3. Strengthening gender budgeting in Australia
This chapter examines the implementation of gender budgeting in Australia. It offers an assessment of strengths, challenges and gaps in relation to Australia’s strategic framework for gender budgeting, the tools of implementation and the enabling environment. It also provides recommendations on how Australia’s approach to gender budgeting can be further developed to ensure an impactful and enduring practice.
Governments increasingly realise that the budget process is a powerful tool for delivering on national policy goals. Given the “power of the purse”, dealing with horizontal policy objectives such as gender equality as part of the budget process offers an opportunity to influence government-wide policymaking and deliver on outcomes in a way that might not otherwise be feasible.
The social rationale for gender budgeting is well understood, but the economic and fiscal rationale for gender budgeting is also strong. Gender inequalities such as the gender employment gap and gender pay gaps bear large economic costs, particularly when considered in the context of current labour market shortages. Population ageing and low fertility rates are impacting the size of the workforce, and this has knock-on effects for both the future size of the economy and the health of public finances. Closing gender gaps offer the opportunity to help alleviate challenges relating to labour market shortages. Tapping into the potential of women workers and closing the gender gap that currently exists in relation to labour market participation and hours worked in Australia would raise real GDP per capita in 2060 by 10.1% (OECD, 2022[1]). Better allocations of women across occupations and economic sectors can help reduce wage gaps and further contribute to growth. There is also emerging evidence that greater gender equality in the workforce has positive benefits for productivity (Nicol, 2022[2]).
Gender budgeting is a key public governance tool which governments can use to encourage, identify, and fund measures which will be effective at closing gender gaps. It does not aim to create a separate budget for policies for women. Instead, it seeks to encourage proposals from departments and agencies that are aligned with the gender equality objectives of the government. Gender budgeting also seeks to strengthen the evidence base on how new policy proposals impact gender equality and encourage use of these insights in policy and budget decisions. The practice brings information to the fore that decision makers can use to help prioritise investments progressing gender equality.
The benefits of gender budgeting include:
An improved evidence base upon which resource allocations decisions can be made.
Improvements to the effectiveness of the budget in closing gender gaps.
Greater transparency on the impact of the budget on different groups across the population (OECD, 2023[3]).
This chapter looks at gender budgeting in Australia. It considers Australia’s background and history of gender budgeting and assesses current efforts around its reintroduction. It also provides recommendations on how Australia’s approach to gender budgeting can be optimised to ensure an impactful and enduring practice.
The Commonwealth Government of Australia pioneered gender budgeting globally, introducing it in the 1980s. The cornerstone of the Australian Government’s gender budgeting model was the publication of a Women’s Budget Statement.1 At its peak in comprehensiveness, the statement highlighted initiatives that advanced gender equality and the gender impacts of budget programmes, reported on progress towards objectives outlined in the National Agenda for Women through a range of gender equality indicators and included an analysis of revenue raising and taxation form a gender perspective (Sharp and Broomhill, 2013[4]; Australian Government, 1985[5]). Gender budget statements of varying style and content were introduced in all Australian states and territories for periods of time between 1985 and 1993 (Victorian Government, 1992[6]; Sharp and Broomhill, 2002, p. 27[7]) (Sharp and Broomhill, 2013, p. 3[4]).
Over subsequent years, however, the Australian Government’s Women’s Budget Statement came to be viewed as an exercise internal to the bureaucracy, and of little relevance to the women’s movement. Political and administrative championing of the statement diminished, and the document was dramatically downsized. The government ceased publication of the statement in 2014 and in its absence, the National Foundation for Australian Women (NFAW), a non-governmental organisation, began publishing a Gender Lens on the Budget providing analysis of the gender impact of revenue and expenditure measures; an exercise which continues to this day (National Foundation for Australian Women, 2022[8]).
Although the practice of gender budgeting in Australia ceased during this period, the novel approach to gender-responsive policymaking, gender budget analysis and monitoring and reporting against gender equality goals gained momentum internationally. The majority of OECD countries now practice gender budgeting (Figure 3.1), with the number of countries introducing gender budgeting measures almost doubling since 2016 (OECD, 2023[9]). This reflects a growing interest in using the budget process as a mechanism to progress high-level cross-cutting goals (using so-called “strategic budget initiatives”) as well as factors including the #MeToo social movement, the COVID-19 pandemic highlighting the starkness of gender inequalities in all areas of social and economic life, and greater recognition of the potential social, economic, and fiscal gains that can be achieved through closing gender gaps.
Source: OECD (2023[9]), Gender Budgeting in OECD Countries 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/647d546b-en.
As international momentum grew, gender budgeting measures began to be reintroduced in Australia at the Commonwealth Government level from 2018. Seeking to promote the economic security of women, the 2018-19 and 2019-20 Government Budgets included a Women’s Budget Snapshot, outlining a summary of budget provisions to improve women’s safety and security, financial security, and workforce participation (Hon. Kelly O’Dwyer, 2018[10]; Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2019[11]). The Cabinet Taskforce on Women’s Safety and Economic Security was established in 2021 and contributed to shaping new initiatives in the revamped Women’s Budget Statement, published alongside the 2021-22 and May 2022-23 Budgets, which included a more comprehensive report on budget measures impacting women, including analysis on the gendered impacts of COVID-19 (Australian Government, 2022[12]; Australian Government, 2021[13]; Australian Government, 2022[14]). The Statements, however, did not outline a strategic approach to address the drivers of inequality or measure progress on women’s economic security against the framework outlined in the 2020 Women’s Economic Security Statement (Australian Government, 2020[15]).
