for social services, a lot of
developing countries have introduced schemes of user fees for public services. And it is
often in countries were human capital outcomes are extremely low that user fees have
been introduced. Fees for primary education, for instance, have been introduced in 13
countries of sub-Saharan Africa (Burundi, Cape Verde, CAR, Madagascar, Mali,
Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and
Zimbabwe), the region with the lowest level of education.

As demonstrated by Jan Vandemoortele, effects of user fees are complex, and seldom
gender-neutral. On the contrary, user fees often aggravate gender disparities as they
enter the calculus about costs and benefits, which is made at the household level.
______________________________________________________________________
Review of theoretical arguments and empirical evidence on user fees leads to three
main conclusions:
• their potential for supplementing social budget is very limited;
• they often result in a sharp reduction in the utilisation of the services,
particularly among women or girls and the poor; and
• protecting these groups has proven exceedingly difficult in practice

38
Source: Jan Vandemoortele (2001)
_____________________________________________________________________

It are primarily parents who decide about the level of investment in children’s human
capital goods on the basis of a kind of cost-benefit analysis. In the case of education,
costs that enter are the direct costs (such as user fees), opportunity costs (income
foregone of not immediately being engaged in productive activities), possibly also costs
which arise of non-compliance to local cultural norms (in some societies it is unusual
that girls are kept in schools after puberty), benefits are the expected returns from
children’s education. In most societies parents are confronted with (perceived) higher
costs of a girl’s education and (perceived) higher benefits from a boy’s education.
Whereas numerous studies have shown that girls’ education generates substantial
amounts of social benefits for the overall society, these are not fully taken into account
in the parents’ calculation.

In a lot of societies, we clearly face a higher willingness to pay for boys’ than for girls’
human capital investment. If policy makers levy user fees for children’s education,
parents are still more pushed to choose among children. Jan Vandemoortele
showcased examples from Zambia, Ghana, Zimbabwe, Malawi where findings are
unanimous: user fees lead to a lowering of children’s education and in particular to a
serious decline in girls’ enrolment figures. The 1994 poverty assessment in Kenya, for
instance, found that poor communities had serious difficulties keeping children in
school mainly due to financial constraints. Nearly half the households interviewed in
seven poor districts had one or more children who had dropped out because of their
inability to pay fees. Girls were found to be twice as likely to be pulled out of school as
boys were.

In order to compensate for the negative effects of user fees, while at the same time
increasing efficiency and lowering costs, some countries have started to target scarce
resources on narrowly identifiable groups (for instance, ‘children of the poorest income
quintile’, ‘first-born girls’) or areas (for instance, ‘least developed area’ in a country).
As argued by Jan Vandemoortele, it is difficult to generalise about the usefulness and
impacts of narrow targeting as conclusions largely depend on the kind of goods and
services that are being targeted. He further demonstrated that it is not a good practice
to increase universal access to basic social services as it generates a number of hidden
costs.
______________________________________________________________________
Five important hidden costs of narrow targeting of basic social services are:
• cost of mis-targeting: it is difficult to identify the poor, particularly female
beneficiaries;
• cost of failing to reach the poorest: the non-poor seldom let themselves be by-
passed by subsidies;
• cost of administering narrowly targeted programmes: including for oversight to
control mismanagement and petty corruption;
• cost of out-of-pocket expenses to document eligibility: including expenses such
as bus fares; and
• cost of non-sustainability: once the non-poor cease to have a stake in narrowly
targeted programmes, the political commitment to sustain their scope and
quality is at risk. The voice of women and the poor alone is usually too weak to
maintain strong public support.

Source: Jan Vandemoortele, 2001

39
Finally, Jan Vandemoortele strongly warned for the fallacy of ‘misplaced concreteness’
and demonstrated that ‘averages’, on which policy makers base themselves when
designing their policy, often hide different realities. Increasing in averages may mask
declines for some groups: increases in average school enrolment figures, for instance,
may go hand in hand with a female drop-out. As men and women are neither a
homogeneous group, generalisations about gender gaps also often overlook realities.
He concluded by making a strong plea to document and nuance gender gaps as this
will be helpful in pointing out appropriate policy actions and programme interventions
to reduce existing gender gaps.

Virginia Vargas, of the (Ecuador), analysed the experiences of gender sensitive

budget analyses in three countries of the Andean Region: Peru, Bolivia and Ecuador14.
While the focus was on the latter three, Virginia pointed out that through the Regional
UNIFEM Program, the review of budgets and mobilization focusing on budgets have
become a strategy for the entire region of Latin America and the Caribbean.

Budget reviews in the Andean form part of the broader ‘Program of Economic and
Social Rights of Andean Women’, which strives to enhance the economic and social
rights of women in society and the State and to raise public awareness about the rights
of women, especially their economic and social rights. Another major aim of the
program is to build up the capacity of women’s organizations so that they can exert an
impact on their governments and apply pressure to these governments to fulfil their
commitments to their citizens.

As Virginia Vargas argued, the initiatives for gender-sensitive budgeting should be put
within a larger process of profound economic, political, cultural and subjective
transformations taking place in Latin America. Gender-sensitive budgeting can be
understood as one of the concrete ways in which civil society and the State aim at
promoting social dialogue processes that stimulate transparency and oversight in public
affairs. In the Andean region it is obvious that the initiative of gender-responsive
budgeting is not merely about the content of budgets but also about underlying
budgetary processes. In particular the need to make these processes more transparent
and participatory is addressed. This goes hand in hand with the increasing importance
that is given to local empowerment and local governance in the process of building ‘a
democracy of closeness’. As argued by Virginia Vargas, decentralising power to
municipality level has the potential to increase the access and exercise of rights at the
local level and to promote social control over the management of public affairs. She
strongly emphasized the importance of budgets as instruments of democratic
governance. In particular participatory budget experiences, which are becoming
increasingly spread in Latin America15 and the Andean Region are vital for democracy
as they contribute to broadening democratic forums and increase the degree and
forms of control that citizens can exercise on local public government as a whole.

14
More specifically, budget reviews with a gender perspective are being conducted in the following places:
Bolivia (national level and the municipality of La Paz), Peru (municipality of Villa El Salvador), Ecuador
(municipality of Downtown Quito, Cuenca, Salitre). In the near future, the process will start in Bolivia
(municipality of Cochabamba) and Ecuador (municipality of Esmeraldas, Colta and Chambo) (Virginia
Vargas, 2001).
15
See among others the experience in the municipality of Porto Alegre in Brazil, which launched a
participatory experience in the elaboration of budgets in 1989 (Vargas, 2001).

40
Notwithstanding their usefulness, many participatory budget initiatives are gender-
blind.

______________________________________________________________________
Gender-blind budgets are unable to understand the underlying forces behind the
dynamics of exclusion that prevail in societies themselves and are manifest in budgets.
When participatory budgets do not take into consideration a gender perspective, they
run the risk of giving an illusion of plurality and inclusion, while actually fostering
exclusion, because they are generally biased by gender imbalances (Virginia Vargas,
2001).
______________________________________________________________________

Budgets with a gender perspective have the potential to foster participation of groups
of citizens who were before, implicitly or explicitly, excluded. Inclusion of women will
partly be enhanced through the recognition of the reproductive, caring and community
dimensions of the economy, to which women tend to contribute most and which
constitutes part of a nation’s wealth. As Virginia Vargas argued, the democratic
repercussions of the gender-responsiveness will be broader than the inclusion of
women. It involves coming closer to fairness, weaving a stronger social fabric, while it
also offers possibilities of closing the gaps between citizens, not only those arising from
gender inequalities, but also ethnic, class, regional and age gaps.

In her description and analysis of the current Andean gender-responsive budgeting

initiative promoted by UNIFEM, Virginia noted that one of the constraints was the lack
in methodology and ad hoc materials to replicate experiences from other countries as
South Africa and Australia. She highlighted that a research is set up to shed light on
important local characteristics, which may differentiate practices in the Andean region
from the already existing experiences in other areas, and to identify sound practices
and possible risks, both at the technical and political level. Afterwards the already
existing training materials from other regions (such as the ‘How to do’ booklet of
Budlender, Sharp and Allen) will be adapted accordingly and shared with the
authorities and women’s organisations.

The focus of the current Andean initiative is on the municipality level. As demonstrated
by Virginia Vargas, a number of municipalities spread over Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia
have been selected on the basis of a number of criteria such as, among others: i) the
already existing degree of openness of municipal authorities to address gender equity
in public policies and government programs, including the budget; ii) the presence of
women in executive positions in municipal government; iii) the existence of women’s
organisations interested in becoming involved in the whole process, from the
description of needs, the discussion of local priorities, and budget allocations to the
monitoring of compliance; iv) the degree of municipal institutionalisation, which makes
it possible to gain access to consistent information.

As however the two central components of the Andean initiative are training and social
mobilization, the impact of the initiative is likely to go beyond the municipal level.

The central subject of analysis is the expenditure side of budgets. The aim is to
determine whether there are expenditures that are favouring gender equity and the
equality of opportunities between men and women, as well as to analyse the
differentiated impact of spending on men and women. Next to the content of budgets,

41
also budgetary processes will be assessed on their degree of gender-responsiveness.
Aside from the analysis, it is also the aim to make specific recommendations to
integrate a gender perspective in budgets. To guarantee that the results of the
initiative will be used by those immediately responsible for elaborating budgets, efforts
will be made to involve these institutions in the overall process whereas women’s
organisations also have their advocacy role.

While the specific budget reviews are still under way, there are a number of findings
that may already be highlighted: i) the incremental budgeting process, as opposed to a
zero-base budget system, hampers innovation, and curtails processes aimed at
expanding citizens interests. This is particularly so when focusing on municipal budgets
where most of the small amount of resources are earmarked for infrastructure; ii) the
incongruence between the actual and the planned expenditures (related to the issue of
‘tracking’); iii) the lack of sex-disaggregated data; iv) the absence of gender-
differentiated information on municipal resources and outlays; v) the disentanglement
of internal budgets and external funds, which prevents obtaining complete and realistic
information on a government’s resources; vi) the need to decentralise not only funds
but also functions.

______________________________________________________________________
Municipalities must stop being merely the administrators of services, which are
generally scarce and of poor quality, and must start consolidating themselves as hubs
of local development, including the development of women (Virginia Vargas, 2001).

Warren Krafchik, of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (US), highlighted the
growing contribution of civil society organisations to public sector budget policy making
in developing countries. Since the 1990s, the budget groups, defined by Warren
Krafchik as the subset of civil society organizations which are involved in independent
applied budget work, have started to play a larger role in the budget processes in
some developing countries, a recent trend which corresponds with the political trend
towards democratisation.

While budget groups differ on a lot of characteristics, most of them operate

independently from their country governments and political parties, acknowledge the
value of inclusive budget processes while the scope of their analysis is often the impact
of public budgets on the poor. While there are these commonalities, their work also
varies on the methodologies used, the level of analysis (national, local), the particular
stage of the budgetary process focused on (planning, implementation, evaluation) and
the strategies implemented (advocacy, training, research). Also their origin widely
differs: while some groups were established specifically to engage in budget issues,
others have emerged to strengthen the work of already existing organisations; while
most groups can be classified or operate within NGOs, others were established within
an academic environment or even within the public sector.

Warren Krafchik puts the growth in budget groups against the background of a number
of international developments as

• democratisation: democratisation brings an increase in transparency and

participation which allows a greater public participation, which in turn often
fosters more transparency and democracy

42
 • decentralisation: bringing budgets closer to communities which opens
opportunities for greater involvement of citizens)
• public expenditure management: new public expenditure management is
conditional on greater transparency and more useful, timely and accessible data
provision, which is also necessary for the work of budget groups
• poverty alleviation and International Finance Institutions (IFIs): independent
applied budget work matches with the new consensus on the shared
responsibilities of the state and civil society in the development process

While there is still, in a lot of countries, resistance against opening up budgetary

processes for involvement of civil society, legislature and media, evidence from those
countries where there has been a tendency towards greater involvement shows that
civil society actors can operate effectively as critical allies of the government. As
indicated by Warren Krafchik, the work of budget groups mostly has the potential to
improve budget decision-making as they may provide a kind of information and
communication channel between the government and the citizens. They may, for
instance, translate inaccessible budget information into ordinary language and
disseminate information about expenditures and incomes to a large audience. On the
other hand, they may feed new information (e.g. resulting from independent critical
analyses about impacts of budgetary policy, from citizen’s needs and beneficiary
assessment, from expenditure tracking) into the budgetary processes.

While the most visible activities of budget groups are concentrated at one particular
stage of the budget cycle, i.e. the moment of the presentation of the annual budget in
the legislature, Warren Krafchik argued that there are crucial activities at each stage of
the budget cycle.

The drafting is probably the most difficult stage for involvement as this is often the
most closed part of the budget process. Intervention opportunities are often informal
and depend on a group’s networks with the government bodies that are formally
involved. A way of intervention, which has proven effective is the processing of timely
research reports, which summarise findings from massive needs and beneficiary
assessment. This provides useful information to the government about the policy
priorities of their inhabitants. As showcased by Warren Krafchik, some organizations go
one step further and produce an alternative budget. This however requires a huge
amount of both financial and time resources and it proved only successful in a number
of cases. The best-known are the Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives who prepare
the Alternative Federal Budget in Canada and the Institute for Fiscal Studies in the
United Kingdom who produce alternative tax proposals. Other examples of successful
interference at the pre-budget stage are government-led. One of most famous
initiatives in this regard is the case of participatory budgeting initiated and managed in
1989 by the local government in the Porto Alegre. As argued by Warren Krafchik, the
successfulness of participative budgeting is mostly influenced by the power of the
legislature. In most cases, it proved successful when the latter was weak and when all
power was concentrated with the mayor who could change the budgetary process
without consulting the legislature. National cases of participatory budgeting, which may
potentially occur within the HIPIC Initiative or the PRSP process, are in an infant stage
and it is not yet possible to assess their successfulness. Finally one further
government-led innovation that may increase the likelihood of civil society intervention
is the publishing of early details of macro-economic policy and a broad outline of the
forthcoming budget in a pre-budget statement months before the tabling of the final
budget. As Warren Krafchik argued, the benefit of the pre-budget statement is that it

43
can protect the macro-economic envelope early in the process, while encouraging
detailed engagement with issues of reprioritization and effective and efficient spending.

Room for intervention considerably increases during the legislative stage. The
parliament is often the first place where the budget plan is officially presented and it
offers the first formal opportunity for legislative representatives to debate and change
the budget. As there often exist formal and informal networks between legislators and
other actors of civil society, the legislative stage is also the first moment of broad civil
society involvement.

______________________________________________________________________
Given parliament’s role as the representative of citizens, this stage is often considered
the most appropriate point for civil society intervention. However, the effectiveness of
civil society involvement in this stage depends on the strength of parliament’s own
power in the budget process (Warren Krafchik, 2001).
______________________________________________________________________

However, legislative power over the budget is in developing countries often curtailed
by the absence of powers of amendment, the weak committee system, poor research
capacity and the timing of the budget process. Despite these shortcomings, there is
recently a tendency in a lot of countries to expand legislative engagement in the
budgetary process. As argued by Warren Krafchik, the cooperation with independent
budget groups is crucial for the effectiveness of parliament’s involvement as these
groups often have more training and analysis capacity than legislatures. Warren
Krafchik showcased examples from different countries as Mexico, South Africa, India,
Brazil, Croatia where independent budget groups provide among others accessible
summaries of the budget, training, intensive technical support, independent analysis of
the budget. This analysis includes a.o. monitoring of social expenditures, measuring of
the difference between the planned and the actual expenditures, assessing the impact
of expenditures on a particular sector or socio-economic groups, assessing the impact
of the budget on macro-economic aggregates, evaluating the impact of different ways
of revenue collection and tax administration reforms.

Whereas the legislative stage offers most opportunities for involvement of civil society,
budget groups collect their necessary data on expenditure, revenue and outputs during
the implementation stage. Research findings from different countries show that data
collection and overall monitoring capacity of implementing governmental bodies are
often minimal. This has led to initiatives whereby independent budget groups are
directly involved in these activities. Warren Krafchik referred to the Ugandan case
where civil society organizations have been involved in the monitoring of the funds
released under the HIPC initiative.

Finally, to date, budget groups have not invested much in the auditing stage. As
argued by Warren Krafchik, one of the main reasons is the timing: the audit report is
mostly presented about two years after the closing of the financial year. The absence
of strong budget powers for parliamentarians limits their investment in the use of the
results of the audit report. Greater involvement of independent budget groups during
the audit stage (through analysis and dissemination of results of the report of the
auditor-generals) may increase effective accountability and may generate information
to feed in other stages of the budgetary process.

44
Mary Rusimbi, Executive Director of the Tanzanian Gender Networking Programme
(TGNP), highlighted the activities, outputs and impact of the Gender Budget Initiative
in Tanzania. The TGNP is an NGO, effectively operating since 1993, which is mainly
engaged in facilitating the achievement of women’s empowerment and human rights
through promotion of social transformation, gender equity and equality. Methods used
to achieve this are animation, networking, outreach, policy advocacy, collective action,
consensus building and action-oriented participatory research.

As Mary Rusimbi highlighted, the Gender Budget Initiative is a lobbying initiative which
was developed as part of TGNP’s and Feminist Activism Coalition (FemAct) vision of
reviewing and influencing the conceptual paradigms among policy makers, economists,
researchers, etc. to adopt more gender-sensitiveness. The particular context wherein
the GBI started was the implementation of the structural adjustment programme and
in particular the introduction of cost sharing whereby free health and education
services were dramatically cut, user fees introduced and privatisation and liberalisation
promoted. Apart from these particular budgetary outcomes, there was also little
involvement of civil society in the underlying budgetary processes.

The GBI aims at examining the budgetary process from a civil society and gender
perspective to see how national/local budgets are allocated, how the resources are
effectively utilized and how policy impacts on citizens of diverse groups. Through
information dissemination, consensus building and collective action among many
national NGOs, the GBI involves in lobbying and advocacy as to change the content of
budgets and the underlying budgetary processes. The main strategy in the
implementation of the GBI is coalition building with like-minded stakeholders and other
civil society actors.

______________________________________________________________________
Coalition building to gender groups represents an effective strategy for lobbying and
advocacy work, as the sheer weight of numbers often brings appropriate attention to
bear on pertinent issues or concerns and tends to have more impact (Mary Rusimbi,
2001).

The first activity of the GBI in 1997 was the adoption of a campaign for three years,
stating strategic points and a given timeframe in order to influence key policies,
structures and actors within the government, parliament, and civil society to adopt
gender budgeting concepts and processes. The identification of the strategic points
and the timeframe involved a huge collective process of reflection and planning
sessions with like-minded NGOs and gender organisations. Among the main activities
identified were a.o.

• building of a documentation base and linkages with other related initiatives as

in South Africa, Australia, Commonwealth Secretariat;

• action-oriented research activities (data collection and analysis from a civil

society and gender perspective) at the national and district level and in selected
sectors16. Typical for the GBI is the involvement of actors of several settings in
16
National Planning Commission, Ministry of Finance as the key sectors in the planning and budget
process; Health and Education as the vital social sector service providers; Agriculture as essential to the
livelihood of the majority of men and women; Industry and Commerce given the significance of market
and trade liberalisation policies in the globalisation process (Mary Rusimbi, 2001).

45
 the action research activities. Cooperation among researchers from university,
government and NGOs combines strengths and weaknesses of different
backgrounds and creates opportunities for building conducive relationships
(government researchers contributed technical skills, university researcher
added quantitative research insights and an academic background while the
NGO researcher contributed issues of gender, participatory techniques and
analysis of social impacts of policies and related processes);

• information-sharing. This involves feedback and dissemination of research

findings and own GBI processes to different sectors of society through
publishing of reports and the organisation and participation in working sessions,
public and strategic fora with civil society, donors, policy makers,
parliamentarians, technocrats, etc. This also often involves the popularisation of
information;

• coalition building and networking. Coalition building and networking has been
used to create alliances, contacts and solidarity with other groups and people,
promoting collective action in and outside the country;

• development of lobbying strategies, capacity building and tools for

parliamentary and public support. This involved, for instance, dialogue with key
policy makers, the legislative and political parties for positive changes in
discriminatory, retrogressive and gender blind policies, laws, guidelines,
structures and development programmes. Important in the development of
lobbying strategies is the organisation of capacity building activities on gender
budgeting. These sessions where not only organised for NGOs, but also for
government actors;

• development of tools and instruments for gender budgeting. The GBI

developed, for instance, alternative budget guidelines for the Planning
Commission (1999-2000) as an example of ways in which guidelines could be
mainstreamed. The project further developed tools to guide planners and
budget officers in the collection of gender-disaggregated data for budgeting
purposes;

• GBI activities to influence government and donors’ structures and processes.

More specifically, the GBI has tried to influence important macro-economic
processes with major impact on the budgetary policies and processes, like the
Public Expenditure Review, the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP);

In her assessment of the results of the GBI, Mary Rusimbi referred to results of GBI-
initiated analysis, which highlighted that planning and budgeting processes were too
top-down, non-participatory and male-oriented, largely excluding women’s needs and
priorities. Due to the lobbying efforts related to gender mainstreaming and gender
budgeting, the year 2000-2001 budget guidelines gave the mandate to all Ministry,
Department and Agency (MDA) to prepare their budgets with gender mainstreaming
objectives in mind. Capacity building on gender budgeting for government actors has
further become more institutionalised: gender budgeting became, for instance, a
training requirement of the Medium Term Expenditure Framework Process and the
TGNP was identified as the main resource for this part of the training. More specifically,
about 200 budget officers were in this way trained and supported by the TGNP.

46
Government and donors recognize that involvement of the TGNP will increase
transparency and accountability within the government machinery.

Mary Rusimbi strongly pointed out that an important factor in reaching these results
was the particular processes that have been used by the GBI. GBI has invested a lot in
capacity building within and outside the own organisations, information sharing,
coalition building, networking, which has resulted in strong collective actions.
Government actors also have often been involved in the GBI processes (cf. the
composition of the action research teams), which has led to government ownership of
the GBI processes, an important factor for the initiative’s sustainability.

While the second phase of the GBI, which started in 2001, will continue to support the
government in its gender budgeting activities, more focus will be put on advocacy
through a civil society campaign. Activities to make macro-economic processes more
participatory and gender responsive are and will be directed at the general public, the
government, regional and international partners and donors.

Finally, Mary Rusimbi, identified a number of lessons and challenges for gender
budgeting. As mentioned already above, capacity building at various levels is thought
to be essential to generate impact. She further referred to the difficult balance
between active involvement in government processes and protecting the civil society
agenda. In that discussion, the TGNP has deliberately chosen for continuous
involvement as government macro-economic decision-making is thought to be
important for future policy priorities and resource allocation. From the same logic, it is
important to work and lobby towards international agencies, which often strongly
influence a national government’s policy manoeuvre room. To facilitate effective
involvement, it is important to build partnerships between northern and southern
NGOs.

Emilia Boncodin, of the Department of Budget and Management (Philippines) and

Celia Reyes, of the NGO Policy and Development Foundation (Philippines), focused on
the Gender and Development (GAD) Initiative in the Philippines. The latter was
elaborated under the Republic Act 7192 (‘Women in Development and Nation Building
Act’), which carried out the Philippines’ constitutional provision that recognizes the role
of women in nation building, and the fundamental equality of men and women. The
enactment requires that a substantial portion of official development assistance (ODA)
should be allocated for gender and women’s concerns.

It further requires that annual budget proposals of each government agency should
incorporate an allocation for GAD programs, projects and activities. Interventions
(start-up or mainstreaming) should be identified in a GAD Plan that should be
submitted for review to the National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women
(NCRFW), which is the central policymaking and coordinating body for women and
gender concerns.
_____________________________________________________________________
A GAD Plan must take its direction from the Philippine Plan for Gender-Responsive
Development (PPGD), 1995-2025. The PPGD gears to address the concerns of women
for equality and development across six major spheres: individual, family, socio-
cultural, economic, political and legal. Across each of these spheres, three basic goals
must cut through:

47
 • Establishment of mechanisms/structures for gender-responsive policy and
program formulation and implementation. This includes coordination across
government agencies and with NGOs, institutionalising sex-disaggregated
databases, mainstreaming of gender issues in all aspects of government
concerns.

• Special attention must be placed on women in special circumstances and the

manner in which their circumstances are aggravated by other national policies
and programs. This refers to victims/survivors of violence and armed conflict,
as well as special sectors of women namely prostituted populations,
adolescents, women with disabilities, indigenous women and migrant women.

• Continuous consciousness raising, advocacy and affirmative action. This

entails training and other educational programs, information dissemination,
research and documentation, and a concrete plan for revision or creation of
gender responsive laws.

Source: Celia Reyes (2001)

_____________________________________________________________________

The ‘General Appropriations Act (GAA) 1995-1999’ further specified that the amounts
to be set aside for the above mentioned activities should be at least 5% of the overall
budgets of the agencies, departments, bureaus, offices. Monitoring and follow-up of
the implementation is effectuated through annual reports that indicate the
accomplishments and the amounts utilized in implementing GAD related activities,
projects and programmes and which should be submitted to Congress, the Department
of Budget and Management (DBM) and the NCFRW.

The key agencies in the implementation of the GAD are the NCRFW, the National
Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), the Department of Budget and
Management (DBM) and the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG).
Each of the latter agencies has specific tasks and responsibilities throughout the
process of planning and implementation of the overall GAD policy and the specific GAD
Plans. The NCRFW provides assistance to agencies in the planning process through the
organisation of training programs on gender sensitivity and gender responsive planning
and is responsible for monitoring overall GAD compliance. The NEDA is responsible for
integrating gender concerns in macro-economic planning and they also determine and
recommend the amount to be allocated for development activities involving women.
The guidelines on GAD budgeting are prepared by the DBM while DILG provides
technical assistance to local government units on how to operationalize GAD planning
and budgeting at all levels.

Reviewing the experience to date with the GAD, Emilia Boncodin and Celia Reyes
referred to the findings of the NCRFW, which indicated that there is an increasing
compliance (from 19 to 140) of agencies in the submission of the GAD plans over the
period 1995-2000. Also the aggregate GAD budget allocation is increasing: the largest
share of the GAD budget to the total national budget was in the years 1997 and 1999
and stood at 0.62% and 0.58% respectively.

The positive findings should however be set against a number of critical remarks.
Independent evaluation and monitoring of the GAD Initiative is difficult to date as the
annual reports to be submitted to the Congress, the DBM and the NCRFW only give a

48
review of activities and do not provide an overview of the degree of effective
implementation of these activities. Reports also do not mention outputs and outcomes
of the activities, programmes and projects. The NCRFW and Congress neither provided
a consolidated report on the actual utilization of funds for GAD programs, projects and
activities.

In her paper, Celia Reyes, referred to the initial assessment of the GAD budget policy
implementation in the Philippines (2001) effectuated by the monitoring and evaluation
division of the NCRFW. Most of the findings and recommendations in the latter
assessment report match those from a case-study by Budlender and Buenaobra (2001)
on gender budgeting in selected local government units.

Both studies mentioned among others the very low awareness of GAD concepts in
general and GAD budget policy among government officials/employees and the
absence of a monitoring system. Both indicated that Local Government Units often
wrongly conceptualise the GAD plan as a separate plan that has little to do with the
general development plans. They consequently do not integrate it in the general
planning and budgeting cycles, which is also partly due to the lack of technical skills.

In her paper, Celia Reyes further highlighted a number of important proposals from the
assessment study and the case-study. One of the most important guidelines, which
both reports retain is the creation of an audit scheme that would monitor and evaluate
the GAD budget policy both at the national and local level.

49
VI. OPENING SESSION (day 2)

Laurette Onkelinx, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Employment

and Equal Opportunities

Mr the Secretary of State

Ladies and Gentlemen

It is a great privilege for me to express myself at this International Conference and I

would like to thank you, dear Colleague, for asking me to help for the preparation of it.

I also would like to thank all the co- organisers of this conference: Mrs. Noeleen
Heyzer, Executive Director of the UNIFEM, Mrs Sally Shelton Colby, Deputy Secretary
General of the OECD, Mr Winston Cox, Deputy Secretary General of the
Commonwealth Secretariat and Mr Sigurdur Helgason, Deputy Secretary General of the
Nordic Council of Ministers.

As Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Employment, I can only be very glad to see
that such a small country as mine has taken the initiative to organise such a high level
Conference on such an important topic that concerns all of us today: The integration of
the gender mainstreaming in the government’s budgetary analysis.

______________________________________________________________________
As it has already been underlined, this conference is in keeping with the activities led
by Belgium during the EU Presidency. Such a context allows pursuing a double
strategic objective:
- to give visibility to a thematic which is not well-known either by the population
either by the political authorities
- to raise awareness among the world of politics, either Belgian either European,
about the relevance of such an initiative which have gained results in a series of
countries in order to convince national and community authorities of the need to
proceed to a gender budgeting at Belgium but also Europe scale.

The development of the “Gender mainstreaming” approach forms the common basis
on which to rely to go ahead in the achievement of this double objective. As you are
surely aware of, the Member States of the European Union and Commission realised
the need to intensify the implementation of the gender mainstreaming in the Union
policies after the United-Nations’ Conference on Women that was held in Beijing in
1995.

The EU’s commitment regarding gender mainstreaming has been constructed in

different stages:

First, Article 2 and 3 of the Amsterdam Treaty which formalise the Commission’s
commitment to gender mainstreaming by establishing equality between men and
women as a specific task of the Community as well as a horizontal objective affecting
all Community tasks.

50
Secondly, the adoption in 1996 of the Commission’s Communication “Incorporating
equal opportunities for women and men into Community policies and activities that
gives a definition of the concept “mainstreaming” and states the commitment of the
Commission to adopt a policy based on mobilising all general measures specifically for
the purpose of achieving”.

Thirdly, as part of the annual follow-up of the Women World Conference of the
United-Nations organised in 1995 in Beijing, the Council has committed itself, since
1998, to develop indicators for one of the themes to be found in the Beijing Platform
for Action. After Finland and the women’s representation in politics, France and the
articulation of private and working life, Belgium has chosen to present indicators on
gendered wage inequalities.

Finally, always part of the Beijing follow-up, a new step has been got over in 2000 at
a European Meeting of the Ministers in charge of equal opportunities where it has been
decided to incorporate issues related to equality in at least 2 Councils different from
the Employment and Social Affairs ones. As part of this exercise, the Belgian
Presidency has chosen the Barcelona Process and the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership
addressed in a General Affairs’ Council and the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines
during an Ecofin Council.

In this last case, the objective is in close link with the “gender budgeting” problematic
that concerns all of us today. Indeed, the purpose of the exercise undertaken by the
Belgian Presidency is to face the well established idea according to which the so-called
general issues discussed and dealt with by the Ecofin Council are straight off gender
neutral. To support this questioning, a series of experts have been invited to carry out
a first reading considering the gender mainstreaming of the 4 chapters of the Broad
Economic Policy Guidelines and to suggest a first impact assessment from the equality
between men and women’s point of view.

I am of course aware that the gender mainstreaming has just started in a series of
policies that should deserve to be carefully examined through the equal opportunities’
angle, notably the public finances, product markets (goods and services) and financial
markets. That is the reason why the technical seminar organised at the end of this
week, with the support of the European Commission, turns out to be necessary. It will
enable an exchange of views among experts and European officials concerned with the
setting up and implementation of economic and financial policies. Let us hope that this
will encourage them to expand their gender analysis in the field of public finances,
product markets and financial markets, which seem at first sight reluctant to that
approach.

As Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Employment and Equal Opportunities Policies, I
am more and more convinced of the relevance and the validity of the “gender
mainstreaming” approach. I have moreover invested in materialising this approach at
the Federal Government level with the creation of a specific action system called
“mainstreaming section”. This system has been set up for a one-year period as an
experimental measure in 2001. Its main objective was to cope with the difficulties,
underlined in the government 2000 report on the follow-up of the Beijing Platform, to
define and identify and to implement a gender mainstreaming in all governments

51
policies. Indeed, at the occasion of this report, the “gender mainstreaming” concept
turned out not to be well understood and little assimilated.

Set up and to be paid by the specific budget ‘Equal Opportunities of the Employment
Department’, the “mainstreaming section” is a tool that allows an optimal follow-up of
the commitments made by the Government concerning the implementation of the
resolutions of the Women World Conference held in Beijing.

The university specialists that are part of the section are from 5 universities (VUB, ULB,
ULG, UIA and UCL). They work in close collaboration with 2 members from the Cabinet
and from the Administration that have been appointed by each Minister to look after
the implementation of the strategic objective defined for each ministerial competence.

The section is responsible of 4 central missions:

• Training of relay persons (focal points) in Cabinets and in the Administration;
• Identification of the provisions and measures taken in each policy to reinforce the
equality in a mainstreaming perspective;
• Impact analysis and assessment of these measures: recommendations for a
continuing improvement;
• Dissemination of good practices through the development of a high visibility of the
system that has been set up.

The results of the intermediate assessment of the section show the efficiency and
utility of the system even though it needs to be improved. It cannot be denied that real
progress has been made and that for some departments, the explanation of the
“gender mainstreaming approach” and its methodological management have not only
allowed the setting up of an action plan but also to obtain the first concrete results.

Despite these breakthroughs, it would be wrong to say that all the problems are
solved. It is still very difficult for some departments either to accept this approach,
either to mobilise the human resources and materials necessary for its implementation
even if a principle approval is taken for granted.

Considering the results already gained and waiting for the final assessment that will
not be available before the end of this year, the existing system of the “gender
mainstreaming” section seems to me to constitute a first action leading towards the
launching of the “gender budgeting” exercise in 2002, if not in all the departments, at
least in some of them. A working group with representatives of the following Cabinets
have already been gathered once to examine the project feasibility: Budget, Foreign
Affairs and Development co-operation, Finances, Environment and Health, Sustainable
Development and Mobility. A new meeting is scheduled for the beginning of December
in order to define a working method and identify the information and expertise needs
for the launch of the exercise within the different departments concerned.
____________________________________________________________
I am convinced that the “gender mainstreaming” approach has a great potential for
increasing the quality and efficiency of policies by making them more transparent,
more consistent as well as comprehensive and by making a full and effective use of
human resources. The budgetary analysis is obviously at the heart of that approach
which is not aiming at producing a separate budget for women neither increasing the
amount of money on women-specific programmes. On the contrary, it aims at

52
analysing to which extent public money are collected and spent equally through an ex-
ante impact assessment on women and men, by means of, notably, an identification of
the final beneficiaries. I do hope that the launch, in Belgium, of the “gender budgeting”
exercise will be successful and that my country will soon be among all the daring
countries that have understood that the respect of the equality principle is first of all a
matter of material and financial means.

53
 Eddy Boutmans, State Secretary of Development Co-operation

I would like to welcome you all to the second day of this conference on gender
responsive budgeting. Yesterday you all had the opportunity to share your own
experiences and knowledge and learn from those of other participants. Today, we’ll
move a step forward and enlist statements of different countries, which express their
assessment, appreciation and visions on future initiatives of gender responsive
budgeting. The basic document for today is the ‘Conference Communique – Towards
Gender Responsive Budgeting’ a copy of which was distributed yesterday.

Before I go into a number of issues I would like to welcome in particular Mr. Winston
Cox, Deputy Secretary General of the Commonwealth and Ms. Véronique Degraef from
the Cabinet of Ms. Laurette Onkelinx, Belgian Vice-Prime Minister and Minister of
Employment and Equal Opportunities. She will clarify the efforts and future initiatives
as regards gender sensitive budgeting in Belgium.

______________________________________________________________________
One of the main rationales underlying a country’s fiscal policy is to redress existing
inequalities in distribution of wealth and resources. If one acknowledges that gender is
one of the most persistent axes of inequality and if one shares the assumption that an
equitable distribution between men and women is an important policy goal, then it is
clear that this should be translated in a country’s fiscal policy.

Our first question is then whether there indeed exists a male bias in allocation?

The answer to this question is fairly easy and there is by and large agreement among
academics and policy makers that there is in the overall majority of the countries of the
world a persistent male bias in the allocation of human capabilities and rights. One
should just take a quick glance at reports of several leading international organisations
to become convinced that despite the huge progress that has been made over the past
20 years, gender remains a crucial factor when it becomes to allocation and
distribution. The latest Human Development Report reveals that in 43 countries,
including India, Mozambique and Yemen to name a few, male literacy rates are at least
15 percentage points higher than female rates. While there has been on average good
progress in eliminating the male bias in primary and secondary enrolments with a ratio
of girls to boys in developing countries of 89% for primary education and 82% for
secondary education, there are also 27 countries, including Eastern European countries
as Bulgaria and Romania and Latin American countries as Bolivia and Ecuador, where
the girls’ net enrolment has declined at the secondary level between the mid-1980s
and 1997. In 20 countries girls’ secondary enrolment ratios are less than 2/3 of boys’
enrolment ratios.

Our second question is whether one does share the assumption that an equitable
distribution between men and women is an important policy goal.

There are several arguments, which can be used to justify the policy option of gender
equality. Recently, the rationale for gender equality is strongly built on the efficiency
argument. The basic idea is that inequality in allocation of human capital and rights is

54
not only bad for women but for everyone. Investing in women is then like a kind of
win-win game where everybody will be made better off in the long run. Investing in
women will enable them to fully participate, which will make the total cake for
distribution larger.

I do not doubt about the assertion that investing in women leads to higher economic
growth and development. It is built on quite strong evidence. The latest World Bank
Policy Research Report ‘Engendering Development’ for instance shows that if countries
in South Asia, SSA, the Middle East and North Africa had closed down their gender gap
in schooling at the same rate achieved by East Asia over the period 1960-1992, their
income per capita could have grown by an additional 0.5 to almost 1% points per year.

I feel however that the efficiency argument places an unbalanced emphasis on the
importance of a fully participation of women in production, whereas an equal
participation in the distribution of the benefits of production is much less emphasized.

And how far do we need to invest in women? What would be a fair share? Suppose
that impact on economic growth is highest if the level of investment in women’s
human capabilities attain about 70% of the investment in men’s human capabilities.
Should we accept then this 70% ratio?

It is clearly potentially dangerous to build the rationale for an equitable distribution

completely on efficiency arguments. A gender equitable distribution might indeed
enable to reach other objectives but we should not forget that it is a well-justified
objective in itself.

A lot of governments in the world, and Belgium is one of these, even have already
explicitly indicated that they do share the vision that gender equality is an important
policy goal. We have for instance endorsed the Convention on the Elimination of
Discrimination Against Women and the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. The
latter even explicitly referred to the importance of integrating a gender perspective in
budgetary decisions. More recently did we commit ourselves to an internationally
agreed set of development goals and time-bound targets through the United Nations
Millennium Declaration. Greater gender equality is one of these goals with the headline
target being the equal access for girls and boys to primary and secondary schooling by
the year 2015.

Reaching this target will necessitate appropriate budgetary provisions as declarations

without the corresponding allocation of resources is meaningless.

What can we learn then from the Gender Budget Initiative Programme of
UNIFEM and its partner organisations and from other ongoing initiatives of gender
responsive budgeting?

It became already clear yesterday that it is difficult to summarise lessons learned. I will
only emphasize a couple of issues, which I find important.

Firstly, Gender Responsive Budgeting is not only about the content of budgets. It is
also about the underlying budgetary processes. Essential words here are good

55
governance, accountability and transparency. While budget formulation is mostly an
exclusive process, often not even leaving room for parliamentary participation, gender
budget initiatives offer ways to encourage public participation. Budgets become in fact
the instrument through which citizens can assess their government’s policy and its
effective implementation.

It is clear that lessons learned on how to integrate a gender perspective in fiscal policy
are also important for the integration of other important policy goals in budgets and
budgetary processes. Initiatives to make budgets more pro-poor and environmental-
sensitive and those that strive for more gender responsiveness clearly need to
exchange views and share lessons learned. They have at first sight a lot of the
demands and recommendations in common.

There is no uniform and clearcut pattern of a successful gender budget exercise.

Initiatives for gender responsive budgeting have been diverse in outlook and scope. A
wide range of actors have been involved from various backgrounds. Some initiatives as
the Australian and the Filipino have been more governmental and were based within
ministries of finance and national women machineries while others as the Ugandan or
the Tanzanian were primarily led by parliamentarians or by civil society actors. Each of
the diverse settings has its advantages and drawbacks, with governmental initiatives
being often more influential and directly effective while civil society-led actions are
more broad-based and sustainable. In particular interesting are those initiatives, such
as the South African, where efforts of government and civil society go hand in hand
and reinforce each other.