Going into the most recent election in May 2022, the current government made a commitment to using gender budgeting as a tool to progress gender equality outcomes (Hon. Katy Gallagher, 2022[16]; Hon. Anthony Albanese, PM, 2022[17]). The government’s October 2022-23 Women’s Budget Statement clearly indicated the intention to embed further gender budgeting measures in budgetary processes and decision making (Australian Government, 2022, p. 13[18]). Both the 2022-23 and the 2023-24 Statements included learnings from the GIA pilot led by the Office for Women, examining a selection of the government’s new policy proposals. The pilot will help inform the roll-out of GIA of all policies in future budgets and assist in the development of the most appropriate gender budgeting model for the Australian context (Australian Government, 2022, p. 13[18]; Karvelas, 2022[19]). This roll-out will occur in the latter half of 2023. The Budget 2023-24 Women’s Budget Statement set out that:
“The Government is expanding its gender budgeting approach. From 2023–24 MYEFO [Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook], gender response budgeting will be embedded across the budget processes, implementing the Government’s election commitment to reintroduce this important gender equality practice. All agencies will play a greater role in delivering gender equality outcomes through undertaking gender analysis and will be required to conduct gender impact assessments on policy proposals that meet a set of criteria. (Australian Government, 2023[20])”
The full roll-out of GIA to all policies in future budgets will be a powerful enabler in building a whole-of-government approach to promoting gender equality.
The OECD publication Designing and Implementing Gender Budgeting (2019) sets out a framework for an effective and enduring gender budgeting practice, based on the following elements:
strategic framework: the political commitment and governance arrangements for an enduring approach to gender budgeting, including a legal framework, institutional roles and responsibilities and national gender equality goals;
tools of implementation: the tools used to apply a “gender lens” at various stages of the budget process;
enabling environment: the supportive elements which help ensure a more effective gender budgeting practice, including guidance, capacity building and independent oversight mechanisms (Downes and Nicol, 2019[21]).
The remaining sections of this chapter present an assessment of the current state of play in Australia with regard to each of these elements, together with recommendations for the further introduction of gender budgeting measures in line with the OECD’s framework.
3.3.1. Strategic framework for gender budgeting
An effective strategic framework for gender budgeting outlines why it exists, what it aims to achieve and how it will be implemented. In assessing the adequacy of the current strategic framework for the introduction of gender budgeting in Australia, this section looks at the extent to which it strengthens the link between budgeting and key gender equality objectives, benefits from strong institutional arrangements and has political and legal underpinning.
Gender budgeting should create a strong link between the objectives in the National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality and the budget
Where gender budgeting is functioning effectively, it encourages new policy proposals from departments and agencies that are aligned with the gender equality objectives of the government. It also brings evidence to the budget process that allows decision makers to prioritise measures aligned with overall priorities in relation to gender equality.
The budget process in Australia is outlined in Figure 3.2. Budget decisions are made through the Expenditure Review Committee (ERC) of Cabinet. This is a committee of Cabinet responsible for examining all new policy proposals in light of the government's overall fiscal strategy, advising Cabinet on budget spending priorities and initiating reviews of individual ongoing programmes or initiatives. The ERC considers expenditure and revenue proposals both during and between budget updates. Decisions of the ERC require endorsement of the Cabinet.
The Prime Minister determines membership of each Cabinet Committee, including the ERC. Membership of the ERC currently consists of the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, the Treasurer, the Assistant Treasurer, the Minister for Finance, along with other selected portfolio ministers (typically larger spending portfolios).
Source: Australian Government, Department of Finance (2023[22]), “The Budget Process”, https://www.finance.gov.au/government/federal-budget/budget-process.
In terms of priority-setting, having a comprehensive and coherent framework outlining the higher-level priorities of the government ensures that budget planning remains focussed and rooted in political commitments set out by the government. Clear guidance on this, often seen through budget circulars from the central budgetary authority (in Australia’s case, the Department of Finance, the Treasury and PM&C each fulfil functions of the central budget authority) can be valuable in ensuring consistency of information presented as well as expectations on the criteria for considering new policy proposals across all parts of the government.
In Australia, each Minister is tasked by the Prime Minister with overarching priorities for their portfolio. Departments and agencies are cognisant of priorities set out by the Prime Minister on behalf of the Cabinet, together with election commitments and policy objectives in government strategies to consider when developing new policy proposals.
In this context, the inclusion of priorities on advancing gender equality in the Minister priorities, together with the new National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality, will be helpful in the short and medium term in encouraging new policy proposals that seek to address gender inequalities being put forward as part of the budget process. Transparency in relation to the priorities communicated by the Prime Minister to Ministers could also provide clarity for Australians on the broad goals and high-level priorities of the government, how they are being progressed and how they frame the budget process. Canada, for example, begun publishing their equivalent – Mandate Letters – in 2015 as part of a greater push towards results and delivery (see Box 3.1).
The Government of Canada sets out its high-level commitments in individual Mandate Letters, addressed from the Prime Minister to each minister, outlining overall expectations as well as more specific policy objectives. In the Letters, each Minister is mandated to ensure that GBA Plus is performed to the expected standard in all decision-making documents, including budget proposals from their departments. The Letters direct each minister to track and regularly report on progress against their commitments, assess the effectiveness of ongoing work, and invest resources to achieve results for Canadians in relation to strategic priorities. Consistent with the government’s emphasis upon the principles of open and transparent government, these documents have been public since 2016.