And finally, what can be the role of development policy.

_____________________________________________________________________
I consider the role of development policy as ‘supporting’ and surely not as ‘imposing’.
In this whole initiative of gender responsive budgeting it is extremely important not to
fall in the trap of donor conditionality. If I consider the Belgian approach, it would call
it a twofold approach. First and for all, we have opted to support the Gender Budget
Initiative of UNIFEM and its partners organisations whose global objective is that all
countries in the world would engage in gender responsive budgeting by 2015.

By funding the GBI programme, we support the three main activities of the
implementing organisations, which are:

a. operational support for country-driven initiatives including local capacity building

and technical assistance
b. underlying conceptual work which might be considered as global public goods
c. international advocacy directed at civil society, national governments, donors,
regional and international agencies

The three organisations have proved in the past that they have knowledge on this
issue and that they are able to create a value added.

Challenges they face are threefold.

Firstly, the knowledge base needs further refinement with special emphasis on the
budget revenue side.

56
Secondly, additional resources are needed to meet the excessive demand for
widespread replication. Support needs to go to newly arising initiatives but on-going
ones also need further back-up as to increase their sustainability.

A third challenge is to put gender responsive budgeting on the agendas of

international organisations engaging in governance and economic reform programmes.
This conference can be considered one important step forward in these advocacy
efforts. The collaboration of international organisations as the OECD and the Nordic
Council of Ministers in the organisation of this event and the high-level representation
of diverse institutions are important indications that gender responsive budgeting will
be more than a vogue word.

______________________________________________________________________
Until now, Belgian DC has primarily invested in the support of organisations, which are
innovators and leaders in this topic. In the future, we also want to intensify our efforts
to support country-led initiatives for gender responsive budgeting through our bilateral
development policy. Crucial is that partner country strategies should be the template
for funding. We thus explicitly recognise the primacy of country ownership. As we
share the vision that budgetary processes should be more transparent and
accountable, country-driven, participatory, performance and results-oriented, we will
effectively try to promote this in our development policy.
______________________________________________________________________

It has been clear throughout the conference that gender responsive budgeting is not
the primacy of the developing world. While some OECD-countries did start already
initiatives, it is clear that our partners from the south are political entrepreneurs when
it comes to gender sensitive budgeting. It is clear that we might learn a lot from them.
The participation of high representatives from diverse OECD-ministries in this
conference might help to elevate the practice in our own countries.

57
 Noeleen Heyzer, Executive Director, UNIFEM

Ms. Deputy Prime Minister, Mr. Secretary of State, Mr. Cox, Mr. Helgason,
Distinguished Ministers, Delegates, colleagues and friends

Yesterday, we shared our vision to strengthen economic and financial governance. We

saw that it was impossible to talk about good governance with addressing its
foundation: equality, democracy, and justice. We heard about gender budget initiatives
on every continent. Across programme and donor countries. We learned about the
technical tools being used and developed to support these initiatives. And we heard
from the sweeping movement of women and governments that are championing this
approach in more than forty countries around the world.

We find ourselves now at a critical juncture. The momentum is high. Unique alliances
have been forged. And the political will exists. We have, in gender budget analysis, a
concrete tool to assess how the major trends with which the world is occupied are
affecting more than fifty percent of the population. From peace and security to
decentralisation. Globalisation to the feminisation of poverty. Even the HIV/AIDs
pandemic. We have accelerated the development of global “public goods” – in the
form of tools, analysis and materials – and have better insight about how to govern
more efficiently, more inclusively and with greater social and economic impact.

Yesterday, we heard new ideas about analysing revenue collection from a gender
perspective and about the process of budget-making. It became obvious that gender
budget analysis is not simply a technical exercise. That it requires thinking about
government finances in a new way, looking beyond the household as a single unit of
analysis to examine the situation of each of its members, male and female. That it
requires a focus on the unpaid care economy, in which much of women’s time is spent
caring for children and dependent adults. That it requires gender-disaggregated
statistics. And that it requires serious political commitment.

Yesterday, experiences were shared from Ecuador, France, India, Peru, the Philippines,
South Africa, Sweden, Tanzania, Uganda, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
We heard about lessons learned and obstacles encountered. Frankly, I think that the
results have been remarkable. In the Philippines and India, we have seen the women’s
movement engage in the budget process. In Tanzania and Zimbabwe, we have seen
new awareness about sectoral bias – in the areas of health and education. In South
Africa and Uganda, we have seen parliamentarians use gender budget analysis in
powerful ways.

Our purpose today, is to look beyond the tools and approaches. To speak as leaders,
within and outside of government, about strengthening economic and financial
governance through gender responsive budgeting. Our purpose is to support the
mobilisation of political and financial support to meet the increasing demand for these
initiatives in programme and donor countries alike. Our purpose is to follow up the
commitment that every government in the world made six years ago, as stated in the
Beijing Platform for Action, to incorporate a gender perspective into the design,
development, adoption and execution of all budgetary processes. In 1995, we made

58
this commitment to promote equitable, effective an appropriate resource allocation to
support gender equality and enhance women’s empowerment.

Today, we are here to make good on that pledge. I hope that you will all reaffirm this
global consensus by supporting the Conference Communiqué. UNIFEM, and the
powerful alliance of partners before you, pledge to support your efforts to undertake a
gender responsive budget initiative by the year 2015.
______________________________________________________________________
The conference communiqué sets out four main principles: transparency, efficiency,
participation and equality. It encourages an examination of budget processes to
ensure that women’s and men’s needs and priorities are considered equally. It calls for
women’s participation in this process, through their parliaments and civil society
organizations. It encourages governments to take the initiative of publishing an annual
gender equality budget report. And finally, it promotes the catalytic and supportive role
of development cooperation in fostering gender budget initiatives.

The Government of Belgium has paved the way. Last year, it made a generous
contribution to UNIFEM for its work in this area. Italy quickly joined forces. Together,
they have provided core support for developing the global “public goods.” For refining
our methodology and tools. To strengthen the linkages between gender budget
analysis and macro-economic policy. But mostly, to support gender budget initiatives in
the more than 100 countries were we work.

The challenges remain immense. In a world that seeks to achieve efficiency and
growth on one hand, and equity and poverty reduction on the other, governments are
faced with difficult choices. Managing trade and financial liberalization, capturing the
benefits of new technologies, responding to the threat of HIV/AIDS, conflict,
environmental hazards and generating sufficient finance for development. Over the
past two days, we have seen how gender budget analysis can be a valuable tool for
managing these critical governance issues.

I want to thank you all for being here.

______________________________________________________________________
This conference is testimony to our collective will to strengthen global governance in
the face of increasing global insecurity. Belgian’s leadership, during their presidency of
the European Union, has made an extraordinary contribution to this goal. The
partnership of the OECD and the Nordic Council of Ministers has brought strength and
substance to our shared objectives. Support from the north and from the south, from
the women’s movement, and from the many independent experts and NGOs joining us
has advanced our work.

A decided statement today can make the difference for millions of women and their
families. We can give meaning to our commitments to gender equality while promoting
human development, economic efficiency and good governance.

Thank you.

59
 Sigurdur Helgason, Deputy Secretary General, Nordic Council of Ministers

Gender and Equality Perspectives in Nordic Economic Policy

The Nordic countries have committed themselves to incorporating gender quality

perspectives into every important political decision-making (mainstreaming). This
applies also to national budgets that are of central importance in economic policy and
in implementation of central government policies.

To create Nordic societies where gender equality flourishes requires budgets that
include a coherent, visible and carefully formulated gender equality perspective.
Incorporating a gender equality perspective into budgets also encourages the
generation of new data. Before long, the perspective will help illustrate the impact of
the Governments use of money on equality between women and men.

Another method is the systematic incorporation of the gender and equality perspective
into the budgets, administration and policies of the Nordic Council of Ministers itself.
Challenges include obtaining data about the practical implementation of
mainstreaming, developing new working methods, providing employee training in
gender equality issues, and reshaping and adapting the organisation and its employees
to incorporate the gender equality perspective so that all aspects of each activity are
encompassed.

In today’s Nordic Community it is also important to incorporate the gender equality

perspective into Nordic welfare policy. The Nordic countries are in transition. The
Nordic welfare society is being remodelled in each of the countries, and so far we have
little information about the impact of these changes on the lives of women and men.
The public sector employs many women, and the changes will inevitably affect the
terms and conditions of their employment, wages and wage structures, range of
influence, and power.

______________________________________________________________________
The gender equality perspective also helps us to understand how dependent we are on
the services provided by a welfare society. One of the preconditions for equality
between women and men is that society continues to bear the brunt of the
responsibility for children and young people, the sick and the elderly, thereby affording
each gender the same opportunities for influence in society, working life and family
life.

The Nordic Council of Ministers research programme on welfare, approved in Spring

2000, is an important tool in mapping out and analysing the effects of the development
of the welfare society on gender equality in society at large and in working life.

The main goals of the Nordic Council of Ministers in incorporating a gender perspective
in economic policy are:

• to incorporate gender and equality perspectives into the activities of the Nordic
Council of Ministers in accordance with the resolution made by the Co-operation
Ministers (MR-SAM) in June 2000

60
• to develop methods to assess the effects of Nordic Council of Ministers budgets on
gender equality
• to create co-operation with ministries of economic affairs and other actors in order
to evaluate economic policy from a gender equality perspective
• to secure visibility for gender and equality issues in the transition period of Nordic
welfare societies
• to assess the experiences and practices that resulted from incorporating gender
and equality perspectives into economic policy.

The Nordic Ministers of Gender Equality and Finance have started a co-operation
initiative. The aim is in to evaluate economic policy from a gender equality perspective.
A Nordic working group with representatives from both the gender equality sector as
well as the finance sector will be set up. The task of the group is to work out a
proposal to a Nordic project on gender mainstreaming and Nordic state budgets. This
new initiative for a joint Nordic project starts co-operation between these two sectors
and is a new challenge for the Nordic co-operation.

Applying the budget as an instrument for gender equality is a challenging task as the
budget has a tendency to reflect the society, including its inequalities. The budget can
on the other hand be a powerful instrument for changing and developing the society
and should be designed to improve gender equality.

The budget process is a highly complex decision-marking process that is affected by

numerous interests and perspectives such as macro-economic objectives,
policy/political priorities and micro-economic and institutional objectives. Balancing
these different objectives is challenging and it can be difficult to get a voice in the
process. The gender perspective will more likely to have an effect if it is integrated into
both existing and new budgetary tools and processes.

The budget process is conservative and change is often incremental. It is important to

be realistic and focused and to design the process of enhancing a gender perspective
carefully. It can be useful to focus on practical examples and identity barriers to
introduction of gender oriented budgeting.

Decentralisation or devolution of the budget process means that budgetary decision-

making is increasingly being shifted from Ministries of Finance to line departments and
local government. This means that initiatives have to focus on the appropriate
decision-making level. It is often easier to start at the local or departmental level that
at the level of the budget as a whole.

______________________________________________________________________
Generic changes in the budget process such as increased transparency, accountability
and results-orientation are vital preconditions of gender responsive budgeting. The
development of results-oriented budgeting means that the budget process focuses not
only on the input side but also on the output and outcome side of the budget. Gender
responsive budgeting needs to approach budgeting in a similar manner, as there is no
mechanical relationship between inputs and outcomes. Focus on the input side may
not necessarily improve gender equality if barriers are institutional rather than lack of
resources.

61
In the Nordic countries public policies are increasingly intertwined. This means that
policy outcomes may often be unpredictable as changes in one policy may affect
others. Focus on outputs and especially outcomes as opposed to inputs will thus often
be more likely to provide information that can be used to improve policy design and
the use of public resources.

The Nordic Council of Ministers will strengthen gender responsive budgeting through
facilitating co-operation between the Nordic countries. This co-operation will focus on
development of methods and approaches, exchange of information and practical
experiences. The Nordic Council of Ministers has also responsibility for promoting
gender equality in its own activities, for example its own institutions and programmes.
This means that the Nordic Budget will increasingly be analysed from a gender
mainstreaming perspective.

We are well aware that gender responsive budgeting is not a simple exercise and that
there are many hurdles to overcome. We are convinced that the implementation of the
strategy creates new and improved opportunities for establishing gender equality
within the Nordic countries and in Nordic co-operation.

62
 Winston Cox, Deputy Secretary General, Commonwealth Secretariat

The involvement of Commonwealth countries in gender responsive budgeting is both

long and substantial: it began with Australia in 1984 and spread to Canada and South
Africa in 1993 and 1994, respectively. The Commonwealth Secretariat’s programme
began in 1995 and since then nearly half of the forty known country initiatives on
gender responsive budgeting are in the Commonwealth17. The issue has been
discussed in depth at the Fifth and Sixth Meetings of Commonwealth Ministers
Responsible for Women’s Affairs and it was on the agenda of the Commonwealth
Finance Ministers Meeting, which like a number of other international meetings, was
cancelled following to the tragic events in the USA.

The Commonwealth’s involvement in gender responsive budgeting takes its genesis

from a number of discreet but interconnected factors:

The Commonwealth’s commitment to the fundamental principle of equality and non-

discrimination18 creates the need to develop public expenditure tracking systems to
measure how consistent national decisions on resource allocation are with these and
the other fundamental principles of the Commonwealth.

Reaffirmation of commitment to gender equality by Heads of Government when

they endorsed the Ottawa Declaration (on Women and Structural Adjustment) at
Harare in 1991 and the 1995 Commonwealth Plan of Action on Gender and
Development (and its update, Advancing the Commonwealth Agenda for Gender
Equality into the New Millennium (2000-2005) at Durban in 1999.

Exploitation of the Commonwealth’s demonstrated a comparative advantage in the

area of encouraging governments to integrate gender concerns into economic
policy dating from the report of the 1989 Commonwealth Expert Group on Women
and Structural Adjustment, Engendering Adjustment for the 1990s, a pioneering
work that advocated incorporating gender concerns into a broad range of economic
policy areas: public expenditure, taxation, credit policies, exchange rate policies,
pricing policies, wage policies, trade liberalisation and privatisation19.

The need to ensure that gender issues form part of the Commonwealth Secretariat’s
work on ‘Integrated Economic and Social Development Policy Management’.

Contributing to the achievement of the International Development Targets (IDTs) in

general and in particular those targets dealing with poverty reduction, primary and
secondary education, and infant and maternal mortality.

17
Gender responsive budget initiatives have taken place in forty countries, nearly half of them
Commonwealth. The Commonwealth countries include Australia, Barbados, Botswana, Canada, Fiji
Islands, Kenya, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, St Kitts & Nevis,
Tanzania, Uganda, UK, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. The Secretariat directly coordinated projects in Barbados,
Fiji Islands, St. Kitts/Nevis, South Africa and Sri Lanka.
18
Commonwealth fundamental principles were first affirmed in the 1971 Singapore Declaration and
reaffirmed in the 1991 Harare Declaration, see Commonwealth Declarations 1971-1991, Commonwealth
Secretariat 1993.
19
Engendering Adjustment for the 1990s, Commonwealth Secretariat, 1990.

63
THE COMMONWEALTH PROGRAMME

The Commonwealth Secretariat has contributed to the development of this programme

area through the development of analytical tools and frameworks, international advocacy
and the building strategic partnerships.

The Development of Analytical Tools and Frameworks

From the outset, one of our aims was to create a set of analytical tools for budgetary
expenditure analysis that could be used by different governments. Through the
commissioned work of Diane Elson, six broad categories of expenditure tools were
developed: (i) gender-aware policy appraisal, (ii) beneficiary assessments, (iii) public
expenditure incidence analysis, (iv) gender-disaggregated analysis of the budget on
time use, (v) gender-aware medium-term economic policy framework, and (vi) gender
responsive budget statement.

The Commonwealth Secretariat, in collaboration with AusAID, also commissioned Debbie

Budlender and Rhonda Sharp to develop a training manual to apply these tools at the
country level. The manual is based on a three-way categorisation of expenditure, which
distinguishes between: (a) gender-targeted expenditure; (b) equal opportunity expenditure
for civil servants; and (c) mainstream expenditure (the rest) considered in terms of its
gender impact.

______________________________________________________________________
Along with the new programme partners, the development of revenue tools is an
important next step in order to determine the possible gender impacts of revenue-
raising measures, as well as to complement work done on expenditure impacts.

International Advocacy

The Commonwealth Secretariat programme on gender responsive budgeting emerged out

of the 1995 Commonwealth Plan of Action on Gender and Development, the
Commonwealth’s contribution to the Beijing Conference and Platform for Action. In 1996, at
the Fifth Meeting of Commonwealth Ministers Responsible for Women’s Affairs, gender
responsive budgeting was for the first time included on the agenda of an intergovernmental
meeting. At that meeting Ministers endorsed the use of the expenditure tools and
recommended that the Commonwealth Secretariat assist governments to implement
gender responsive budgets.

At their Sixth Meeting held in New Delhi in April 2000, Ministers Responsible for Women’s
Affairs requested that Finance Ministers endorse the integration of a gender analysis into
the national budget. Commonwealth Finance Ministers at their meeting held in Malta in
2000, ‘reaffirmed the importance of the Commonwealth Secretariat’s programme on
gender equality’. They also welcomed the Commonwealth Gender Responsive Budget
Initiative and ‘looked forward to the review of the pilot stage of the project.’

Beyond the confines of the Commonwealth, the Secretariat has sought to raise awareness
of the value of gender responsive budgeting including at the UN General Assembly Special
Session on Beijing+5, at other major meetings organised by the OECD, Nordic Council of

64
Ministers, and UNDP, and also on a regional basis with the ADB and the Pacific Islands
Forum.

Building Strategic Partnerships

We consider our new programme partnership with the International Development Research
Centre (IDRC) and the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), which
emerged out of a meeting at the Commonwealth Secretariat in April 2000, as crucial to
responding to the emerging demands of the programme and the diverse support required
at the country level. Our new partners bring unique, complementary and
critical resources to the initiative: UNIFEM works towards enhancing the role, capacity and
participation of women at all levels: national, regional and international, whereas IDRC seeks
to help developing countries find solutions to social and economic problems through
research, recognising that equitable and sustainable development requires an
understanding of the differential impact of policies on women and men.

LESSONS LEARNED

___________________________________________________________________
Our involvement in gender responsive budgeting have taught us three critical lessons and
have allowed us to identify a number of benefits. The lessons learned are: the importance
of country ownership; the importance of collaboration between government and civil
society; and the need for work on revenue and tax systems.
While the specific economic impacts of this relatively new global initiative are still difficult to
determine, there have been a number of positive benefits that could be highlighted: an
enhanced ability to determine the real value of resources targeted towards gender-specific
groups; a challenge to the notion that many policies and programmes are gender neutral;
and the strengthening of the collection and analysis of gender-disaggregated data.

The Need For Country Ownership

Government commitment and leadership, and broad country ownership are critical for
effective formulation and implementation of gender responsive budget initiatives. There is
no universal blue print or pre-determined process on how to successfully implement an
initiative. Each one must evolve from the local circumstances that generate the
development priorities of the countries, determine the capacity of different stakeholders
(governments, civil society organisations, NGOs, women’s groups, research institutes), and
that determine the resource constraints, which include budgetary constraints, human
resources and technical skills.

The Need For Government and Civil Society Collaboration

Once the initiative is locally owned, the best condition for sustaining a gender responsive
budget initiative is a process of dialogue and complementarity between government and
civil society activities. This would ensure that a synergy occurs between the aims, expertise
and capabilities of each group. Based on Commonwealth experiences, civil society agencies
have a vital role to play in gender responsive budgeting, especially in research on the
impact of public spending, advocacy for policy changes and improved accountability, and in
the delivery of services. The Commonwealth Secretariat articulates a principal role for
governments in this programme, based on two key factors:

65
 Governments have central responsibility for implementing initiatives to promote
gender equality. This responsibility is based on their roles as the representatives of
the democratic will of the people, the principal architects of development strategies,
and as the signatories to the global declarations, both Commonwealth and UN, on
gender equality.

National budgets are the responsibility of governments. Although governments

recognise the value of wide consultations with civil society in formulating the budget
it is the executive and legislative branches of government that ultimately must
decide on and allocate resources i.e. determine ‘what to do’ and ‘how to do it’.

The Need for a Gender Analysis of Revenue and Tax Systems

Although gender responsive budgeting provides the means to determine the impact of both
revenue and expenditure allocations on women and men, for pragmatic reasons, the
programme has focused near exclusively on the expenditure side of the budget. However,
as the programme has developed and technical skills and experience have accumulated,
attention should now be paid to the impact of revenue and tax systems on gender.
Revenue and tax systems contain a wide range of taxes including those on personal and
corporate income, payroll, goods and services, foreign trade, wealth, gifts and inheritances.
Several aspects of taxes are relevant to pro-poor and gender responsive budgeting
including:

Direct tax: Global income taxes are typically the source of gender bias. This
can be in the form of marriage penalties, where couples who do not have the
option to file singly incur a greater tax liability filing joint returns than filing
singly or where the tax liability on the second income in a household begins at
a rate higher that the base rate of tax. Gender bias can also occur when all
non-labour income (from assets, savings, property or business) or tax
expenditures (subsidies, deductions, exemptions or credits) are allocated to the
male spouse only or not available to a married woman who is the sole earner.

Indirect tax: The current trends towards reducing trade taxes and a demand
for greater ease in collection has led to indirect taxes now constituting a larger
percentage of tax revenue than direct taxes in many countries. While these
taxes may seem to be gender-neutral as they are attached to products and
services, they can have significant gender implications, given that women and
men tend to consume different goods and services, and also based on the way
in which household income and expenditure is managed and distributed.

User fees: Since the 1980s the number of countries having implemented some
form of user fee system has grown considerably and user financing of basic
social services has become common practice in many developing countries.
Governments have come to see user fees as an alternative to tax-based
financing for a range of public services. Efficiency, effectiveness and even
equity arguments have been made for applying these charges, yet supporting
evidence is limited. There is, however, some disturbing evidence from studies
that reveal equity losses through reduced utilisation of services among the
poor and through the negative effects on well-being and health following the
introduction of user fees (Esim 2000).

66
 Other areas: Other tax issues may be examined for possible gender impacts.
These include corporate taxes, primarily the granting of incentives to certain sectors
as opposed to others; the impact of globalisation, specifically the reduction in
customs and trade taxes; and the debt crisis and the fiscal drain of debt servicing,

CONCLUSION

Gender responsive budgeting provides a mechanism by which governments, in

dialogue with civil society, donors and other partner agencies can integrate a gender
analysis into public expenditure policies and budgets. By combining social and
economic policy, it promotes the complementarity of efficiency and equity, reducing
areas of trade-off between equity and growth. It also provides a strategy for promoting
efficient and equitable economic policies as an integral component of national
development. The techniques and the methodologies developed under the gender
responsive budget initiative can potentially be modified and adopted to assess the gap
between the words and the actions of governments to eliminate inequality and
discrimination against all underserved groups in society.

Building on the experience gained from the programme in Commonwealth countries, the
Commonwealth Secretariat believes that these achievements can be consolidated and that
implementation of gender responsive budget initiatives at the country can be increased by
endorsement of the ‘Brussels Call to Action: Strengthening economic and financial
governance through gender responsive budgeting’.

We at the Commonwealth Secretariat will continue to support to gender responsive

budgeting by:
• allocating resources to meet our core programme costs in this area;
• allocating staff time to the subject; and
• including it on the agenda of the next meeting of Commonwealth Finance Ministers.
This is an area of activity that will remain a priority for us and for which we will continue to
provide.

67
VII. SESSION 4: INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE AND CALLS TO
ACTION

A brief assessment of the country statements exemplifies what several speakers

already pointed out on the first day: past initiatives and future plans for gender-
responsive budgeting are highly country-specific and diverge in terms of, among
others, their guiding goals, political location, the degree of institutionalisation, stage of
the budget cycle at which initiatives are implemented, and the
way in which results of gender budget analysis are reported.

Despite the divergences, there are also a number of shared experiences and common
concerns that may be derived from the different country statements. Several country
representatives pointed at the constraints and opportunities arising from the overall
macro-economic and political context. The lack of knowledge about gender-responsive
budgeting and the shortage of country-based technical skills to put it into practice, was
highlighted by some of the delegates as a major hindrance. The further development
and refinement of tools and approaches and the immediate operational support of
country-based initiatives were identified as two of the main activities where
international organisations are expected to invest in. Several representatives pointed at
the important reinforcing role of national political entrepreneurs and external
catalysers. The commitment of both groups of actors is thought to be essential for the
likelihood and successfulness of gender budget initiatives.

The importance of the macro-economic and political context

The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) process

Representatives from several developing countries and from the donor community
pointed at the importance of the PRSP process, which strongly influences the content
and the way in which macro-economic policies are determined. Where they emphasize
the importance of good governance and more specifically budgetary processes that are
transparent, participatory, results-oriented and medium-term, the discourse of PRSP
and gender-responsive budgeting show similarities. In its broad objective of making
governmental processes more transparent, efficient and accountable, the PRSP process
clearly envisages a number of policy tools, such as Medium Term Expenditure
Framework, Budgetary Reviews, which will also facilitate a gender budget analysis.
Secondly, as several delegates strongly pointed out, a thorough analysis of poverty and
its causes, will necessarily point at the underlying gender effects. Identification of
strategies on the basis of the poverty analysis would thus consequently lead to a
gendered policy. Starting from these observations, several representatives highlighted
the objective opportunities for increasing gender-responsiveness through the PRSP
process.

However, representatives also pointed at the disappointing results to date. Speaking

from different contexts, they pointed at the difficulties to effectively link analysis to
policy and to translate the broad and vague objective of gender equality into policy

68
actions. The lack of corresponding budgetary allocations and translation in terms of
objectively verifiable indicators puts the implementation into perspective and makes
monitoring and evaluation almost impossible. This is not only a problem as far as the
objectives of gender equality is concerned, it also applies to the realisation of other
objectives.

Limited budgetary room for social spending

Reinforcing what some speakers during the first day already highlighted, several
country representatives noted in their statements the often very limited room for social
spending. As a large portion of national budgets is allocated towards the payment of
debt servicing, little room is left for own prioritisation. Starting from this observation,
several speakers also referred to the importance of involving international financial
institutions and the donor community in the debate about gender-responsive
budgeting.

Ms. Gnounka Diouf, Economic Advisor to the President of the Republic of Senegal, pointed at
the important limitations, which are set by the current load of debt repayment on the budget. A
large part of potential government expenditures are pre-allocated to debt repayment and little
room is left for social spending. Previous structural adjustment processes and current debt
repayment lead to a continuing under-investment in human capabilities, which endangers future
development and economic growth. Effects tend to be especially negative for girls and women.
In a context of limited resources, investments in human capabilities tend to be primarily
directed towards boys. The costs of declining social expenditures, on the other hand, are
primarily transferred to women who necessarily have to increase their time spent in unpaid
caring work. As Ms. Diouf noted, the Senegalese government tries to cope with these effects
through a National Action Plan for the Senegalese Women, whose aim is, among others, to
promote female education and health, female human rights, female access to financial
resources. She considers the inclusion of a gender perspective in national budgeting as a
future step in redressing the persistent gap in the allocation of resources and rights among
Senegalese men and women.

Decentralisation

Several Latin American representatives, from among others Cuenca in Ecuador and
Villa El Salvador in Peru, referred to the current debate and increased practice of
decentralisation and participatory budgeting. They clearly consider the current
evolution towards more decentralised budgeting as a broadening of opportunities to
strengthen the process of social auditing and to integrate a gender perspective.

Limited knowledge and lack of appropriate technical skills to

integrate gender in the fiscal policies

Several representatives pointed at the limited knowledge and the lack of technical skills
to engender fiscal policies. While the broad objective of gender equality is shared by
the majority of the policy makers, the application remains scarce. Several speakers
pointed at the absence of technical skills to translate broad objectives of gender
equality into specific identifiable actions and measurable indicators. While many
governments subscribe to the objectives of gender-responsive budgeting in their

69
legislation and recognize its effects in terms of increased efficiency and equality, they
highlight their limited technical resources to put gender-responsive budgeting into
practice. The absence of adequate technical resources also makes it less likely that
sex-disaggregated data is gathered and included in national statistics.

Anne Konate, Delegated Minister, Ministry of Economy and Finance of Burkina Faso, highlighted
two particular initiatives that have recently been taken in her country to make effective
application of a gender perspective in budgets more likely. In order to effectively engender
budgetary policies, the Ministry of Economy and Finance has given highest priority to the
strengthening of the existing knowledge base on gender. In order to achieve this objective,
training and sensitisation sessions will be organised for high-level policy makers. Aside from the
initiative to create a critical mass of informed policy makers, a training manual will be
elaborated for all actors involved in initiatives, which aim to integrate gender in macro-
economic policies.

The importance of an internal political entrepreneurs

Committed Kings, Presidents, Ministers of Finance, Prime

Ministers

Several representatives highlighted the importance of strongly committed high-level

policy makers, especially in the initial phase of initiatives for gender mainstreaming and
gender-responsive budgeting. It contributes in legitimising policies, which aim to bring
about changes in gender and tends to weaken the resistance of those who are
opposed against any changes in existing patterns of allocation of rights and resources
between men and women.

The King of Morocco has repeatedly stressed the importance of investing in women’s rights. He
has even installed a royal commission, in which women’s organisations participated, to
investigate possible routes to improve the legal position of women in Morocco. As a result, a
number of institutional measures have been identified and implied. One of the measures is the
increase of women at high-level positions in the public administration. As Mohammed Chafiki,
Chief of the Cabinet, Ministry of Economy and Finance, highlighted, the Ministry is currently,
and in consultation with the UNIFEM Office in Rabat and the World Bank, investigating the
possibility to integrate a gender perspective in the national budget.

Nigeria’s current dynamism to gender concerns is partly due to the president’s personal
commitment. The country’s president himself is an advocate of gender mainstreaming and was
previously an adviser to the Beijing conference. As Ms. Aisha Isamail, Minister for Women’s
Affairs and Youth Development of Nigeria, pointed out, the current capacity building on gender-
responsive budgeting within the Ministry of Women and Youth is to a large extent due to the
president’s support. The president’s direct involvement has contributed to the general
acknowledgement of the importance of integrating a gender perspective in national
development policy and to the acceptance of the advice of the national gender machinery to
engender budgets. Until now, Ministries and Agencies of Health, Education, Industry, Water
Resources and Agriculture, which are thought to affect gender mainstreaming directly, have
started to analyse their budgets and it is the aim to re-allocate resources accordingly. The
gender machinery has even been able to sensitise government to transfer resources realised
through savings on, among others, defence to areas of poverty reduction and human resource
development.

70
 Ministry of Women’s Affairs and National Women’s Machineries

Whereas it was highlighted that gender budget initiatives tend to be more influential
when they are located at the Ministry of Finance or at the office of the Prime Minister,
many delegates also pointed at the important role of an internal catalyser. Most of the
country statements referred in this context to the important role for a Ministry of
Women’s Affairs, which is often involved in internal lobbying work and which may
increase the likelihood that countries effectively engage in gender budgeting work. The
Ministry of Women’s Affairs may also be engaged in the monitoring and evaluation of
the process.

The setting up of the Ministry of Women’s Rights, Child Development and Family Welfare in
1982 has in general been influential for the promotion of women’s rights in Mauritius. Gender
Equality is also high on the agenda of the current Minister, Hon. Mrs. Marie Arianne Navarre-
Marie. The Ministry has also promoted initiatives that have been taken to engender budgets. As
Hon. Mrs. Marie Arianne Navarre-Marie puts it, ‘the exercise of engendering the budget is vital
as not engendering development is endangering development’. Mauritius is currently
implementing a two year project ‘Engendering the Budget’, which is financed by UNDP. A pilot
project was conducted involving the integration of gender analysis into budgetary processes of
four line ministries, namely Agriculture, Social Security, Education and Health. The exercise of
engendering budgets in two ministries has not only presented an analysis of the budget but has
also identified disparities at all levels and has proposed remedial actions.
The Minister of Women’s Rights, Child Development and Family Welfare, whose own budget
has increased by 28% for the financial year 2001-2002, finally pointed at the fact that her
initiatives are strongly supported by the gender sensitive Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime
Minister, who is also the Minister of Finance.

In New Zealand, the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, is responsible for reviewing the effectiveness
of the gender implications statement. The latter documents the assessment of the impact of
proposed and existing policies in the key areas of education, employment, health and housing.
The Ministry of Women’s Affairs is further responsible for giving advise to public service
departments on how to integrate gender analysis into their policy development, including
providing guidance to departments on how to decide on the nature and the extent of the
analysis required for any particular policy issue.

Parliament

Country statements lend support to earlier contributions from parliamentarians and

point at the important role of the parliament in stimulating gender budget initiatives. In
particular the work of parliamentarian committees and female parliamentarians within
these committees is referred to. An important factor in stimulating -parliamentary work
on gender-sensitive budgeting seems to be the interest groups behind
parliamentarians and the composition of the overall population of potential voters. In
cases where MPs are emanating from women’s movements and where female MPs are
involved in networking with women’s movements, it seems to be more likely that
parliamentary work on gender budgeting will be elaborated.

In Uganda, the coalition between female representatives and the non-governmental

organisation, FOWODE (Forum for Women in Democracy), has been vital for the gender-
responsive budget initiative. As Winnie Byanyima, MP in Uganda and member of FOWODE
argued, in 1996, after the Beijing conference, and with a newly elected parliament that had
18% of female representatives, FOWODE strongly invested in sensitising the women’s caucus in

71
parliament. Together with female MPs, national and international researchers and experts,
media persons and in close cooperation with government planners a gender budgeting exercise
was initiated. For three budget cycles now, findings were summarised and produced as issue
briefs for MPs who use these during budget debates. Some of the recommendations have even
been included in parliamentary committee reports and ministers have made some
commitments. Four years later, the Budget Bill was enacted and there is currently lobbying so
that the budget committee established under the Budget Bill will also form a gender analysis
subcommittee.

Civil society and Women’s Movements in particular

Several representatives pointed at the important role of civil society in making gender
budget initiatives more broadly based. Non-governmental organisations are thought to
be vital in the process of information sharing, both from government to the citizens
and from the citizens to the government. Budget groups may translate complex and
highly technical information about budgeting into more easy accessible language, while
they may also feed information about citizens’ needs and priorities into the budgetary
process.

In particular women’s groups and movements are thought to play a vital role in making
budgets more gender-responsive. Their activities are mostly in the field of training,
research and advocacy. Women’s groups and movements seem to be particularly
successful in advocacy activities, which seems to be partly due to their strong
networking efforts. In various countries women’s and gender NGOs are regrouped into
one broad national council, which strongly monitors a government’s progress in the
field of gender mainstreaming. Gender budget analysis is thought to be particularly
useful in the monitoring and evaluation process.

The mission of Equidad de género, a Mexican civil association, is lobbying to achieve changes in
the Mexican public policy that benefit women. As Laura Pérez Fragoso of Equidad de généro
indicated, the organisation has always strongly invested in networking with women’s groups
and organisations. This has resulted in the National Forum of Women and Population Policies, a
wide networking of about 70 women’s groups, which is lobbying for the Caïro agreements to be
implemented. They have identified gender budgeting as a powerful tool to monitor the financial
commitments made in Caïro.

The importance of institutionalisation

Whereas personal interest and motivation of highly committed ministers and

parliamentarians are thought to be crucial, especially in the initial phase, several
representatives also pointed at the limitations. Highly personalised initiatives have the
tendency to weaken and disappear once the influence and the power of the initiators
flounders. In order to increase sustainability, it is important to institutionalise gender
budget analysis by making it a legal obligation. In Japan, for instance, initiatives for
gender-responsive budgeting have been taken to meet the mandate stated in the
Gender Equality Law, which was passed in 1999.

In her contribution about experiences with gender-responsive budgeting, Patti O’Neill, Specialist
Adviser on Gender and International Development of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade,
New Zealand, referred to the recent agreement of the New Zealand Cabinet that a gender

72
implications statement will be required for those papers submitted to the Cabinet Social Equity
Committee. These papers cover how to reduce inequalities in the key areas of education,
health, employment and housing. The purpose of the gender implications statement is to
ensure that policy proposals include an assessment of the impact of proposed and existing
policies and programmes on women and men, and whether they advantage or disadvantage
women and men. Where the gender implications of the policy proposal are significant, those
findings and implications will be incorporated throughout the body of the proposal. Where
gender analysis has not been possible, the reason for this should be included in the paper.

In Nigeria, the Ministry of Women and Youth is currently elaborating a comprehensive

mechanism for gender-responsive budgeting. An important angle of this undertaking is focusing
on legal aspects. As Ms. Aisha Isamail, Minister for Women’s Affairs and Youth, highlighted, the
Ministry is participating in the on-going constitutional reform so that gender-reflexive
constitution would emerge. There is further a strong involvement in legal reform exercises that
aim to translate the aspiration of gender equality before the law and that would enable to use
legal instruments to achieve economic and political equity.

The importance of international catalysers

International agreements

Most of the delegates referred in their country statements to the importance of

international agreements, which set the benchmark for policies on women’s
empowerment and gender equality. The Beijing Platform for Action and the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) are
considered by governments in the north and the south as guidelines for government’s
programmes and actions in the field of gender. In Mauritius, for instance, the
government has elaborated a national plan (The National Gender Action Plan) to fulfil
the recommendations. International agreements further offer a blueprint against which
individual countries’ achievements can be measured. Gender budget analysis is
considered as a tool to facilitate the monitoring and evaluation of the progress made.

Belén López López, the Chief of the International Relations of the Women’s Institute (Instituto
de la Mujer) in Spain indicated that in her country initiatives about gender budgeting are still in
an infant stage. The Women’s Institute, an autonomous entity within the Labour and Social
Affairs Ministry, is trying to introduce a gender perspective in selected department’s budgeting
according to the objectives of the Equal Opportunity Plans and the mandate from the Beijing
Platform for Action. The priority areas are employment and domestic violence. With respect to
employment, a gender focus has been integrated in the budgets for the various entities
involved, among which are the National Employment Institute, the General Directorate for Small
and Medium Enterprises, etc…

International organisations

Several country delegates explicitly highlighted the importance of the financial and
technical support they did receive from international organisations as the
Commonwealth Secretariat, the United Nations Development Fund for Women
(UNIFEM) and the United Nations Development Fund (UNDP). They also clarified their
expectations about future support. More specifically, they expect that international
organisations as UNIFEM, UNDP and the Commonwealth Secretariat further invest in:

73
i. producing local public goods through further development and refinement of
approaches and tools and elaborating instruments for sharing information

ii. international networking and lobbying at international fora and at international

finance institutions, in particular

iii. supporting local initiatives

In their concluding statements, Noeleen Heyzer, Executive Director of UNIFEM, Winston Cox,
Deputy Secretary-General of the Commonwealth Secretariat and Randy Spence of the
International Development Research Centre, indicated that they will continue to support and
invest in the process that has been launched. The following activities were identified for the
future:
i) elaborating an information sharing network (including a database of initiatives that will be
available on a website already developed by the IDRC)
ii) promoting gender-responsive budgeting in relevant fora including the Financing for
Development and in regional organisms as the IGAD and Mercosur
iii) supporting linkages with CEDAW
iv) developing of training materials
v) refining of conceptual tools
vi) supporting country initiatives

Donor community

Different delegates from ministries and agencies of international co-operation clearly

spoke out their willingness to take up a supportive role in gender-budget exercises.
Some donor agencies and ministries, like Canada, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden,
the UK highlighted that they already invest in this undertaking through the support for
the analytical work that underpins the tools and case studies. They mostly do this
collectively through their work in the Working Party on Gender Equality. Others support
budget analysis activities in the partner countries. Several donors also pointed at the
possibility for greater consultation and dialogue among different stakeholders through
the processes of PRSPs, Sector Wide Approaches (SWAPs) and Medium Term
Expenditure Frameworks (MTEF). These ongoing processes are considered as having
the potential for promoting a more equitable distribution of resources. However, for
this potential being realised, there is a need to examine continually the processes and
their impact. One way in which donors can contribute to making the processes truly
participative and engendered is through local capacity building. Capacity building is
important to ensure that a country’s poverty analysis is thorough and disaggregated
along relevant categories and that results of analysis are effectively fed into policy.