Progress against delivering these commitments is highlighted in a Mandate Letter Tracker that is updated internally. The Results and Delivery Unit at the Privy Council Office led this work, providing a status report on all commitments made by the Prime Minister, including those relating to GBA Plus. Commitments are aligned under one of seven overarching priorities for government which are for the most part drawn from the Speech from the Throne which sets out the government’s agenda at the start of each parliamentary session. In their most recent release (2021), all mandate letters specify a commitment to ensuring that public policies are informed and developed through an intersectional lens, including applying frameworks such as GBA Plus and the quality of life indicators in decision making.
Source: OECD (2018[23]), Gender Equality in Canada: Mainstreaming, Governance and Budgeting, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264301108-en.
The Department of Finance in Australia supports the Treasurer and the Minister for Finance to maintain a set of rules and guiding objectives which underpin and govern the budget process and are the equivalent to a budget circular in other OECD countries. The rules set out guidance for departments developing new policy proposals, support government decision-making processes and are closely guided by the government’s overarching Fiscal Strategy. To support the roll-out and sustainability of gender budgeting, it is important that this guidance – and what it outlines in relation to gender budgeting – continues to evolve as the approach to gender budgeting in Australia at the Commonwealth level is strengthened. To further reinforce the link between budget decision making and the objectives set out in the new National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality, it would be beneficial for the ERC to build and maintain an inventory of new policy proposals coming forward which have the potential to make significant progress in relation to each of the objectives in the Strategy. This could be facilitated through gender budget tagging (see forthcoming section on gender budget tagging). Information gleaned through this exercise will help decision makers on the ERC ensure that budget measures being taken forward are sufficient to progress the high-level priorities of the government.
Establish a Gender Budgeting Steering Group to lead gender budgeting efforts
For the majority of OECD countries, the central budget authority (CBA) has the lead role in gender budgeting (OECD, 2023[9]). The power that the CBA has to influence what information is provided alongside new policy proposals, and the scope that it has to influence what information is considered as part of budget decision making, makes the CBA an important institutional lead.
The nature of the budget process in Australia means that there is not one CBA, but three separate central agencies that have powerful and unique roles in the budget process: the Department of Finance, the Treasury, and PM&C. The principal roles of each of these stakeholders in the budget process is highlighted in Table 3.1.
The Office for Women has so far led the overall efforts of the Australian Government on gender budgeting. It has benefited from the support of the Treasury who has the lead role in publishing the Women’s Budget Statement alongside the budget.
Although gender budgeting is currently being implemented on a limited scale and on a pilot basis, these efforts are already putting a strain on the limited resources of the Office for Women. The Office for Women does not have the capacity, nor the influence, to roll-out gender budgeting more broadly across government. The success of gender budgeting in the medium-long term relies on the central budget authorities joining forces with the Office for Women in its implementation. This corresponds to a greater role for the Treasury and the Department of Finance and aligns with OECD Best Practice (OECD, 2023[3]). It may be that the resourcing of these central budget authorities needs to be revisited in order to facilitate this.
Where multiple government actors share responsibility for implementing reforms, there is always the danger that efforts are duplicative or uncoordinated. The roles of the Office for Women and the central budget authorities in taking forward gender budgeting will need to be clearly defined so as to avoid this arising and ensure smooth and effective functioning.
A new institutional platform can also support co-ordination and collaboration between the Office for Women and the central agencies on gender budgeting. The Gender Data Steering Group in Australia could be a useful structure to emulate for this purpose. A Gender Budgeting Steering Group would naturally be convened by the Office for Women, with representatives from each of the central agencies (see Figure 3.3). High-level representation, e.g., Deputy Secretary level, would be commensurate with the political importance of the initiative. Its business would include setting out an action plan for the implementation of gender budgeting, taking forward legislative changes to give gender budgeting legal underpinning, co-ordinating on guidance material, developing a framework for measuring the impact of gender budgeting, etc. This type of inter-agency group to facilitate co-ordination for gender budgeting exists in many OECD countries (30% of countries practising gender budgeting) including Belgium, Canada, Spain, Ireland, Israel, Korea, and Sweden (OECD, 2023[9]).
Source: Developed by OECD authors.
As convenor of the Gender Budgeting Steering Group, the Office for Women should be responsible for driving collaboration and positive engagement with gender budgeting processes across the central agencies, as well as the APS as a whole. It will co-ordinate inputs from a range of government actors to ensure the effective roll-out and implementation of gender budgeting.
The Treasury and Department of Finance will have important lead roles in relation to incorporating gender budgeting into budget guidance documents and ensuring that new gender budgeting requirements are fulfilled. Given their roles in relation to setting out the rules and guiding objectives underpinning the budget process, they can continue to work with the Office for Women on updating guidance relating to gender budgeting. Continuing to evolve the guidance will be central to growing the role of gender budgeting in coming years (see further discussion on guidance in Section 3.3.3 on the enabling environment).
In addition, the Agency Advice Units in the Department of Finance have a role in reviewing new policy proposals, particularly focusing on the expenditure and policy context the proposal is bringing forward. As requirements in relation to gender budgeting expand, it would make sense that the review function of the Agency Advice Units expand to include quality checks on this new information. While the Office for Women could provide support to the Agency Advice Units in this expanded role in the short term, it is envisaged that their supporting role will diminish over time as this capacity is built up within the Department of Finance.