The principles of gender-responsive budgeting underpin Ireland’s overseas development

assistance. Liz Higgins of the Irish Development Co-operation Division within the Department of
Foreign Affairs, highlighted that gender mainstreaming forms the basis of Ireland’s development
policy. The bilateral support provided to six countries in Sub-Saharan Africa are based on
principles of partnership, participation, transparency, accountability, equity and attention for the
local context. A central issue in Irish development co-operation policy is local capacity building.
As a way of facilitating further the ongoing process of gender-responsive budgeting in Tanzania
and Uganda, Irish development co-operation has opted to strengthen the capacity of ministries
of gender and women’s affairs.

74
 International finance institutions

Different country delegates pointed at the impact of the international economic,

financial and political context on the likelihood and successfulness of gender budget
initiatives. International finance institutions as the World Bank and in particular the
International Monetary Fund (IMF) are considered to be major players in setting the
environmental parameters wherein which national actors operate. Several
representatives pointed at the opportunities that PRSP, SWAP and MTEF processes
seem to offer to move to a rights and poverty-responsive budgeting with gender-
responsiveness at its centre. For these opportunities to be realised, a number of
conditions need to be realised, among others, disaggregating poverty analysis along
lines of gender, age, ethnicity, location, etc.; strengthening linkages between poverty
analysis and policy; investing strongly in local capacity building, and in particular in
women’s capacities, to ensure that all local stakeholders are able to effectively
participate in the decision-making processes; installing from the start instruments to
ensure an effective monitoring and evaluating process; increasing consultation among
different donors, etc.

75
APPENDIX

A. AGENDA AND SPEAKERS

16 October
9:00 Registration and Coffee
9:30 Opening
• Eddy Boutmans, State Secretary for Development Co-operation,
Belgium
• Noeleen Heyzer, Executive Director, UNIFEM
• Tony Hutton, Director of Public Management Service Directorate,
OECD
• Sigurdur Helgason, Deputy Secretary General, Nordic Council of
Ministers
10:00-11:00 Session 1 : The context and future challenges
Chair: Nancy Spence, Commonwealth Secretariat

• Rationale for Gender Responsive Budgeting – Winnie Byanyima

(Uganda, Forum for Women in Democracy)
• Outcomes in Gender Budget Initiatives–Diane Elson (UK,
University of Essex)
• Contribution of Development Co-operation to Gender Responsive
Budgeting – Diana Rivington (Chair of the OECD Working Party
on Gender Equality)

Discussion
11:00-11:30 Coffee Break
11:30-13:00 Session 2: Tools and approaches
Chair: Randy Spence, International Development Research Centre
(IDRC)

• Gender Responsive Budgets: Multiple Strategies and Guiding

Goals (videotaped intervention) – Rhonda Sharp (Australia,
Research Centre for Gender Studies, University of South
Australia)
• Expenditure Tools – Guy Hewitt (Commonwealth Secretariat)
• Gender Insights from Benefit Incidence Analysis – Lionel Demery
(World Bank)
• Taxes and Benefits – Sue Himmelweit (UK, Open University)
Discussion
13:00-14:30 Lunch
14.30-16.00 Session 3: Lessons learned in practice

76
 Chair: Hon. Emilia Boncodin, Department of Budget and
Management, Philippines

• South Africa – Pregs Govender (Member of Parliament)

The role of parliament
• India – Devaki Jain (Karnataka Women’s Information and
Research Centre)
Decentralisation and fiscal policy: the case of Karnataka
• Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (United States) – Warren
Krafchik
What can civil society add to national budget policy making?
• UNDP – Jan Vandemoortele
Social Budgets, Cost Recovery and their Impact on Women
and Children
• Ecuador – Fernando Cordero Cueva (Mayor of Cuenca)
Local Development and Gender Equality: Experiences of the
Municipality of Cuenca
Discussion
16.00-16.30 Coffee Break
16:30-18:00 Session 3: Lessons Learned in Practice (continued)
Chair: Sigurdur Helgason, Nordic Council of Ministers

• Andean Region – Gina Vargas (UNIFEM, Ecuador)

Women’s rights and UNIFEM Experiences in the Andean
Region
• France – Françoise Philippe-Raynaud (Service des Droits des
Femmes)
‘Le jaune budgétaire envers les femmes et les hommes’
(The informative budgetary annex about gender impacts)
• Tanzanian Gender Networking Programme- Mary Rusimbi
(Director)
Lobbying Initiative for Transforming of Mainstreaming
Gender into National Planning and Budgeting Processes and
Macro-policies in Tanzania
• Philippines – Celia Reyes (Policy and Development Foundation)
An institutionalised initiative
Discussion
18:00-20:30 Reception

77
17 October
9:00-10.00 Introductory Session
• Laurette Onkelinx, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for
Employment and Equal Opportunities, Belgium
• Eddy Boutmans, State Secretary for Development Co-operation,
Belgium
• Winston Cox, Deputy Secretary General, Commonwealth
Secretariat
• Noeleen Heyzer, Executive Director, UNIFEM
• Sigurdur Helgason, Deputy Secretary General, Nordic Council of
Ministers
10:00-10:30 Coffee Break
10:30-12:30 Session 1 : International Practice and Calls to Action
Chairs: Maria Kaisa Aula, Chair of the Budget Committee and
Member of Finnish Parliament; Noeleen Heyzer, UNIFEM Executive
Director

• Country statements
• Conclusion
12:30-13:30 Press conference
13:30-15:00 Lunch

78
B. SHORT BIO OF SPEAKERS AND CHAIRS

Eddy Boutmans, State Secretary for Development Co-operation, Belgium

State Secretary for Development Co-operation, Eddy Boutmans was born in 1948 in
Wilrijk near Antwerpen and studied law at Ghent State University. Since 1970 he has
been a lawyer and member of the bar of Antwerp, where he founded an office
specialised in particular branches of the law, such as family law cases, criminal law and
environment.
As a lawyer, Mr. Boutmans published about a diversity of subjects. Mr. Boutmans is an
active party member of Agalev [= Anders GAan LEVen, "Changing our way of life"]
since 1990. He first came to the fore after the 1994 municipal elections, when he
played an important role as political secretary in the negotiations which led to the
democratic rainbow coalition which has been governing Greater Antwerp since then.
From June 1995 to 1999 he held a seat in the Senate for Agalev; as a Senator he
promoted several draft laws concerning euthanasia, drugs, cyclists' rights, cohabitation
contracts and he was very active both within and outside Parliament in discussions
about asylum policy, police reforms, the law on criminal organisations and the law on
official secrecy.
In 1999 he was elected representative and less than a month later he was sworn as
State Secretary for Development Co-operation in the so-called purple-green
government.

Noeleen Heyzer, Executive Director, UNIFEM

Dr. Noeleen Heyzer is the first Executive Director from the South to head the United
Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), the leading operational agency
within the UN dedicated to women's empowerment and gender equality.

Since her arrival in 1994, UNIFEM has transformed from a grant-providing agency to a
learning and advocacy organization providing strategic financial support to promote
women’s human rights, political participation and economic security. At the same time
the Fund’s annual resource base has doubled and its programmes have developed and
expanded to cover over 100 countries. The organization has also undergone
comprehensive restructuring to maximize performance and deliver results, and build an
operational knowledge base documenting ways of empowering women.

Dr. Heyzer has galvanized the UN system to strengthen its programmes to eliminate
violence against women and has raised this as a priority issue on all government
agendas. Initiatives of UNIFEM in this area have led to new legislation to protect
women; increased resources to prevent gender-based violence and have mobilized
new constituencies as partners.

Dr. Heyzer has recently re-articulated the discourse on humanitarian interventions to

war-torn areas by directing attention to the gender dimensions of war and conflict and
to women’s roles in peace building. As a result of UNIFEM's interventions, the Security
Council has extended its support to the issue.
In addition, Dr. Heyzer's continues to direct her attention to several key issues, such as
promoting women’s economic security worldwide; urging governments to engender

79
their national budgets; and raising awareness on the gender dimensions of the impact
of HIV/AIDS.

Before joining UNIFEM, Dr. Heyzer was policy adviser to several Asian governments
and played a key role in the formulation of several national development policies,
strategies and programmes. She has considerable experience at the community-level,
working with women in the informal sector and in plantations and young women in
prostitution. She was a founding member of several regional and international
networks such as Development Alternative with Women for a New Era (DAWN), the
Asia Pacific Women in Law and Development (APWLD) and Isis International. She was
also responsible for initiating and coordinating the first Asia Pacific NGO Plan of Action
for the 1995 UN Fourth World Conference on Women, held in Beijing.

Dr Heyzer holds a Ph.D. in Social Sciences from Cambridge University, England. Her
key publications include "Woman Farmers and Social Change", "From the Rural
Economy to the Industrial Sector", "Market Growth and State Planning in the Asian
Region" "A Women’s Development Agenda for the 21st Century", "Gender, Poverty and
Sustainable Development", "The Trade in Domestic Workers", and "Working Women in
South East Asia".

Tony Hutton, Director of the Public Management Service Directorate, OECD

Tony Hutton joined OECD in September 2000, after more than 25 years as a senior
official in the British Civil Service.

His main career specialisations have been trade policy and public administration. His
last post before appointment was Director General for Trade Policy. Before that, for
eight years, he was first Director of Personnel and then Director General for Resources
and Services at the Department of Trade and Industry in London. In the latter post,
he was responsible not only for personnel, financial management, organisation, IT and
support services, but also for carrying through a wide-ranging reform programme
covering the creation of executive agencies, contracting out and privatisation, the
structure and pay of the senior civil service, decentralised budgeting and personnel
services, the introduction of a networked IT system, a new training and development
framework and a major review of accommodation.

He was educated at Oxford and is married with three children.

Sigurdur Helgason, Deputy Secretary General, Nordic Council of Ministers

Sigurdur Helgason is currently the Deputy Secretary-General of the Nordic Council of

Ministers, responsible for Administration and Finance. This includes the development
and implementation of the Nordic budget and other central management systems and
processes. Currently also acting head of the Department for Welfare, Business and
European issues.

From 1999 to 2001, he worked as a public management consultant, providing public

management expertise to Ministries (including the Ministries of Finance, Social Affairs
and Health), agencies, local government and international organisations.

80
From 1995 to 1999, he worked at the OECD’s Public Management Service (PUMA) as
administrator, analysing public management reforms, providing support and advice to
Member countries. Major projects include a comparative study of performance
management practices in OECD countries: (In Search of Results: Performance
Management Practices), preparation of PUMA’s “Best Practice Guidelines for
Evaluation) and management of relations with non-member countries.
He worked as a Senior Advisor for the Icelandic Ministry of Finance from 1990 to 1995,
providing advice and assistance to the Minister of Finance on public sector
modernisation and professional expertise to ministries and agencies. Major work
includes advice on the Icelandic modernisation policy, benchmarking performance of
public agencies, development of contract management, evaluations of public policies,
management reviews, and formulation of the Government’s policy on regulatory
reform.

Mr. Sigurdur Helgason holds a Masters Degree in Public Administration from the
University of Roskilde, Denmark and a degree in Sociology from the University of
Iceland.

Laurette Onkelinx, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Employment and Equal
Opportunities, Belgium

Laurette Onkelinx, was born in Ougrée in 1958. She studied Bachelor of Law at the
University of Liège. Before she became member of the PS (socialist party) Party Office
and PS Deputy for the district of Liège in 1988, she was lecturer in Administrative
Sciences and barrister entitled to practice before the court of Liège. Since July 1999,
Laurette Onkelinx is Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Employment and Equal
Opportunities in the federal government. She held different ministerial positions
before: a.o. from 1992 until 1993, she was Minister for Social Integration, Health and
Environment in the national Government; from 1993 until 1995, she was Minister-
President in the Government of the Communauté française, in charge of Civil Service,
the Childhood and the Promotion of Health; from 1995 until 1999, she was Minister-
President in the Government of the Communauté française, in charge of Education, the
Audiovisual, the Youth Help and the Promotion of Health. She is the author of a.o.
‘Continuons le débat’, ‘Théâtre du jeune public’.

Winston Cox, Deputy Secretary-General, Commonwealth Secretariat, UK

Winston A. Cox, former Governor of the Central Bank of Barbados, was appointed
Commonwealth Deputy Secretary-General, with responsibility for Development
Cooperation, on 1 September 2000.

Mr. Cox served as an Alternate Executive Director at the World Bank and has
undertaken a broad range of assignments for that institution as well as for the UNDP,
IMF, IADB, and CDB. In Barbados he was also Director of Finance and Economic Affairs
in the Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs.

81
Nancy Spence, Director of the Gender and Youth Affairs Division, Commonwealth
Secretariat, UK

Nancy Spence from Canada, was appointed the Director of the Gender and Youth
Affairs Division of the Commonwealth Secretariat in February 1999.

As Director of Gender and Youth Affairs, she directs the mandate given to the
Commonwealth by Ministers Responsible for Women’s Affairs in human rights, peace
and conflict, political advancement and integration of women into economic change.
As Director of Youth Affairs, she manages the portfolio given to the Commonwealth by
Ministers of Youth.

Before 1999, Ms. Spence was Director of the South-East Asian Gender Equity
Programme based in Singapore and funded by the Canadian International
Development Agency (CIDA). As such, she assisted CIDA’s regional efforts to assist
women in their efforts to implement the Beijing Platform of Action.

Prior to that, from 1991 to 1995, she served as the Deputy Executive Director of the
Canada Asean Centre of South East Asia in Singapore, where she developed the Can-
Asian Business Women’s Network to assist women to play more active roles in regional
and international trade. She was also responsible for the design and implementation
of a five-year award programme for graduate students to do field work in South-East
Asia.

With a Masters Degree in Education and an MA in International Affairs, Ms. Spence

began her career as a teacher in Tanzania, Kenya and Canada before moving into
development work.

Winnie Byanyima, Member of Parliament and Chairperson of the Forum for Women in
Democracy, Uganda

Winnie Byanyima is a member of Parliament in Uganda (elected three times) and the
Chairperson of the Forum for Women in Democracy (FOWODE), a Ugandan non-
governmental organization that promotes gender equality in decision-making. There,
Ms. Byanyima has developed training programs for Uganda and other African countries
to increase women politicians’ access to and effectiveness in local and national
legislatures. In Parliament, her main focus has been on issues of transparency and
accountability and gender equality. She joined the Uganda National Resistance
Movement (NRM) in the 1980s while it was still fighting the corrupt governments of Idi
Amin and Milton Obote. Ms. Byanyima was an elected delegate to the Constituent
Assembly, which deliberated a new constitution in 1995, and was also elected Chair of
the Assembly’s Women’s Caucus.

She was Uganda’s Deputy Permanent Delegate to the U.N. Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for five years. She was named by the World Economic
Forum as a “Global Leader of Tomorrow” in 1995 and was voted “Woman of the Year”
in 1997 and 1998 by the Ugandan press. Ms. Byanyima has been a member of the
executive board of the UN University’s Institute for New Technologies, and is currently
on the African Capacity-Building Foundation executive board and the Gender Advisory
Board of the U.N Commission on Science and Technology for Development (UNCSTD).

82
She is also a member of the Advisory Council of Equality Now an international women’s
human rights NGO. Recently Ms. Byanyima was appointed to the UNDP’s Independent
Commission for the Africa Millennium Project.

Ms. Byanyima holds an M.Sc. in mechanical engineering from Cranfield Institute of

Technology in the United Kingdom and worked for Uganda Airlines as the first female
flight engineer.

Diane Elson, University of Essex, UK

Dr. Diane Elson is Professor at the University of Essex, UK. She previously held posts
at the universities of Manchester, Sussex and York, after being educated at Oxford
University. From 1998-2000,she was Special Adviser to the Executive Director of
UNIFEM and was responsible for the UNIFEM report, Progress of the World's Women
2000. She is the author of numerous books and papers on international development
and on gender equality and economic policy. In 1996 she advised the Commonwealth
Secretariat, London, in developing their pilot project on gender-responsive budgeting.
She has served as a consultant to many international development cooperation
agencies. She has participated in workshops on gender-responsive budgets in South
Africa, Sri Lanka, India, Peru, Mexico, Spain and UK; and given presentations on this
topic to UN OECD and EU meetings. She is a member of the UK Women's Budget
Group.

Diana Rivington, Chair of the OECD Working Party on Gender Equality

Diana Rivington is Director, Gender Equality and Child Protection Division within the
Policy Branch of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). As Director
she is responsible for both development and support of CIDA's Gender Equality Policy
(1999) and the Child Protection Action Plan (2001).

Ms. Rivington was elected Chair of the OECD - Development Assistance Committee
(DAC)'s Working Party on Gender Equality in June 1999 and was re-elected in February
2001. The Working Party is composed of delegates from the member countries of the
OECD-DAC as well observers from the World Bank, UNDP, and UNIFEM. The Working
Party is responsible for a program of work designed to improve the quality of gender
equality understanding and programming by bilateral donors and to support the on-
going work of the DAC.

Since joining CIDA in 1977, Ms. Rivington has worked in the partnership programme
with Canadian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and as a planner and project
manager with bilateral programs for Colombia, Haïti, and Central America. She has
field experience as First Secretary to Bogota, Colombia (1984-87), and as Counsellor
and Consul to Tegucigalpa, Honduras in (1989-92).

She participated on the Canadian Delegations to the 1994 United Nations Conference
on Population and Development in Cairo, Egypt, and to the 1995 United Nations Fourth
World Conference on Women in Beijing, China.

Before joining CIDA, Ms. Rivington worked with the Canadian NGOs World University
Service of Canada, CUSO (as a cooperant in Jamaica), and Canada World Youth (as

83
coordinator for a youth exchange with the Philippines). She has degrees from Bishop's
University, McGill University, and University of Ottawa.

Randy Spence, International Development Research Centre, Canada

Dr. William Randall (Randy) Spence received a Ph.D. degree in Economics in

1972. He worked for the next 17 years as a university professor, researcher and public
policy analyst in government planning, finance, trade and energy ministries in Canada,
Tanzania and Kenya. His employers included the University of Toronto, McMaster
University, World Bank, Government of Canada (Finance, Energy, External Affairs,
CIDA) and North-South Institute. He worked during the 1990s for International
Development Research Centre in Singapore, first as an economics program officer and,
for the next 7 years, as Regional Director. From January, 2000, he has been a Senior
Economist with IDRC, based in London. He manages one of IDRC's two principal
economic policy programs - The Micro impacts of Macroeconomic and Adjustment
Programs - and participates in the other - Trade, Employment and Competitiveness. He
also works with IDRC's Partnership and Business Development.

Rhonda Sharp, Research Centre for Gender Studies, University of South Australia

Dr. Rhonda Sharp is a member of the Research Centre for Gender Studies where she
researches in the area of gender, work and the economy and is an Associate Professor
of Economics, School of International Business, University of South Australia. She has
had extensive experience in the field of government budgets and gender policy audits.
She was seconded to the South Australian Department of the Premier and Cabinet in
1985-86 where she developed the conceptual framework and implemented the world's
first gender responsive budget at the state government level. This model was
subsequently adopted by the other state and territory governments in Australia and
underpinned the Commonwealth Secretariat Pilot on gender budgets. She has been an
adviser to governments and international agencies on gender responsive budgets in
Europe, Africa, Asia, the Pacific and the Caribbean. She has held senior policy
appointments with the South Australian government as a member of the State
Transport Authority Board, the government's Task Force on Superannuation and the
Social Justice Advisory Committee to the Minister. She is an author of several articles
and papers on gender responsive budgets including, with Debbie Budlender, How to
Do a Gender-Sensitive Budget: Contemporary Research and Practice. (Commonwealth
Secretariat and AusAid 1998).

Guy Hewitt, Senior Programme Officer, Commonwealth Secretariat, UK

Guy Hewitt is a Senior Programme Officer in the Gender Affairs Department at the
Commonwealth Secretariat, and programme manager of the Commonwealth gender
responsive budget initiative. He advises Commonwealth governments on the
implementation of gender responsive budgets and also provides support to
intergovernmental organisations and developmental agencies. In addition, he
coordinates the gender mainstreaming programme in the Commonwealth Secretariat
and supports the new programme on integrating economic and social development
policy.