The Treasury’s leadership is important in three key areas. First, in relation to its role in developing revenue policy, the revenue policy teams will be responsible for undertaking GIAs to inform the development of new revenue policy proposals. In relation to its role in preparing the budget documentation, the Treasury will continue to have responsibility for preparing the Women’s Budget Statement and developing its contents over time. Finally, the Treasury has been incorporating a gender lens into a number of key publications. For example, the 2022-23 Tax Expenditures and Insights Statement included gender disaggregated data for the first time (Australian Government, 2023[25]). The application of a gender lens to its broader work, including fiscal policy setting, will continue to be important. For example, the integration of a gender perspective to the Intergenerational Report could help identify how tax and welfare policy will impact gender equality over time.
The envisaged roles of all key stakeholders in relation to gender budgeting, are summarised in Table 3.2.
All lead agencies for gender budgeting – including the Office for Women – will need sight of new policy proposals being submitted to the ERC so they can raise concerns about their impact on gender equality objectives, if needed, through the ERC process. To support this, the Minister for Women should become a permanent member of the ERC. This guarantees that the Office for Women have sight of all proposals tabled at the ERC, regardless of its long-term institutional position.
A “hub and spoke” model across government to support the implementation of gender budgeting
The institutional arrangements for gender budgeting will provide important foundations for its success. Of particular importance is clarity around the leadership arrangements for gender budgeting, and consideration of how best to build and maintain gender budgeting expertise across government departments and agencies.
Under the envisaged role for policy officers across departments and agencies, these officials will have responsibility for ensuring that the policies they develop are aligned with, and helping to further, the governments gender equality objectives. In-house experts who have clarity on the requirements relating to gender budgeting and can provide advice and on its implementation, can support policy-officers in fulfilling this role.
The nature of the budget process in Australia means that there is not one CBA, but three separate central agencies that have powerful and unique roles in the budget process: the Department of Finance, the Treasury, and PM&C. As highlighted in Chapter 2, instigating “gender champions” and gender focal points in each government agency and department are one option for to facilitating and guiding successful implementation of GIA and gender budgeting. This development would also align with the Australian Public Service Gender Equality Strategy 2021-26 that sets out that agencies should have dedicated resources in place to support their work on gender equality (Australian Government, 2022[26]).
Gender focal points can have a key role in undertaking the first validation of GIA accompanying new policy proposals, ensuring their quality and consistency. The gender focal points will work closely with the Agency Advice Units in the Department of Finance to ensure that the GIA accompanying new policy proposals are completed in an accurate and timely manner. The gender focal points may at times need to draw on the expertise of the Office for Women, when dealing with particularly challenging analysis. Where needed, the Office for Women can also provide specialist advice and training to support gender focal points in implementing their role. This “hub and spoke” proposal – presented in Chapter 2 – is in line with the institutional arrangements in place for gender budgeting in Canada (see Box 3.2).
Canada introduced gender budgeting in 2016 and the Canadian Gender Budgeting Act 2018 codified the requirement to provide information on the gender and diversity impact of all new budget measures described in the budget. In addition, in the Ministerial Mandate Letters, each Minister is mandated to ensure that GBA Plus is performed to the expected standard in all decision-making documents, including budget proposals from their departments. Ministers must approve their department’s Budget proposal, including the GBA Plus of the proposal.
A hub and spoke institutional model aids in the implementation of the requirements of the Act and the Ministerial Mandate Letters. This model includes the establishment of gender focal points within each department to help guide and support policymakers in undertaking GBA Plus analysis for all budget proposals. These gender focal points are the central mechanism responsible for bringing consistency and rigour to GBA Plus application across government. They provide leadership in terms of implementing agreed approaches and performing a first challenge function in relation to the analysis to ensure it is exercised as consistently as possible.
Once the budget proposal is submitted to the Department of Finance, various policy teams in the department perform a second challenge function on the mandatory GBA Plus annex accompanying budget proposals, checking all relevant documentation to ensure that it has been undertaken to a good standard. At any point in the process, gender focal points or the Department of Finance may refer to Women and Gender Equality Canada (WAGE) for specialist advice.
To support this hub and spoke institutional model, the Department of Finance created an internal GBA Plus Advisory Committee at the executive level. This was partly in recognition of both the enlarged role GBA Plus would need to play in the budget process and the importance of having participants who would play a leadership role within their branches. The Committee’s business includes consideration of items such as tools to support gender budgeting, the reporting format of GBA Plus in budget documents, applicable case studies and approaches to common issues.
Source: Developed by OECD authors.
Provide legal underpinning for gender budgeting to ensure an enduring practice
Political support for gender budgeting is strong within the government. This will help drive engagement from across government as gender budgeting is further strengthened, particularly among departments and agencies. It also creates consensus across government regarding the reforms.
While political leadership is important in the initial years, legal foundations help ensure the sustainability of gender budgeting in the longer term (OECD, 2023[3]). The discontinuation of initial gender budgeting measures in Australia introduced in the 1980s illustrates the challenges in ensuring continued momentum for gender budgeting across successive governments. Legislation that is fully tested and debated in parliament will help embed gender budgeting as a valued and more enduring feature of public policymaking and insulate it, as far as possible, from fluctuations arising from the economic or political environment (Downes and Nicol, 2019[21]). Ensuring that gender budgeting is underpinned by legislation will also help Australia align with OECD Best Practices (OECD, 2023[3]).