84
Lionel Demery, Lead Poverty Specialist, PREM, World Bank, Washington, DC, USA

Dr. Lionel Demery is currently Lead Poverty Specialist in the Poverty Reduction and
Economic Management (PREM) group of the World Bank's Africa Region. He joined the
World Bank in 1992, having previously held positions at the Universities of Warwick
and Wales (UK), the Overseas Development Institute (London), and the International
Labour Organisation (Bangkok). He currently plays a lead role in assisting a number of
African countries in their PRSP processes. He has published widely in the field of
poverty. He has worked recently on the dynamics of poverty in Africa during the
1990s, focussing on the relationship between economic reforms, economic growth, and
poverty reduction. He has also completed research on the distributional impact of
public spending in Africa.

Susan Himmelweit, Open University, UK

Dr. Susan Himmelweit is a member and former chair of the UK Women's Budget
Group, a think tank that advises the UK Treasury on the gender implications of
economic policy. She is a member of the Programme Board for the Household Satellite
Account being compiled by the UK Office of National Statistics.

She teaches economics at the Open University and formally taught women’s studies at
the University of Sydney. She is currently engaged in research on the influence of
social norms on mothers’ decisions about work and childcare as part of the UK
Economic and Social Research Council’s programme on the Future of Work. Her
research interests include the economics of care, the gender implications of taxes and
benefits and their effects on paid and unpaid caring work. Her most recent book is
Inside the Household: from Labour to Care, Macmillan, 2000. Other recent
publications include ‘Accounting for Caring’, Radical Statistics, 1999; ‘Caring Labor’,
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 2000 and ‘Domestic
Labour’, in The Elgar Companion to Feminist Economics, M. Lewis and J. Peterson
(eds.), Edward Elgar (2000).

She is an Associate Editor of the journal Feminist Economics and is an active member
of the International Association for Feminist Economics, serving on its board of
directors from 1996-1999.

Pregs Govender, Member of Parliament, South Africa

ANC Member of Parliament, Pregs Govender, chaired the Joint Standing Committee
on the Improvement of the Quality of Life & Status Women, in South Africa’s first
democratic parliament (1994- 1999). She was re-elected Chair of this Committee after
the elections in 1999. This Committee is responsible for monitoring government’s
implementation of CEDAW and the Beijing Platform for Action. In the first parliament,
the Committee established legislative priorities to improve women’s lives in areas such
as domestic violence, maintenance, customary law and labour laws and worked to
ensure these changes were enacted and implemented.

85
In 1994 Pregs proposed in Parliament’s Budget Debate that South Africa initiate a
gendered budget (the “Women’s Budget”). SA has since adopted and has begun
implementing the Women’s Budget. As a Member of Parliament’s Finance Committee,
Pregs was instrumental in establishing the Women’s Budget Initiative with NGO’s,
which produced the Women’s Budget Books.

Pregs edited South Africa’s Country Report on the Status of Women for the Beijing
Conference. During the controversial passage of the bill legalising abortion, her speech
in the Abortion Debate in 1995, received a standing ovation from Members of
Parliament and the public in the gallery. In 1994, she was part of the task team that
conceptualised the Framework for South Africa’s Women’s National Empowerment
Programme.

Prior to being elected to Parliament, she headed the WNC (Women’s National Coalition)
as the WNC’s Overall Project Manager from 1992 - 1994. In this capacity, she ensured
a successful campaign in which approximately two million women across South Africa
participated. This campaign resulted in substantial research on women’s needs as well
as SA’s Women’s Charter.

Before the Coalition, Pregs worked in the trade union movement as Education Officer
of the national clothing and textile union. This union has the largest membership of
women in SA. Her work in the unions led to her initiating and heading the first
Worker’s College in South Africa.

Pregs Govender’s training and initial work experience was as a teacher at schools and
at the University of Durban-Westville. Her background is rooted in political activism in
student, political, community and women’s organisations that fought against apartheid
in the 70’s and 80’s.

In 1999, Pregs received the international Association for Women in Development’s

(AWID) “Inspiration Award, recognising an extraordinary individual whose initiative,
leadership, and unrelenting commitment have made a significant impact in advancing
gender equality and social justice around the world”.

Pregs has three children: Parusha (19), Yashodan (18) and Saien (17 months)

Devaki Jain, Karnataka Women’s Information and Research Centre, India

Dr. Devaki Jain is a development economist. She graduated from Oxford University
and taught economics at Delhi University. She has been a visiting fellow at Harvard
University (Divinity School); Fulbright Scholar at Boston University (World Development
Institute), visiting fellow at Institute of Development Studies (University of Sussex) as
well as at the Scandinavian Institute of Asian Studies, Denmark. She was conferred an
Honorary Doctorate in 1999 at University of Durban, West Ville for her contribution to
international development.

She was one of the two women awarded the Bradford Morse Memorial Award by the
UNDP at the World conference at Beijing 1995 for outstanding achievements through
professional and voluntary activities in promoting the advancement of women and
gender equality. She has edited and co-authored numerous publications including
Indian Women. (Ministry of Education and Broadcasting, Government of India, 1975)

86
Women’s Quest for Power. (Vikas, 1979) Tyranny of the Household (Shakti Books,
1985) Speaking of Faith: Cross-cultural Perspectives on Women, Religion and Social
Change. (Kali for Women, 1986) She is also the sole author of several books, essays
and articles- like Vocabulary of Women’s Politics and Contemporary Writings and has
given several distinguished lectures like the Bradford Morse Memorial Lecture 1995,
Nita Barrow Memorial Lecture, University of West Indies, Barbados, 1999 and lectures
to the Board of Directors at UNDP, 1996, and at the MacArthur Foundation, Chicago.

She has served on several National Policy Making Committees of the Government of
India, as well as on their National Committees in preparation for U N Conferences
(Mexico, Nairobi, Cairo, Durban). She has also been a member of UN expert groups,
eminent persons group, high powered review committee (most recent of UNDAF,
2001). She was a member of the Planning Board of the State of Karnataka for 12
years.

Françoise Philippe-Raynaud, Service of Women’s Rights, Ministry for Employment and

Solidarity (‘Service des Droits des Femmes, Ministère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité’),
France

Françoise Philippe-Raynaud is director of the Department ‘Human Resources,

Financial Affairs, and General Administration’ at the Service of Women’s Human Rights
and Equality since 1998. She is in charge of the composition of the budgetary annex
(le jaune budgétaire), which summarises the efforts undertaken by the different
ministries and departments to promote women’s rights and to stimulate equality
between men and women.

Before her current appointment, Ms. Philippe-Raynaud held different positions at the
Ministry of Social Affairs. She was educated at the Sorbonne in Paris and was a lecturer
for several years.

Jan Vandemoortele, Principal Adviser and Group Leader on Social Development, United
Nations Development Programme, NY, USA

Jan Vandemoortele is a Belgian national who holds a Ph.D. in Development

Economics. He recently joined UNDP as Principal Adviser and Group Leader on Social
Development. Since 1995, he worked with UNICEF where he headed Policy Analysis.
Between 1991-94, he served with UNDP as Senior Economist in Malawi/Zambia as well
as with the Regional Bureau for Africa in New York. Prior to that, he worked for 12
years for the ILO, mostly in Africa.

During his extensive field experience, his work has focused on labour market policies,
public finance, income distribution, poverty reduction, and social policy. He has
published numerous articles, reports and chapters in books. He is a regular speaker at
international conferences, universities and NGO fora. He is fluent in English, French
and Spanish.

87
Fernando Cordero Cueva, Mayor of Cuenca, Ecuador

Fernando Cordero Cueva is an architect, specialised in urban planning and local

development projects. He has been a Professor at the University of Cuenca and author
or numerous urban plans and urban development plans from 1980 to 1996. He was
elected the Mayor of Cuenca for the 1996-2000 period as a candidate of the civil
movement Pachacutik-Nuevo País and has recently been re-elected for the 2000-2004
period.
He presently leads the preparation of the Cuenca Strategic Plan (PEC) with the
participation of 180 public and private institutions, community organizations and NGOs
The Municipality of Cuenca is carrying out, with the support of UNIFEM, the first Equal
Opportunities Plan (PIO-2000).

Virginia Vargas, gender expert, Peru

Dr. Virginia Vargas, sociologist, majored in Political Science. As an active feminist

militant, she founded the Center for the Peruvian Women "Flora Tristán" in 1978. She
is the author of several books and articles on democracy, citizenship, state and
globalization from a feminist perspective.

Virginia Vargas has been a professor for the Women and Development Program at the
Social Studies Institute in The Hague, Netherlands. She has also been invited as a
professor by several gender studies programs in Peru and Latin America. Vargas was
the Latin American and Caribbean NGOs' Coordinator to the NGO Forum held in
September 1995 on occasion of the Fourth World UN Conference on Women in Beijing,
China. In Beijing, Vargas received a UNIFEM Award. She was part of the Gender
Advisory Council of the World Bank between 1995 and 1999 and of the Gender
Advisory Council of the IADB between 1996 and 2000.

At the moment, she is in charge, as a consultant, of the Coordination of UNIFEM’s

Economic and Social Rights Program for Women in the Andean Region.

Warren Krafchik, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, United States

Warren Krafchik is Deputy Director of the International Budget Project in

Washington DC. The Project works to nuture civil society applied budget anlaysis
capacity in developing countries. Before joining this Project, Warren Krafchik initiated
and managed the Budget Information Service at the Institute for Democracy in South
Africa. Warren Krafchik is an economist trained at the University of Cape Town where
he also taught for several years.

Mary Rusimbi, Director, Tanzanian Gender Networking Programma, Tanzania

Mary Rusimbi is an expert in Adult Education and gender with degrees from Dar es
Salaam, University of Auckland in New Zealand and the University of Essex (IDS) in the
UK. She has worked closely with Tanzanian and bilaterall organisations on diverse
projects and as a specialised trainer and project designer and manager.

88
Among the most relevant are support and professional advise mainstreaming initiatives
in all projects and programmes to the Local Women Fund, financed by the Government
of Netherlands from 1993 to 1997. The other is as Excecutive Director ot the Tanzania
Gender Networking Programme where she has been involved since 1997 in coalition
building, advocacy activities and other lobbying initiatives on gender budgets qnd
through this fqcilitqting the process of empowerment of women qnd other
disempowered groups (poor men and youth).

Celia Reyes, Senior Research Fellow, Philippine Institute for Development Studies and
Project Director of the Micro Impacts of Macroeconomics and Adjustment Policies
(MIMAP) Project

Dr. Celia M. Reyes is a Senior Research Fellow at the Philippine Institute for
Development Studies and Project Director of the Micro Impacts of Macroeconomics and
Adjustment Policies (MIMAP) Project in the Philippines. One of her major research
areas is poverty- focusing on the assessment of the impact of policies and program on
poverty and equity. She also has been working on monitoring systems to assist
national and local policymakers and program implementors by providing timely
information on the welfare status of vulnerable groups. She is also very much involved
in developing tools to analyze economic and social policies, particularly
macroeconometric models.

Dr. Reyes obtained her Ph. D in Economics from the University of Pennsylvania. She
also has a Bachelor of Bachelor of Science degree in Statistics from the University of
the Philippines.

Maria Kaisa Aula, Member of the Finnish Parliament, Chair of the Budget Committee,
Finland

Maria Kaisa Aula is a member of Finnish Parliament since 1991. She has been
member of the Finance Committee of the Parliament since 1995 and Chair of the
Committee since 1999. In the Parliament she is also a member of the Grand
Committee (European Affairs). At 1994 she was elected Deputy chair of the Centre
Party of Finland, which is the second largest party in Finland. During the years 1993-
1994 Ms. Aula acted also as a Political Advisor in the Prime Ministers Office.
Ms. Aula was born 1962 in Lapland, Northern Finland. She is a political scientist by
education and has a degree in Political Science from the University of Helsinki. Before
her parliamentary career she worked as a researcher at the University of Helsinki and
at the Finnish Broadcasting Corporation. She studied politics and media at the Harvard
University, USA during 1989-1990 with a Fullbright Grant.
Ms. Aula sits in the administrative boards of both Finnish Broadcasting Corporation and
Finnish Co-operative bank. She chairs the advisory delegation of the State Audit Office
of Finland, too. Ms. Aula also takes part in the European politics as a vice-president of
the ELDR (European liberal democratic and reformers party).

89
C. OVERVIEW COUNTRY STATEMENTS
COUNTRY Ministries Officials NGO and other
Brazil Raul Belens Jungmann
Minister of Agricultural Development
Burkina Faso Anne Konate
Delegated Minister
Ministry of Economy and Finance
Chile Adriana Delpiano Puelma National
Service for Women
Mauritius Arianne Navarre-Marie
Minister of Women’s Rights Child
Devleopment and Family Welfare
Nigeria Aishu Ismail
Honorable Minister
Federam Ministry of Women’s
Affairs And Youth Development
Portugal Maria do Ceu Cunha Rego
Secretary of State for Equality and
Women’s Rights
OFFICIALS
Canada Diana Rivington
CIDA
Ecuador Fernando Cordero
Mayor of Cuencq
Finland Maria Kaisa Aula
Parliament of Finland
Germany Margaretta Wenzel
Weckmann
Federal Ministry for
Economic
Cooperation and
Development
Ireland Liz Higgins
Education Advisor
Department of foreign
affairs
Japan Yumiko Tanaka
Senior Advisor
Japan International
Cooperation Agency
Mexico Aurora Del Rio
Ministry of Health
Morocco Mr. Mohammad
Chafiki
Chef de Cabinet
Ministere de
l’économie et des
Finances
New Zealand Patti O’Neill
Specialist Advisor
Gender and

90
 International
Development
Ministry of Trade
Norway Anne Havenor
Senior Advisor
Ministry of Childern
qnd Family Affairs
Peru Raul Martin Pumar
Vilchez
Alcalde
Municipality De Villa
El Salvado
Philippines Emilia Boncodin
Secretary Department
of Budget
Senegal Gnounka Diouf
Economic Advisor to
the President of the
Republic
Spain Belen Lopez
Chief of Cabinet of
International
Relations
Women’s Institute
Sweden Lars Back
Political Advisor
Ministry of
Agriculture
The Netherlands Bea Ten Tuscher
Head of Women and
Development Division
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
Uganda Winnie Byanyima
Member of Parliament
United Kingdom Phil Evans DFID
OTHER INSTITUTIONS
Commonwealth Winston Cox
Deputy Director
Ecuador Doris Solis Carrion
Fundacion ANDAR
IDRC Randy Spence
Senior Economist
Mexico Lucia Perez
Equidad de Genero
Scotland Rona Fitzgerald
European Policies
Research Centre -
Scotland
Pacific Forum Margaret Leniston
Gender Affairs

91
D. LIST OF CONFERENCE PAPERS

BYANYIMA Winnie (2001). Strengthening Parliamentary Governance through Gender

Budgeting: the experience from three African countries. Uganda, 16 pp.

DEMERY Lionel (2001). Gender and public spending: insights from benefit incidence.
Washington D.C., World Bank, 17 pp.

DIANE Elson (2001). Gender Responsive Budget Initiatives: Some Key Dimensions and
Practical Examples. UK, University of Essex, 14 pp.

HEWITT Guy (2001). Gender Responsive Budget Initiatives: Tools and Methodology.
London, Commonwealth Secretariat, 9 pp.

HIMMELWEIT Susan (2001). Tools for Budget Impact Analysis: taxes and benefits.
London, Open University, Faculty of Science, 14 pp.

JAIN Devaki (2001). Recreating the Budgetary Process – Women direct fiscal policy.
Bangalore, Karnataka Women’s Information and Research Centre, 33 pp. (including
annexures)

KRAFCHIK Warren (2001). Can civil society add value to budget decision-making? A
description of civil society budget work. Washington D.C., International Budget Project,
20 pp.

PHILIPPE-RAYNAUD Françoise (2001). Le Jaune Budgétaire des Droits des Femmes et

de l’Egalité entre les Femmes et les Hommes. Paris, Ministère de l’Emploi et de la
Solidarité, Service des Droits des Femmes et de l’Egalité, 3 pp.

REYES Celia (2001). Gender and Development Initiative in the Philippines. Manila,
Philippine Institute for Development Studies, Micro Impacts of Macroeconomics and
Adjustment Policies (MIMAP) Project, 9 pp.

RUSIMBI Mary (2001). A Case Study on Strategies for Transforming and

Mainstreaming Gender into National Planning and Budgeting Processes. The Case of
Gender Budget Initiative (GBI). Tanzania, Tanzania Gender Networking Programme, 15
pp.

VANDEMOORTELE Jan (2001). Are user fees and narrow targeting gender-neutral?
New York, UNDP, 5 pp.

VARGAS-VALENTE Virginia (2001). Budgets and Democratic Governance Processes.

Peru, 16 pp.

92
E.LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Title First Name Name Function Working Place Address 1 Address 2
1 Mrs. Nisreen Alami UNIFEM Headquarters 304 East 45th Street
2 Karali- National Representative to UN on Gender
Mr. Dimitriadi Antigoni Special Advisor Ministry of Foreign Affairs Issues 5, Vas. Sophias Ave.
3 Mrs. Maria Kaisa Aula Parliament of Finland
4 Mrs. Maria Cristina Avetta Ministero dell'Economia e Finanze VIA XX Settembre, 97
5 Mr. Lars Bäck Political Advisor Ministry of Agriculture Government Offices
6 Mrs. Annabel Backs Cabinet Isabelle Durant, Vice Premier Ministre et Ministre de la Mobilité et des Transports Rue de la Loi, 63 - 65
7 Dr. Yvon Bartelink Vice-president Commission on Women and Development c/o UCOS Pleinlaan, 2
8 Ministry for Industry, Employment and
Ph.D. Per Bavner Communications Project on Gender Budgeting
9 Department for the Co-ordination of
Mrs. Gabriella Bekman Director Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment Emancipation POBox 90801
10 Ms. Emma Bell Researcher BRIDGE Institute of Development Studies
11 Mr. Jann Ola Berget Nordic Council of Ministers Store Strandstraede 18
12 Mrs. Pia Bertini Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ple Farmesina
13 Mrs. Santina Bertulessi European Parliament E.P. - off.156215 Rue Wiertz 60
14 Mrs. Francesca Bettio Universita di Siena Dipartimento di Economia Piazza S. Francesco 7
15 Boardmember of UNA
Mrs. Magda Biesmans Claude - WFUNA - ICW St Joan's I. Alliance - WILPF_CFFB - Soroptimist I Bexstraat 5
16 Director, Women in United States Agency for International
Mrs. Katherine Blakeslee Development Development 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue
17 Mr. Jon Blondal Deputy Head OECD Budgeting and Management Rue André Pascal, 2
18 Mr. Eddie Boelens First Attache Ministry of Finance International relations Kunstlaan, 30
19 Mrs. Marie Boes Belgian Senate Natieplein, 1
20 Mrs. Lily Boeykens Ministry of Foreign Affairs Vossekouter 29
21 Mrs. Emilia Boncodin Secretary Department of Budget and Management General Solano Street
22 Association of Employers Federations of Slovak Association of Employers Federations of
Mr. Juraj Borgula Rep Slovak Rep 18 Nobelova Str
23 Deputy head Seminars Technical Center for Agricultural and Rural
Mrs. Isolina Boto Department Cooperation Postbus 380
24 Secretary of State of Development Cooperation
Mr. Eddy Boutmans of Belgium Regentlaan, 45-46
25 Mrs. Anne C. Brouwers Project Manager Sorca Management Consultants Rue des Aduatiques, 71
26 Regional Programme
Mrs. Florence Butegwa Director UNIFEM Oyinkan Abayomi Drive Ikoyi, PO box 2075