In Australia, the Charter of Budget Honesty Act 1998 provides a legal framework for the conduct of government fiscal policy. Details of the Charter are shown in Box 3.3. The Charter also sets out the timing for the public release and tabling of fiscal strategy statements and other annual government reports. The amendment of the Charter to include a requirement for the Women’s Budget Statement to be prepared annually by the Treasury would cement its place as a credible and enduring Budget publication.
The Australian Charter of Budget Honesty was enacted into law in 1998 and was intended to help entrench sound and transparent fiscal policies and make it difficult for future governments to deviate from them. The Charter provides a comprehensive legal framework for the formulation and conduct of fiscal policy in general.
The provisions of the Charter can be divided into three groups:
1. A regime for setting fiscal objectives. Setting fiscal objectives is a two-step process involving certain legislated “Principles of Sound Fiscal Management” and an annual Fiscal Strategy Statement prepared by the government. The Principles of Sound Fiscal Management are principles-based in the legislation and do not mandate any specific fiscal targets. The Statement in turn provides a benchmark for evaluating the government’s fiscal policy performance. This Statement is published as part of the budget documentation.
2. An extensive system of fiscal reporting to monitor the consistency of the government’s fiscal actions with its stated fiscal objectives. The reports are the Economic and Fiscal Outlook released at the time of the budget, the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook released approximately six months after the budget, and the Final Budget Outcome Report released three months after the end of the fiscal year. In addition, the Charter requires an Intergenerational Report assessing the long-term sustainability of government policies at least every five years.
3. Arrangements for reporting and policy costings around elections. The Charter requires a Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook to be presented within ten days of an election being called. The Charter also sets out general rules around the costing of election commitments.
Source: (Australian Government, 2023[24]) and (Blondal, 2008[27]).
Codifying roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders with regard to gender budgeting in legislation could also help provide clarity on how roles are delineated between different government actors and ensure the co-operation of key stakeholders. This would include the requirement for departments and agencies to provide GIAs alongside new policy proposals and the different roles of each of the central agencies. Although these elements could be packaged in a gender budgeting law, as is the case in Canada for example, given the pivot towards a whole-of-government approach to promoting gender equality it could be more appropriate to set these out in a broader piece of legislation on gender equality or gender mainstreaming (see earlier discussion in Chapter 2), and for the core elements relevant to budgeting to be set out in revisions to the Charter of Budget Honesty.
3.3.2. Tools of implementation
Gender budgeting tools are used to systematically embed gender considerations within the overall context of the planning and budget process. Some of the most common tools include: requiring gender information to accompany new policy proposals; gender dimension in performance setting; gender budget tagging; gender impact assessment (GIA); and distributional assessments of tax and welfare measures by gender (see Figure 3.4).
Source: OECD (2023[9]), Gender Budgeting in OECD Countries 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/647d546b-en.
Across OECD countries, there is no “one-size-fits-all” approach to gender budgeting. Instead, countries tend to select gender budgeting tools that build on the strengths of the existing budget framework and that would function in the context of existing capacities. This section looks at the planned approach to gender budgeting in Australia and how it might be further developed and strengthened in the context of the unique nature of the Australian budgetary framework.
Gender impact assessment as a core tool of gender budgeting
The planned approach to gender budgeting in Australia centres around the use of GIAs during the budget process. GIAs provide useful insights on how new policy proposals tabled as part of the budget impact gender equality and facilitate gender equality objectives to be taken into account in resource allocation. Australia is not alone in proposing to instigate GIA as the core tool of their gender budgeting approach. In 2022, five OECD countries use GIAs as a central tool of gender budgeting, specifying that GIAs must accompany all new budget proposals (Austria, Canada, Iceland, Spain, and Sweden). A further six OECD countries specify that GIAs must be undertaken for selected budget measures (Chile, Germany, Ireland, Norway, New Zealand2, and Portugal) (OECD, 2023[9]). Examples of how GIAs are used as a tool of gender budgeting in select OECD countries are shown in Box 3.4.
Sweden
The Swedish Government introduced gender budgeting as a strategic tool in the budget process in 2014. The Ministry of Finance issues specific instructions on gender budgeting in its yearly budget circular. These instructions specify that an ex ante GIA is mandatory at the initial drafting stage of reforms and policy proposals. If a budget proposal is deemed to have a possible impact on gender equality, the GIA must be presented to the Ministry of Finance alongside the budget proposal. The budget circular also calls for a GIA when policy results are presented in the Budget Bill. Additionally, a GIA is required when the government presents new policy to the Parliament in the Budget Bill.
A specific and tailor-made methodology has been developed to support the implementation of GIA in Sweden and the Gender Equality Division conducts trainings on gender budgeting across the government administration.
Spain
The Spanish Government implemented gender budgeting in 2008, but recently introduced a new “3Rs methodology” which includes three stages of analysis: Reality, Representation, and Resources – Results. As part of the Resources – Results stage, ministerial departments must submit reports to the Secretariat of State for Budget and Expenditure analysing the gender impact of their spending programmes.
A working group comprising representatives of the Ministry of Equality, the Secretariat of State for Budgets and Expenditure, the Directorate General for Budgets and the Directorate General for Personnel Costs draws on the GIAs of ministerial departments to prepare the final draft of the Gender Impact Report, which accompanies the preliminary draft of the General State Budget Law.
Source: OECD (2023[9]), Gender Budgeting in OECD Countries 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/647d546b-en.
As explained in Chapter 2, the Office for Women conducted a GIA pilot, where selected gender equality issues were analysed as a part of the October 2022-23 Budget and the 2023-24 Budget. High-level summaries of GIAs conducted as part of the pilot were included in the Women’s Budget Statements presented alongside the budgets. The Office for Women was the key driver of the work undertaken in the pilot phase, identifying relevant issues, and partnering with lead agencies on the analysis of the new policy proposals.
The 2023-24 Budget also set out that the government will be expanding its approach to gender budgeting. As from the 2023-24 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook (MYEFO) all agencies will be required to conduct GIA on policy proposals that meet a set of criteria.
The criteria to identify gender impact assessments have been designed to capture proposals that can have a significant impact on gender equality. The criteria will also consider factors like:
the total value of the proposal being 250 million AUD or more over the forwards;
the proposal targets cohorts of people who can be typically disadvantaged;
the proposal establishes a National Partnership Agreement or like agreement.
Agencies will be required to self-assess against the criteria. Where a proposal does not meet the criteria for a detailed gender impact assessment, agencies will still apply preliminary gender analysis as part of their policy design (Australian Government, 2023[20]).
As GIAs are further rolled out as a tool of gender mainstreaming and gender budgeting in Australia, policy managers and external budget teams across the APS will need to be provided with relevant training to fulfil these new requirements. Short-term funding for capability building within the APS has been secured and this will help agencies in developing the capacity to provide GIA alongside new policy proposals in forthcoming budget cycles. As highlighted in Chapter 1, the success of this process will depend on legislation making GIA a mandatory part of the policymaking and budget processes, as well as the development of clear guidance, templates and training for departments and agencies. The GIA should also be centrally validated to ensure quality control.
In the short term, as the new requirements bed in, Australia may need to revisit and revise its guidelines, or “screening criteria”, if they are not operating as intended. A well-functioning system will ensure that budget measures with gender impacts are accompanied by good quality gender analysis. The most effort should be focussed on those measures with the most considerable gender impacts. Furthermore, a brief commentary explaining why gender equality is not considered relevant to a proposal should be required, allowing for scrutiny of the prioritisation by the central agencies.
Other OECD countries such as Sweden and Belgium also use “screening criteria” to determine which budget measures should be accompanied by a GIA (see Box 3.5).
Sweden
BUDGe is a budgeting tool by the Swedish Government to determine whether a gender perspective is relevant to a draft budget proposal. If it is, then it is a requirement that gender analysis is conducted in relation to the proposal. BUDGe also provides guidance on the method for conducting a gender analysis and accounting for the proposal’s impact on gender equality. The BUDGe tool consists of five steps, with each based on a question:
1. Is gender equality relevant to the proposal? Does the proposal have a direct or indirect impact on individuals or groups of people? If so, a gender perspective is relevant.
2. In what way is gender equality relevant to the proposal? Identifies how gender equality is relevant to the proposal and how the proposal contributes to gender equality. For example, if it contributes to any gender equality goals in the area in question.
3. What conclusions can you draw regarding the conditions and circumstances of women and men, girls, and boys in the proposal? Includes a detailed analysis of relevant documentation, such as inquiry reports, and other knowledge bases.
4. What gender patterns emerge and what implications does the proposal have for gender equality? Captures the consequences the proposal has for women and men, girls and boys. Also describes the proposal’s consequences for the specific gender equality goals in the area in question.
5. Which alternative proposals can better promote gender equality? Investigate alternative solutions to see whether the proposal can be designed so that it can contribute to improved gender equality.
Belgium
In Belgium, all budgetary allocations/credit lines of the Federal Public Services have to undergo a gender screening and need to be attributed one of 3 categories based on the question of whether they present a gender perspective or not:
Category 1: concerns internal functioning or otherwise does not contain a gender perspective
Category 2: aims to specifically achieve equality between men and women
Category 3: concerns a public policy and has a gender perspective
For those budgetary proposals in Category 1, no further information is needed in relation to gender budgeting. For those budgetary proposals specifically aiming to achieve equality between men and women (Category 2), a gender note - provided by the Institute for the Equality of Women and Men - must be completed and attached to the proposal. For those budgetary proposals where a gender perspective is identified (Category 3), a “gender comment” has to added to the general justification for that budgetary allocation. This gender comment needs to explain how a gender perspective will be taken into account when the actions financed by the budgetary allocation will be executed.
The gender notes and the information provided in the budgetary forms of the various administrations will be integrated in the draft of the Belgian federal budget by the Federal Public Service Budget and Management Control.
Source: (Government Offices of Sweden, 2021[28]) and (Belgian Institute for the Equality of Women and Men, 2010[29]).
An important aspect for GIAs accompanying new policy proposals in Australia is that they capture the gender impacts associated with the new budget proposal as well as related “offsets”. Reductions or reprioritisations in existing expenditure are required to be identified to provide offsets for new spending proposals. The GIA pilot has not prioritised assessment of these in analysis undertaken to date. However, reductions in public spending can potentially have an impact on gender equality and it is therefore beneficial for the public service to build a GIA model where all new policy proposals include a GIA of both the new policy proposal and the corresponding offsets in order to examine the full impact of budget decisions.
Highlighting any issues brought to light through the GIA process on the strategic briefing provided to ERC in relation to each budget measure (in the advice provided by the central agencies relating to budget measures) and ensuring they are subsequently addressed in policy redesign will ensure GIA results are considered in budget decision making. This also increases the likelihood of GIA being undertaken as a serious and credible analytical exercise, particularly if it entails any relevant budget measures without a satisfactory GIA, or with negative impacts on gender equality that have not been addressed, being rejected from consideration by the ERC.