93
 First Name Name City code City Country Tel Fax E-mail
1 Nisreen Alami NY 10017 New York USA
2 Karali-
Dimitriadi Antigoni Athens Greece +30 1 36 81 577 +30 1 36 81 576 antigoni@mfor.gr
3 Maria Kaisa Aula 00102 Helsinki Finland + 358 50 511 30 06 + 358 9 432 22 74maria.kaisa.aula@eduskuntr.fi
4 Maria Cristina Avetta Roma Italy + 39 06 4761 40 80 + 39 06 4761 47 66
mariacristina.avetta@tesoro.it
5 Lars Bäck S-103 33 Stockholm Sweden +46 8 405 10 00 +46 8 405 49 20 lars.back@agriculture.ministry.se
6 Annabel Backs 1040 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 237 67 38 +32 2 230 18 24 annabel.backs@vici.fgov.be
7 Yvon Bartelink 1050 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 629 23 05 + 32 2 629 23 06 ybarteli@vub.ac.be
8 Per Bavner S-103 33 Stockholm Sweden +46 8 405 10 96 +46 8 24 71 52 helen-lundkvist@industry.ministry.se
9 Gabriella Bekman 2509LV Den Haag The Netherlands + 31 70 333 40 49gbekman@minszw.nl
10 Emma Bell BN1 GRE Bridge Great Britain + 44 1273 678 491 + 44 1273 621 202e.bell@ids.ac.uk
11 Jann Ola Berget 1225 Copenhagen Denmark +45 33 96 03 29 +45 33 11 78 50 job@nmr.dk
12 Pia Bertini 00191 Roma Italy +39 06 36 911 bertini.pia@esteri.it
13 Santina Bertulessi 1047 Brussels Belgium +32 2 284 71 08 +32 2 284 91 08 sbertulessi@europarl.eu.int
14 Francesca Bettio 53100 Siena Italy +39 05 77 23 26 48 +39 05 77 23 26 61 bettio@unisi.it
15 Magda Biesmans 2018 Antwerpen Belgium +32 486 61 92 51
16 20523- United States of
Katherine Blakeslee 8100 Washington America + 1 202 712 05 70 + 1 202 216 31 73 kblakeslee@usaid.gov
17 Paris Cedex
Jon Blondal 35775 16 France + 33 1 45 24 76 59 +33 1 45 24 87 76 jon.blondal@oecd.org
18 Eddie Boelens 1040 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 233 74 24 + 32 2 233 70 83 eddie.boelens@minfin.fed.be
19 Marie Boes 1009 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 501 77 17 + 32 2 501 75 97 boes@cvp.polgroups.senate.be
20 Lily Boeykens 3040 Huldenberg Belgium +32 16 47 74 82 +32 16 47 36 66 lily.boeykens@skynet.be
21 Emilia Boncodin San Miguel Philippines +632 735 49 26 +632 735 49 36 etb@dbm.gov.ph
22 Juraj Borgula 88102 Bratislava Slovakia +421 2 49 231 214 +421 2 492 31 272 instore@isternet.sk
23 Isolina Boto 6700 AJ Wageningen The Netherlands +31 317 46 71 57 +31 317 46 00 67+ boto@cta.nl
24 Eddy Boutmans 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 549 09 48 + 32 2 512 21 23
25 Anne C. Brouwers 1040 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 736 39 23 + 32 2 732 03 14 a.brouwers@sorca.be
26 Florence Butegwa Lagos Nigeria + 234 1 269 20 06 + 234 1 269 08 85 florence.butegwa@undp.org

94
 First
Name Name Function Working Place Address 1 Address 2
27 Winnie Byanyima Member of Parliament Government of Uganda POBox 7178
28 Ann Cairo Vrouwen Alliantie Janskerkhof1
29 Dina Canço Statistics on Women Commissin for Equality and Women's Rights Avenida da Republica 32 - 1a
30 Department of Development
Tuukka Castren Ministry for Foreign Affairs Cooperation PL 176
31 Mohamed Chafiki Chef de Cabinet Ministère de l'Economie et des Finances
32 Naima Charkao United Nations Information Center for Benelux rue Montoyer 14
33 Entraide et Fraternité / Commission Femmes et
Sophie Charlier Responsable Opérations Développement Rue du Gouvernement Provisoire, 32
34 Nhi Ha Chu Interpreter Vietnam Women's Union 39 Hang Chuoi St
35 Valérie Compernolle Interpreter avenue Bergmann 8
36 Francesca Cook OECD DAC Secretariat Rue André Pascal, 2
37 Alice Cops Oppensioenstelling UNIFEM Voorzitter Vrouwenhuis Diest Schoonaarde 165
38 Fernando Cordero Cueva Alcalde de Cuenca Municipalidad de Cuenca Avenue Isabel la Caiolica, 182
39 Jean-
Michel Corhay Ministry of Foreign Affairs Direction Générale de la Coopération Rue Brederode, 6
40 Lorraine Corner Regional Programme Director UNIFEM 12th Floor, UN Building Rajdamnern Avenue
41 Dottoresssa in Economia e
Rosalba Cotroneo Commercio Ministero dell'Economia e Finanze VIA XX Settembre, 97
42 Winston Cox Deputy Secretary-General Commonwealth Secretariat Development Co-operation Marlborough House
43 Erika Csongradi Hungarian Ministry of Finance 1051 Jozsef Na'Dor Te'R, 2-4
44 Maria Do
Ceu Cunha Rego Secretary of State for Equality Avda Republica 44 - 5° DTO
45 Claudio Dantos Embassy of Chile in Belgium
46 Carla Dauw Programme Officer Ministry of Foreign Affairs DGIC Brederodestraat, 6
47 Leen De Becker CEL Gender/Genderdesk Ministry of Foreign Affairs Cel Vrouw en ontwikkeling van DGIS Brederodestraat, 6
48 1st Vice President of the
Sabine De Bethune Belgian Senate Belgian Senate Natieplein, 1
49 Policy Advisor Gender,
Ella De Voogd Women and Development Ministry of Foreign Affairs Bezuidenhautseweg, 67
50 Department for the Co-ordination of
Henny De Vries Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment Emancipation POBox 90801
51 Véronique Degraef Ministère de l'Emploi & Politique de l'Egalité des Chances Cabinet du Vice-Premier Ministre Rue du Commerce 78-80
52 Directora de Enlace, Programma Mujer Jose Vasconcelos 221 1 er Piso,
Aurora del Rio Ministry of Health y Salud Col. San Migule Chapultepec
53 Adriana Delpiano Puelma Minister National Service for Woman (SERNAM) Teatinos 950 8th floor

95
 First Name Name Postal Code City Country Telephone Fax e-mail
27 Winnie Byanyima Kampala Uganda + 256 041 342 130 + 254 041 342 123 fowode@steucom.co.ug
28 Ann Cairo 3512 BK Utrecht The Netherlands +31 30 233 26 69 +31 20 771 35 54 annaciro@hetnet.nl
29 Dina Canço 1050-193 Lisboa Portugal +351 21 79 83 000 +351 21 79 83 098 dina.c@cidm.pt
30 Tuukka Castren 00161 Helsinki Finland + 358 134 16 165 + 358 134 16 100 tuukka.castren@formin.fi
31 Mohamed Chafiki Rabat Moroco + 212 37 76 11 13 + 212 37 76 50 68
32 Naima Charkao 1000 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 289 28 90 +32 2 502 40 61
33 Sophie Charlier 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 227 66 80 sc@entraide.be
34 Nhi Ha Chu Hanoi Vietnam +84 4 97 38 58 +84 4 97 38 50 vn-bproject@hn.vnn.vn
35 Valérie Compernolle 1050 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 672 07 44 +32 2 672 07 44 valika@yucom.be
36 Francesca Cook 35775 Paris Cedex 16 France + 33 1 45 24 90 08 francesca.cook@oecd.org
37 Alice Cops 3290 Diest Belgium +32 13 33 38 90 +32 13 33 38 90
38 Fernando Cordero Cueva Ecuador + 593 7 88 59 03 + 593 7 834 359 fcorderocueva@yahoo.com
39 Jean-Michel Corhay 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 519 07 45 + 32 2 519 06 83
40 Lorraine Corner 10200 Bangkok Thailand + 66 2 288 19 34 + 33 2 280 60 30 unifem-bkk@mozart.inet.co.th
41 Rosalba Cotroneo Roma Italy + 39 06 4761 40 81 + 39 06 4761 47 66 rosalba.cotroneo@tenozo.it
42 Winston Cox SW1Y 5HX London Great Britain + 44 20 77 47 61 18 + 44 20 79 25 10 24 w.cox@commonwealth.int
43 Erika Csongradi Budapest Hungaria + 36 1 327 22 61 + 36 1 327 27 42 erika.csongradi@pm.gov.hu
44 Maria Do Ceu Cunha Rego 9050-794 Lisboa Portugal +351 21 761 34 62 +351 21 796 03 32 mccunharego@pcm.gov.pt
45 Claudio Dantos Belgium
46 Carla Dauw 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 519 07 62 + 32 2 519 05 70 carla.daw@diplobel.fed.be
47 Leen De Becker 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 519 08 41 + 32 2 519 06 83 leen.debecker@diplobel.fed.be
48 Sabine De Bethune 1009 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 501 77 17 + 32 2 501 75 97 debethune@senators.senate.be
49 Ella De Voogd 2595 AJ Den Haag The Netherlands + 31 70 348 62 48 ella-de.voogd@minbuza?.nl
50 Henny De Vries 2509LV De Haag The Netherlands + 31 70 333 48 38 + 31 70 333 40 49 hdvries@minszw.nl
51 Véronique Degraef 1000 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 233 51 11 +32 2 230 10 67
52 Aurora del Rio 11850 Mexico Mexico +52 55 53 03 35 +52 52 56 01 13 ext. 224 riozole@hotmail.com
53 Adriana Delpiano Puelma Chile +56 2 54 96 142 +56 2 549 62 48 adelpiano@sernam.gov.cl

96
 First Name Name Function Working Place Address 1 Address 2
54 Mark Demeer State Secretariate for Dev. Coop of Belgium
55 Lionel Demery Lead Poverty Specialist The World Bank 1818 H Street, NW
56 Dirk Depover Kab. O.S.
57 Gnounka Diouf Conseiller Economique Présidence de la République Avenue Roune
58 Arno Dischinger Interpreter
59 Yves Dricot Head of the Information Direction Ministry of Foreign Affairs Direction Générale de la Coopération Rue Brederode, 6
60 Taina Eckstein Financial Adviser Ministry of Finance Fiscal Policy Preparation POBox 28
61 Marie Elena Efthymiou Principal Administrator European Parliament Sch 06 BO 37
62 Zeinab Elbakri Human Resources Manager, North Region African Development Bank BPV 316
63 Bea Elskens Kabinet Minister Magda Alvoet
64 Diane Elson University of Essex Department of Sociology Wivenhoe Park
65 Phil Evans Senior Social Development Adviser Department for International development 94 Victoria Street
66 Peggy Fairbairn-Dunlop UNIFEM Pacific Regional Office Private mail bag, c/o UNOP
67 Babakar Fall Chef de Division Direction de la Prévision et de la Statistique Point E, Rue 1 X Bd de l'Est
68 Fonds de développement des Nations
Yassine Fall Regional Programme Director UNIFEM Unies pour la femme Immeuble Faycal - 19, rue Parchappe
69 Andrea Figueroa Sernam
70 Rona Fitzgerald European Policies Research Centre University of Strathclyde 40 George Street
71 Alta Folscher Director Helm-Africa 2nd Floor Church Square, 5
72 Cristina Funes-Noppen Ministry of Foreign Affairs Direction Générale de la Coopération Rue Brederode, 6
73 Garcia de
Belen Andoain Chief of Programmes Institute for Women c/Condesa de Venadito 34
74 Françoise Goffinet Ministère de l'Emploi et du Travail 51 Rue Belliard
75 Inge Goolis Ministry of Foreign Affairs Direction Générale de la Coopération Rue Brederode, 6
76 Pregs Govender Parliament of South Africa PO Box 15 Parliament Buildings
77 Sumantra
Kumar Guha South National Programe Officer UNIFEM South Asia Regional Office 223 Jorbagh
78 Nyaradzai Gumbonzvanda UNIFEM POBox 30218
79 Ruchira Gupta UNIFEM Headquarters 50 E. 89th Street, 27B
80 Jane Haile Medateam / AIDCO
81 Principal Officer for Gender Office of the Special Adviser on Gender Issues
Carolyn Hannan Adviser United Nations Mainstreaming DC2-1212-2 Un Plaza
82 Anne Havnor Ministry of Children and Family Affairs POBox 8036
83 Sigurdur Helgason Deputy Secretary-General Nordic Council of Ministers Store Strandstraede 18
84 Ria Heremans U.N. Information Centre Montoyerstr. 14

97
 First Name Name Postal Code City Country Telephone Fax e-mail
54 Mark Demeer Belgium mdeneer@cabos.fgov.be
55 Lionel Demery 20433 Washington DC United States of America + 1 202 473 48 00 + 1 202 473 79 13 ldemery@worldbank.org
56 Dirk Depover Belgium ddepover@cabos.fgov.be
57 Gnounka Diouf Dakar Senegal +221 823 23 18 +221 823 50 05 gnoumka@hotmail.com
58 Arno Dischinger Belgium
59 Yves Dricot 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 519 05 33 + 32 2 519 05 44 yves.dricot@diplobel.fed.be
60 Taina Eckstein 00023 Government Finland + 358 9 160 30 18 + 358 9 160 47 64 taina.eckstein@vm.vn.fi
61 Marie Elena Efthymiou Luxembourg Luxembourg + 352 22 401 + 352 27 720 mefthyniou@europarl.eu.int
62 Zeinab Elbakri Abidjan 01 Yvory Coast +225 20 20 47 15 +225 20 20 49 13 z.elbakri@afdb.org
63 Bea Elskens Belgium
64 Diane Elson CO4 3SQ Colchester Great Britain + 44 1206 873 539 drelson@essex.ac.uk
65 Phil Evans SWIE 5JC London Great Britain +44 207 917 06 49 +44 207 917 02 97 p-evans@dfid.gov.uk
66 Peggy Fairbairn-Dunlop Suva Fiji Islands + 679 301 178 + 679 301 654 unifem@is.com.fj
67 Babakar Fall Dakar Senegal +221 825 00 50 +221 824 90 01 babakarfall@yahoo.fr
68 Yassine Fall BP 154 Dakar Egypt +221 823 52 07 +221 823 50 02 yassine.fall@undp.org
69 Andrea Figueroa Chile
70 Rona Fitzgerald G1 1QE Glascow, Scotland Great Britain +44 141 548 49 21 +44 141 548 48 98 rona.fitzgerald@strath.ac.uk
71 Alta Folscher Cape Town South Africa altaf@helm-corp.com
72 Cristina Funes-Noppen 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 519 07 45 + 32 2 519 06 83
73 Garcia de
Belen Andoain 28 027 Madrid Spain +34 91 363 79 07 +34 91 363 80 76 bgandouin@mtas.es
74 Françoise Goffinet 1040 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 233 41 95 +32 2 233 40 32 goffinet@meta.fgov.be
75 Inge Goolis 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 519 07 45 + 32 2 519 06 83
76 Pregs Govender Capetown South Africa +27 21 40 32 561 +27 21 461 04 62 pgovender@anc.org.za
77 Sumantra
Kumar Guha 110003 New Delhi India +91 11 46 04 351 +91 11 46 22 136 s.k.guha@undp.org
78 Nyaradzai Gumbonzvanda Nairobi Kenia + 254 2 624 383 + 254 2 624 494 nyaradzai.gumbonzvanda@unifem.umon.org
79 Ruchira Gupta NY 10128 New york United States of America +1 212 348 67 16 +1 212 90 66 336 rushira.gupta@undp.org
80 Jane Haile Belgium
81 Carolyn Hannan 10017 New York United States of America + 1 212 963 31 04 + 1 212 963 18 02 hannan@un.org
82 Anne Havnor 0030 Oslo Norway + 47 22 24 25 44 + 47 22 24 25 55 anne.havnor@bfd.dep.no
83 Sigurdur Helgason 1225 Copenhagen Denmark +45 33 96 02 27 +45 33 11 78 50 sih@nmr.dk
84 Ria Heremans 1000 Brussels Belgium +32 2 289 28 95 +32 2 502 40 61 heremans@unbenelux.org

98
 First Name Name Function Working Place Address 1 Address 2
85 Programme Manager, Gender Responsive
Guy Hewitt Budgets Commonwealth Secretariat Marlborough House Pall Mall
86 Noeleen Heyzer Executive Director UNIFEM Headquarters 304 East 45th Street
87 Education Policy & Programme
Liz Higgins Development Department of Foreign Affairs Development Cooperation Division 76-78 Harcourt Street
88 Susan Himmelweit Women's Budget Group and Open University Bramshill Gardens, 30
89 Nathalie Holvoet Researcher University of Antwerp Institute of Development Policy and Management Middelheimlaan, 1
90 Anthony Hutton OCDE 9 rue André Pascal
91 Yvonne Hyde Ambassador Ministry of Foreign Affairs Boulevard Brand Whitlock 136
92 Federal Ministry of Women Affairs & Youth
Aisha Ismael Honourable Minister dev. P.M.B. 229
93 Karnataka Women's Information and
Devaki Jain Trustee Resource Centre Tharanga 10th Cross, Raymanal Ulas Extensio
94 Rose-Marie Jauniaux-Soeur Juriste-Fonction Publique UNIFEM Dieweg 178
95 Kyu-Teak Ji International Cooperation Division The Ministry of Gender Equality 520-3, Banpo-dong, Seocho-gu
96 Susan Joekes International Development Research Center IDRC 250 Albert Street, PO Box 8500
97 Eva Joelsdotter Berg European Commission Rue de la Loi, 200
98 Norwegian Ministry of Children and Family
Bente Johansen Section for Gender Equality Affairs POBox 8036 Dep.
99 Johnsson-
Gerd Latham Gender Advisor Ministry for Foreign Affairs Dep Head UN group Vasagatan 8-10
100 Susan Jolly Acting manager Bridge - IDS Gender Information Unit Bridge, 10 S, University of Sussex
101 Raul Belens Jungmann Pinto Ministry of Agrarian Development Esplanada dos Ministerios bloca a Oitavo Andar
102 Maria Karadenizi Advocacy and Network Officer WIDE Women in Development in Europe Rue du Commerce, 70-72
103 Doris Klein Project Officer German Technical Cooperation POBox 5180
104 Stefani Klos Project Manager German Technical Cooperation Sector Advisory Programme Gender POBox 5180
105 Jennifer Klot UNIFEM Headquarters 304 East 45th Street
106 Anne Konate Ministre Délégué Ministère de l'Economie et des Finances Chargé du Développement Economique Ouagadougou 03
107 Adam Koodoruth Delegation of Mauritius 68, rue des Bollandistes
108 Warren Krafchik International Budget Project
109 Confederation of Trade Unions of the Slovak
Milos Krssak Advisor Republic Odborarske Nam 3
110 Rudy Lagnaux Ministry of Foreign Affairs Direction Générale de la Coopération Rue Brederode, 6
111 Shireen Lateef Senior Social Development Specialist Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue Mandaluyong City
112 Margaret Leniston Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat Gender Issues Adviser Private Mail Bag
113 Eva Lindblom Ministry of Finance Department of Budget