Gender budget tagging to link budget measures to the National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality
Budget tagging is a tool that can be used to help identify budget measures that will help make a significant contribution towards high-level gender objectives. When undertaken effectively, it can help strengthen the link between budgeting and high-level priorities. It gives insight into the policy action being taken to progress these objectives, and in some circumstances, can also help identify policy action that may be detrimental to progress. This information can be used internally to help support better budget decision making and externally to facilitate greater transparency and oversight. An example of an effective gender budget tagging system is provided by Colombia (Box 3.6).
Colombia undertakes gender budget tagging using a “budget tracer for women’s equity”, which identifies public funds being used to support women’s equity to demonstrate how much of the budget is allocated to the promotion of gender objectives across different areas and levels of government. In the first stage of the process the user identifies actions, programmes or policies that help support women’s equity. In the second stage the user identifies the resources associated with the activities identified in the first stage and their source of financing. In the third and final stage users identify the specific objective that these resources are targeted towards.
The budget tracer is the core gender budgeting tool used in Colombia. There is a clear methodology in place with effective alignment between the categories in the tracer and the gender equality goals in the National Policy on Gender Equality. Each year, the Budget Bill includes an Annex with information from the budget tracer on spending targeted towards women’s equity. Overall, use of the tracer has raised awareness both inside and outside of government in relation to actions that are being taken to help close gender gaps.
Source: OECD (2023[30]), OECD Review of Gender Equality in Colombia, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a559fc5e-en.
As part of the October 2022-23 Budget in Australia, departments and agencies were asked to provide high-level information on the expected impact of new policy proposals on gender equality, akin to a “tagging” exercise. This initial tagging exercise can be built upon to help strengthen the link between the budget and the forthcoming National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality. Tagging each new budget proposal that has the potential to make significant progress in relation to one of the gender objectives in the Strategy will provide the ERC with useful information on where policy action is being taken, and where there may be gaps.
A similar approach is adopted in Canada where the Department of Finance keeps an inventory of new policy proposals that aim to make progress in each of the six key areas in its Gender Results Framework.3 This information is used by Ministers to help inform budget decisions and it is also presented in the Impacts Report accompanying the federal budget of Canada, aiming to increase transparency and accountability in relation to government action being taken to progress the areas highlighted in the Framework.
Tagging is usually validated by an entity with necessary gender expertise and access to all relevant documents. The Office for Women undertook a validation exercise of the gender budget tagging undertaken for the October 2022-23 Budget, revisiting the classifications made by departments and agencies after the event. This analysis highlighted some differences in assessments undertaken by the Office for Women and departments and agencies. Most often the difference lay in the department or agency indicating that a measure was gender neutral when the Office for Women considered that there was likely a gender impact. The exercise provided important insights for future years, illustrating the need for capacity building concerning the gender impact of policy across government departments and agencies and the importance of secondary validation in relation to tags given to new policy proposals. The Department of Finance can provide this important secondary validation role as part of its broader checks in relation to the information accompanying new policy proposals. The treatment of gender information in the same way as other information required to accompany budget measures will signal to the departments and agencies that this analysis is taken seriously by all the central budget authorities.
Another key lesson from the validation exercise undertaken by the Office for Women was that – without access to central spreadsheets of budget measures – collation of tagging information is a lengthy process, requiring manual input of information and cross-checking. The integration of tagging functionality within the IT system used for budget submissions can greatly facilitate gender budget tagging and analysis of the results, both in the short and long term, giving an overview of how the budget aligns with gender priorities. In line with the Australian Government’s increasing focus on strengthening the link between budgeting and high-level strategic priorities, a number of OECD countries have recently made investments in digital solutions for budget tagging. Examples from Iceland, Ireland and Spain are provided in Box 3.7.
Iceland
In the context of implementing performance budgeting, Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) budgeting and gender budgeting, Iceland is undergoing revisions to its central budget system and developing a tailor-made IT system with a tagging module. The aim is that during the budget preparation process, ministries identify how each area of expenditure is related to a government priority (e.g., SDGs, gender specific targets). This will enable the Ministry of Finance to aggregate information and assess overall links between the budget and different crosscutting priorities.
In the same IT system, the budget submission form currently includes a field for the result of a GIA, where line ministries can choose between the following options:
There is also a text box for further details of the GIA. The inputs are reviewed by the Ministry of Finance, who may change the GIA results after consulting with the submitting ministry.
Exporting the data from the budgeting system facilitates further analysis, where statistics can easily be generated, for example, on the percentage of measures accompanied by a GIA or percentage of measures that promote gender equality. This can both be done by number of measures or value of measures. The results of the analysis are provided to the Ministerial Committee on Public Finances and subsequently the Cabinet, providing high-level summary information on GIAs to inform final budget decision making. Results are also published in the Budget Bill along with a summary of key findings from the GIAs.
Ireland
Ireland has been actively reforming its budgetary system in recent decades and strengthening its performance orientation by introducing performance budgeting, and more recently green budgeting, equality budgeting, well-being budgeting and SDG budgeting. As a next step, Ireland intends to use budget tagging to consolidate different information into the existing framework and give greater visibility around budgetary commitments linked to crosscutting priorities. To facilitate this, Ireland is adding tagging functionality to its “e-estimates” IT system. Functionalities being considered include:
Linking assigned tags to the existing performance targets and budget lines.
Aggregating information tagged under sub-tags (e.g., SDG 5) into the high-level tags (i.e., green, equality, well-being, and SDGs).