99
 First Name Name Postal Code City Country Telephone Fax e-mail
85 Guy Hewitt SW 1Y London Great Britain + 44 20 77 47 65 45 + 44 20 79 30 16 47 g.hewitt@commonwealth.int
86 Noeleen Heyzer NY 10017 New york United States of America +1 212 906 64 35 +1 212 906 64 35 noeleen.heyzer@undp.org
87 Liz Higgins Dublin Ireland + 353 1 408 24 53 + 353 1 408 26 26 liz.higgins@iveagh.irlgov.ie
88 Susan Himmelweit NW5 1JH London Great Britain + 44 20 7272 84 85 + 44 20 1908 654 488 s.f.himmelweit@open.ac.uk
89 Nathalie Holvoet 2020 Antwerp Belgium + 32 3 218 06 76 + 32 3 218 06 50 nathol@ruca.ua.ac.be
90 Anthony Hutton 75020 Paris France
91 Yvonne Hyde 1200 Brussels Belgium +32 2 732 62 04 +32 2 732 62 46 ambel.gov@pophost.eunet.be
92 Aisha Ismael Garki Abuja Nigeria +234 9 52 37 115 +234 9 52 33 644
93 Devaki Jain 560080 Bangalore India + 91 80 334 41 13 + 91 80 346 17 62 ssfh@giasbgoi.usul.net.in
94 Rose-Marie Jauniaux-Soeur 1180 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 374 28 74 +32 2 374 28 74
95 Kyu-Teak Ji 173 - 756 Seoul South Korea +82 2 21 06 52 94 +82 2 21 06 52 87 jikt@moge.go.kr
96 Susan Joekes K1G 3H9 Ottawa, Ontario Canada +1 613 236 61 63 +1 613 567 77 48 sjoekes@idrc.ca
97 Eva Joelsdotter Berg 1049 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 296 36 98 + 32 2 296 36 97
98 Bente Johansen 0030 Oslo Norway + 47 22 24 25 88 + 47 22 24 25 55 anne-berit.mong-haug@bfd.dep.no
99 Johnsson-
Gerd Latham Stockholm Sweden +46 8 405 58 24 +46 8 723 11 76 gerd.johnsson-latham@foreign.ministry.se
100 Susan Jolly BN 19 RE Brighton Great Britain +44 1273 87 25 36 +44 1273 69 16 47 s.jolly@ids.ac.uk
101 Raul Belens Jungmann Pinto Brasilia Brazil +55 61 223 80 76 +55 61 225 53 47 raul.incra.gov.br
102 Maria Karadenizi 1040 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 545 90 70 + 32 2 512 73 42 mk.wide@xs4all.be
103 Doris Klein 65726 Eschborn Germany + 49 6196 79 16 28 + 49 6196 79 73 32 doris.klein@gtz.de
104 Stefani Klos 65726 Eschborn Germany + 49 6196 79 16 12 + 49 6196 79 73 32 stefani.klos@gtz.de
105 Jennifer Klot NY 10017 New york United States of America +1 212 906 64 50 +1 212 906 63 36 jennifer.klot@undp.org
106 Anne Konate 03 BP7008 Ouagadougou Burkina Faso +226 32 43 18 +226 31 27 15
107 Adam Koodoruth 1040 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 733 88 99
108 Waren Krafchik Washington D.C. US krafchik@cbpp.org
109 Milos Krssak 815 70 Bratislava Slovakia +421 2 502 39 107 +421 2 555 61 956 internat.dep@kozsr.sk
110 Rudy Lagnaux 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 519 08 92 + 32 2 519 05 44 h4.infor@badc.fgov.be
111 Shireen Lateef 0401 Metro Manila Philippines +63 2 632 69 04 +63 2 636 24 44 slateef@adb.org
112 Margaret Leniston Suva Fiji Islands +679 31 26 00 +679 30 01 92 margaretl@forumsec.org.fj
113 Eva Lindblom Sweden + 46 8 405 16 39 + 46 8 411 08 35 eva.lindblom@finance.ministry.se

100
 First Name Name Function Working Place Address 1 Address 2
85 Belen Lopez Lopez Chief of Cabinet of International Relations Women's Institute c/ Condesa de Veneadito, 34
86 Nicole Malpas Ph.D. Demography CTB Conseiller Genre Rue Haute, 147
87 Nomcebo Manzini Regional Programme Director UNIFEM 7th Floor Takura House Union Avenue
88 Fernando José Marroni de Abreu Ministry of Agrarian Development Esplanada dos Ministerios bloca a Oitavo Andar
89 Karen Mason Director of Gender and Development The World Bank 1818 H Street, NW
90 Cabinet of Belgian Secretary of State of
Elisabeth Minne Gender Adviser Development Co-operation Boulevard du Régent, 45-46
91 United Nations Information Center for
Mitra Moadab Motlagh Benelux rue Montoyer 14
92 Momoh
93 Ministry of Flanders - Administration of
Brigitte Mouligneau Foreign Policy Boudewijnlaan 30
94 Tanni Mukhopadhyay Human Development Report Office United Nations Development Programme
95 Andrew Mwaba Assistant to the Vice President, Operations African Development Bank 01 B.P. 1387
96 Ministry of Women's Rights, Child
Arianne Navarre-Marie Minister Development & Family Welfare CSK Building cnr R. Ollier & E. Anquetil Street
97 Angela O'Hagan Senior Policy Manager Equal Opportunities Commission 279 Bath St.
98 Shinjuku Maynds Tower Building,
Harumi Okawa Deputy Director Japan International Cooperation Agency Global Issues Division 10th Floor, Shibuya-Ku
99 Specialist Advisor, Gender and Int.
Patti O'Neill Development Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Private Bag, 18-901
100 Ministère de l'Emploi & Politique de l'Egalité
Laurette Onkelinx Vice-Premier Ministre des Chances Cabinet du Vice-Premier Ministre Rue du Commerce, 78-80
101 Paola Ottonello Consultant EURETE Via Cairoli 11/11.1
102 Louise Palludsen Head of Section Department of the Minister for Gender Tordenskjoldsgade, 27-3
103 Kris Panneels Adviseur DGIS Brederodestraat 6
104 Carita Peltonen Nordic Council of Ministers Store Strandstraede 18
105 Equidad de Genero; Ciudadania, Trabajo y
Lucia Perez Fragoso Project Coordinator Familia A.C. Abasolo 176 Col del Carmen
106 Gerti Perlaki Consultant Ministry of Foreign Affairs Austrian Dev. Coop. Dittesgasse 2/12
107 Pilar Perona Larraz Chief unit Gender Equality Spanish Agency for International Cooperation Avda Reyes Cátolicos 4
108 Service des Droits des Femmes au Ministère
Françoise Philippe-Raynaud de l'Emploi et de la Solidarité Rue Brancion, 10-16
109 Christine Pintat Inter-Parliamentary Union Place du Petit Saconnex B.P. 438
110 Federal Ministry for Economic Co-operation
Heike Poherksen and Development Friedrich-Ebert-Allee, 40
111 Bianca Pomeranzi Ministry of Foreign Affairs Via Contarini 25

101
 First Name Name Postal Code City Country Telephone Fax e-mail
85 Belen Lopez Lopez 28027 Madrid Spain +34 91 363 79 93 +34 91 363 80 76 blopezlo@mtas.es
86 Nicole Malpas 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 505 37 74 + 32 2 505 18 62 nicole.malpas@btcctb.org
87 Nomcebo Manzini Harare Zimbawe + 263 4 792 681 + 263 4 704 729 nomcebo.manzini@undp.org
88 Fernando José Marroni de Abreu Brasilia Brazil +55 61 225 57 09 +55 61 225 53 47 fabreu@incra.gov.br
89 Karen Mason 20433 Washington DC United States of America + 1 202 473 49 66 + 1 202 522 32 37 kmason@worldbank.org
90 Elisabeth Minne 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 549 09 29 + 32 2 512 21 23
91 Mitra Moadab Motlagh 1000 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 289 28 90 +32 2 502 40 61
92 Momoh Belgium
93 Brigitte Mouligneau 1000 Brussels Belgium +32 2 553 59 28 +32 2 553 60 37 brigitte.mooligneau@coo.vlanderen.be
94 Tanni Mukhopadhyay United States of America +1 212 90 63 699 +1 212 90 63 678 tanni.mukhopdadhyay@undp.org
95 Andrew Mwaba Abidjan Yvory Coast +225 20 20 47 15 +225 20 20 49 13 a.mwaba@afdb.org
96 Arianne Navarre-Marie Port St Louis Mauritius + 230 240 76 34 + 230 240 77 16
97 Angela O'Hagan G2 4JL Glasgow Great Britain +44 141 248 58 33 +44 141 248 58 34 angela.ohagan@eoc.org.uk
98 Harumi Okawa 151-8558 Tokyo Japan + 81 3 5352 53 22 + 81 3 5352 54 90 okawa.harumi@jica.go.jp
99 Patti O'Neill Wellington New Zealand + 64 4 494 85 76 + 64 4 494 85 14 patti.o'neill@nfat.govt.nz
100 Laurette Onkelinx 1040 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 233 51 11 + 32 2 230 10 67
101 Paola Ottonello 16124 Genova Italy +39 010 24 700 44 +39 010 247 03 85
102 Louise Palludsen 1020 Copenhagen K Denmark + 45 33 92 33 11 + 45 33 81 31 15 lop@lige.dk
103 Kris Panneels 1000 Brussels Belgium +32 2 519 05 95 +32 2 519 05 70 kris.paneels@diplobel.fed.be
104 Carita Peltonen 1225 Copenhagen Denmark +45 33 96 03 45 +45 33 96 02 16 cp@nmr.dk
105 Lucia Perez Fragoso Coyoacan Mexico +52 56 58 71 14 /29 +52 56 58 76 54 presupuesto@equitad.org.mx
106 Gerti Perlaki A - 1180 Vienna Austria +43 1 47 01 17 69 gp.wide.eu@nextra.at
107 Pilar Perona Larraz 28040 Madrid Spain +34 915 83 85 02 +34 915 83 83 23 pilar.perona@aeci.es
108 Françoise Philippe-Raynaud 75015 Paris France + 33 1 53 86 10 51 + 33 1 53 86 11 11 francoise.philippe-raynaud@sante.gouv.fr
109 Christine Pintat 1211 Genève 19 Switzerland +41 22 91 94 150 +41 22 91 94 160 cp@mail.ipu.org
110 Heike Poherksen 53113 Bonn Germany
111 Bianca Pomeranzi 00194 Roma Italy +39 06 36 91 62 18 bianca.pomeranzi@esteri.it

102
 First Name Name Function Working Place Address 1 Address 2
112 Raul Martin Pumar Vilchez Alcalde Municipalidad de Vila El Salvador AV. Revolucion s/n Sector 2 Grupo 15
113 Unni Ramboll Adviser Ministry of Foreign Affairs POBox 8114
114 Anik Raskin Conseil National des Femmes du Luxembourg CNFL (ASBL) 60 rue des Romains
115 Cellule Mainstreaming
Saskia Ravesloot Wetenschappelijk Onderzoekster Centrum voor Vrouwenstudies Universiteit Antwerpen (UIA) Universiteitsplein 1
116 Stéphane Renard Ministry of Foreign Affairs Direction Générale de la Coopération Internationale
117 Robrecht Renard Université d'Anvers Middelheimlaan 1
118 Celia Reyes Senior Research Fellow Philippine Institute for Development Studies 106 Amorsolo Street Legaspi Village
119 Diana Rivington Chair, WP-GEN CIDA
120 Birte Rodenberg Doctor GDI German Development Institute Schillerpromenade 30
121 Mary Janeth Rusimbi Executive Director Tanzania Gender networking Programme (TGNP ) Maribo Resource Cnetre P.O. Box 8921
122 Charlotte Sachse Permanent Representation of Austria to the EU Expert on Social Affairs 30 Avenue de Cortenbergh
123 Lee Sanghee
124 Kristina Sarjo Ministerial Adviser Ministry of Finance Mariankatu, 9
125 Eva Sävfors AIDCO European Commission J54 / 6 / 55, Rue de la Loi 200
126 Bernadette Schmetz DGCI
127 Direction de la Coopération au
Alain Sibenaler Coopération multilatérale Ministère des Affaires Etrangères Développement 6, rue de la Congrétation
128 National Expert on Gender Ministry of Industry, Employment & Member of the COE Network on Gender
Monica Silvell Mainstreaming Communications Mainstreaming Division for Gender Equality
129 Doris
Josefina Solis Camion Municipio de Cuenca y Fundacion SENOAS Sucre y Benigno Malo
130 Sida, Swedish International Development
Ylva Sörman Nath Senior Gender Advisor Cooperation Agency Sida, Policy Division
131 Nancy Spence Commonwealth Secretariat Marlborough House Pall Mall
132 William Spence Senior Economist IDRC Leith Mansions, 43 Grantully Road
133 Spiling Norwegian Agency for Development
Kristin Johanssen Higher Executive Officer NORAD Coopeartion Ruselukkveien 26, PO Box 8034
134 Etienne Squilbin DGIS Brederodestraat 6
135 Véronique Staes Expert EQS Macroéconomiste DGCI - DGIC Rue de Bréderode 6
136 Inge Stemmler Board Member Vrouwen Alliantie Janskerkhoh 1
137 Yumiko Tanaka Senior Adivser Japan International Cooperation Agency Institute for International Cooperation 10-5 Honmuracho, Ichigaya, Shinju-ku
138 Head of Women and Development
Bea Ten Tusscher Division Ministry of Foreign Affairs Bezuidenhautseweg, 67
139 Marceline Tiendrebeogo Conseiller Technique Ministère de la Promotion de la Femme 02 BP 5382
140 Ioannidis Timsteou Ministry of National Economy Hellenic Republic

103
 First Name Name Postal Code City Country Telephone Fax e-mail
112 Raul Martin Pumar Vilchez Lima Perou +51 909 82 50 +51 287 64 85 martinpumar@hotmail.com
113 Unni Ramboll 0032 Oslo Norway + 47 22 24 39 84 + 47 22 24 27 34 unni.ramboll@mfa.no
114 Anik Raskin 2444 Luxembourg Luxembourg +352 29 65 25 +352 29 65 24 secretariat@cnfl.lu
115 Saskia Ravesloot 2610 Wilrijk Belgium +32 3 820 26 24 +32 3 820 28 86 rvsloot@uia.ua.ac.be
116 Stéphane Renard 1000 Bruxelles Belgium
117 Robrecht Renard 2020 Antwerpen Belgium +32 3 218 06 68 robrecht.renard@ua.ac.be
118 Celia Reyes Makati City Philippines +632 89 27 385 +632 89 39 586 creyes@mail.pids.gov.ph
119 Diana Rivington Belgium
120 Birte Rodenberg 12049 Berlin Germany +49 30 627 23 988 +49 30 62 72 39 88 birte.rodenberg@tonline.de
121 Mary Janeth Rusimbi Dar-es-Salaam Tanzania +255 22 24 43 205 +255 22 24 43 244 tgnp@tgnp.co.tz
122 Charlotte Sachse 1040 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 234 51 42 +32 2 234 53 12 charlotte.sachse@bmaa.gv.at
123 Lee Sanghee Seoul DPR of Korea +82 2 21 06 51 68 +82 2 21 06 51 72
124 Kristina Sarjo 00170 Helsinki Finland + 358 9 160 30 85 + 358 9 160 30 90 kristina.sarjo@um.un.fi
125 Eva Sävfors 1049 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 299 64 89 +32 2 296 14 30
126 Bernadette Schmetz Belgium
127 Alain Sibenaler L - 1352 Luxembourg Luxembourg +352 478 33 46 +352 22 20 48 alain.sibenaler@mae.etat.lu
128 Monica Silvell 10333 Stockholm Sweden + 46 8 405 56 41 + 46 8 24 71 52 monica.silvell@industry.ministry.se
129 Doris Josefina Solis Camion Cuenca Ecuador +593 7 840 574 +593 7 834 359 dsolis@etapa.com.ec
130 Ylva Sörman Nath S - 105 25 Stockholm Sweden +46 8 698 52 43 +46 8 698 56 42 Ylva.sorman.nath@sida.se
131 Nancy Spence SW 1Y 5HX London Great Britain + 44 20 77 47 64 61 + 44 20 77 47 65 49 n.spence@commonwealth.int
132 William Spence W9 1HY London Great Britain + 44 20 7289 49 74 + 44 870 124 48 59 rspence@idrc.ca
133 Kristin Spiling Johanssen 0030 Oslo Norway +47 22 24 20 70 +47 22 24 02 76 ksj@norad.no
134 Etienne Squilbin 1000 Brussels Belgium
135 Véronique Staes 1000 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 519 08 76 véronique.staes@diplobel.fed.be
136 Inge Stemmler 3512 BK Utrecht The Netherlands +31 30 233 26 69 +31 20 771 35 54 barterandtrade@hotmail.com
137 Yumiko Tanaka 162-8433 Tokyo Japan + 81 3 3269 38 51 + 81 3 3269 69 92 tanaka.yumiko@jica.go.jp
138 Bea Ten Tusscher 2594 AV Den Haag The Netherlands + 31 70 348 57 23 + 31 70 348 48 83 bm-ten.tusscher@minbuza.nl
139 Marceline Tiendrebeogo Ouagadouga Burkina Faso +226 36 09 79 +226 31 27 15
140 Ioannidis Timsteou Athens Greece +30 1 32 86 171 +30 1 32 86 270 chorenu-ioannidis.ebc@dos.gr

104
 First Name Name Function Working Place Address 1 Address 2
141 Twie Giok Tjoa Staffmember Vrouwen Alliantie Janskerkhof 1
142 Thi Khue Truong Vice-President Vietnam Women's Union 39 Hang Chuoi St
143 Reiko Tsushima Programme Analyst International Labour Organization 4 Route des Movillons
144 Karin Ulmer Aprodev Rue Joseph II
145 Franz Urlesberger Ministre Plén. Permanent Representation of Austria to the EU Expert on Social Affairs 30 Avenue de Cortenbergh
146 Annelies Van Bauwel BTC Belgian Technical Cooperation Hoogstraat 147
147 Martine Van Dooren Conseiller Général Ministry of Foreign Affairs Direction Stratégies Rue Brederode, 6
148 Marion Van Offelen Expert Gender, Gender Unit Ministry of Foreign Affairs Direction Générale de la Coopération Rue Brederode, 6
149 Bloeme Van Roemburg Wetenschappelijk Medewerkster Centrum voor Vrouwenstudies Universiteit Antwerpen (UIA) Universiteitsplein 1
150 Jan Vandemoortele Principal Adviser & Group Leader United Nations Development Programme Social Development Group One UN Plaza, room 0C1-2042
151 Virginia Vargas UNIFEM Andrean Region - Quito Flora Tristan Center Parque Hernan Velarde 42
152 Chris Verhaegen Focal Point UNO Bejin Conference Vrouw and Maatschappij - CVP Brusselsesteenweg, 8 70/1
153 Anna Vidinova Regional Programme Director for CE UNIFEM Grosslingova Street, 35
154 Elisabeth Villagomez UNIFEM Headquarters 304 East 45th Street
155 Ursula Von Gunten Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation Freiburgstr. 130
156 Micheline Voogt Senior Advisor Ministry of Foreign Affairs Director Multilateral Cooperation Rue Brederode, 6
157 Federal Ministry for Economic Co-operation and
Margareta Wenzel-Weckmann Development Friedrich-Ebert-Allee, 40
158 Sushila Zeitlyn Department for International development 94 Victoria Street

105
 First Name Name Postal Code City Country Telephone Fax e-mail
141 Twie Giok Tjoa 3512 BK Utrecht The Netherlands +31 30 233 26 69 +31 20 771 35 54 ttjoa@veouwenallentie.nl
142 Thi Khue Truong Hanoi Vietnam +84 4 97 38 58 +84 4 97 38 50 vn-bproject@hn.vnn.vn
143 Reiko Tsushima 1211 Geneva 22 Switzerland +41 22 799 72 64 +41 22 799 58 15
144 Karin Ulmer 1000 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 234 68 40 +32 2 231 14 13 karin@aprodev.net
145 Franz Urlesberger 1040 Bruxelles Belgium +32 2 234 51 42 +32 2 234 53 12 ingeborg.torchiani@bmaa.gv.at
146 Annelies Van Bauwel 1000 Brussels Belgium +32 2 505 37 85 +32 2 508 98 62 annelies.van.bauwel@mail.btcctb.org
147 Martine Van Dooren 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 519 08 18 + 32 2 519 06 83 martine.vandooren@diplobel.fed.be
148 Marion Van Offelen 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 519 07 45 + 32 2 519 06 83 marion.vanoffelen@diplobel.fed.be
149 Bloeme Van Roemburg 2610 Wilrijk Belgium +32 3 820 28 59 +32 3 820 28 86 bloeme.vanroemburg@uia.ac.be
150 Jan Vandemoortele 10017 New York United States of America + 1 212 906 58 62 + 1 212 906 58 57 jan.vandemoortele@undp.org
151 Virginia Vargas Lima 1 Perou +51 1 26 11 531 +51 1 43 39 500 vargas@amauta.rcp.net.pe
152 Chris Verhaegen 1860 Meise Belgium + 32 2 269 48 95 + 32 2 269 08 58 chris.verhaegen.meise@kmonet.be
153 Anna Vidinova 81109 Bratislava Slovakia + 421 2 593 37 160 + 421 2 593 37 171 anna.vidinova@undp.org
154 Elisabeth Villagomez NY 10017 New york United States of America +1 212 906 51 10 +1 212 906 63 36 elizabeth.villagomez@undp.org
155 Ursula Von Gunten 3003 Bern Switzerland +41 31 322 69 78 +41 31 324 87 41 ursula.vongunten@deza.admin.ch
156 Micheline Voogt 1000 Brussels Belgium + 32 2 519 07 02 + 32 2 519 05 70
157 Margareta Wenzel-Weckmann 53113 Bonn Germany + 49 228 535 37 41 + 49 228 535 47 41 wenzelwc@bmz.bund.de
158 Sushila Zeitlyn SWIE 5JC London Great Britain +44 207 917 68 06 +44 207 917 02 97 s-zeitlyn@dfid.gov.uk

106