The provision of summary information in dashboards that include various filters to allow for analysis of information from different angles.
The ability to enter comments to document the rationale for any changes.
Spain
Spain introduced gender budgeting in 2008. A central element of the practice of gender budgeting in Spain is the production of a cross-cutting budget report summarising the impact of budget measures on gender equality. It more recent years, Spain has introduced new cross-cutting budget reports relating to families and children, the SDGs and climate. To support the production of these reports, the Spanish Government developed a new IT tool with functionality to link budget measures with different cross-cutting priorities.
When submitting a budget proposal using the tool, departments are required to provide information on whether the measure will impact any of the government’s cross-cutting targets. They are asked to justify why they have linked their budget measure to a specific target through identifying 4-5 priority actions or plans which demonstrate how these allocations will progress gender equality outcomes.
Information from the tool is used by the Ministry of Finance to create its cross-cutting budget reports relating to different priorities. Summary data is also presented on the Ministry’s website, using Power BI. This helps contribute towards the government’s broader push towards greater budget transparency. It enables citizens to better-understand how the government is directing public resources and the impact of these choices on high-level goals, such as gender equality.
Source: Developed by OECD authors.
Use the strategic briefings provided to the ERC to highlight the gender impacts of new policy proposals and support budget decision making
In the Commonwealth Government of Australia, each budget submission to the ERC is accompanied by a strategic briefing providing summary information on the new budget proposal, drawing on information regarding the proposal itself as well as analysis presented alongside it. The strategic briefing incorporates information on the impact of the new policy proposal in different areas, for example, regulatory, regional, legal and financial impacts. These strategic briefings are the ideal platform to highlight the findings of GIAs and bring them to the attention of decision makers during the budget process.
Through strategic briefing products, central agencies will have a responsibility to ensure that key issues brought to the fore (or omitted) through GIAs are discussed when budget decisions are taken at the ERC. Given the proposed joint leadership arrangement for gender budgeting, any central agency should be able to raise concerns regarding the gender impact of new policy proposals. Each agency may raise concerns brought to light through the review processes that their policy teams undertake in relation to new policy proposals.
Further develop the Women’s Budget Statement as a tool of accountability and transparency in relation to gender budgeting
The Women’s Budget Statement has a long history in the Australian Commonwealth but the most recent publications accompanying the October 2022-23 Budget and the 2023-24 Budget represented a fresh approach. These Statements focussed on drawing out key statistics relating to some of the main issues for gender equality and providing a qualitative discussion, as well as presenting key findings from the GIA pilot. This helped demonstrate the main gender disparities in these areas, as well as the government’s response to these disparities and budget measures aiming to address them. Together, the different components of these Women’s Budget Statements provided a valuable overview of some of the most pressing gender equality challenges Australia is faced with, along with the pathway the government is taking to tackle them.
Gender budget statements are a key tool of gender budgeting. Over three quarters of OECD countries practising gender budgeting (78%) provide some sort of information on gender equality alongside the annual budget (OECD, 2023[9]). Gender budget statements support stakeholders, such as parliament and citizens, in understanding whether the budget is progressing gender equality goals, helping inform a richer debate on budget choices.
The Commonwealth Government’s Women’s Budget Statement can be strengthened over time as gender budgeting becomes further embedded as a practice in the APS, allowing for the evolution required for the tool to continue being the central element of Australia’s approach to gender budgeting. There are several possibilities for the Treasury in further developing the Women’s Budget Statement. Firstly, it will be a logical platform for reporting on progress towards gender equality objectives set out in the new National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality. Given that outcome indicators are generally slow moving, it is recommended to also include some metrics that can demonstrate tangible short-term results, such as output indicators or progress in policy implementation. Use of information generated from budget tagging also presents an opportunity to highlight measures in the budget that help address each of the objectives set out in the Strategy. Secondly, including summary information from GIAs undertaken in relation to new budget measures would provide information on the anticipated gender impacts of measures, as well as information on any mitigation measures that have been put in place to limit or counter negative impacts. Although this would require the timely compilation and communication of gender analysis accompanying budget measures, doing so would increase transparency and accountability and align the contents of the Women’s Budget Statement in Australia with similar publications across OECD countries (see Figure 3.5).
Source: OECD (2023[9]), Gender Budgeting in OECD Countries 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/647d546b-en.
To make summary information on each policy measure easily accessible, the Treasury may consider representing the findings visually, e.g., using infographics or pictograms. This can facilitate engagement from key stakeholders such as parliamentarians and civil society on the information presented. The Statement on Gender and Diversity in Canada provides a good practice example (see Box 3.8).
The Government of Canada’s Statement on Gender and Diversity (previously the Gender Report) includes an Impacts Report, which leverages GBA Plus and Canada’s Quality of Life Framework to provide a summary of the impacts on Canadians for each new measure.. The first part of the Impacts Report showcases budget measures that are expected to advance each of the six pillars under the Gender Results Framework, while the remaining part of the report includes a summary of the gender and diversity impacts for each new budget measure, ordered according to its corresponding chapter in the budget. Summaries of impacts are based on the GBA Plus information submitted with budget proposals. In addition, since the introduction of the Quality of Life framework in Budget 2021, the information extends beyond who is most affected, to also describe the nature of these impacts at a high level. Pictograms are used to communicate key summary information in a simple and uniform way.
Source: Government of Canada (2023[31]), 2023 Budget: Statement and Impacts Report on Gender, Diversity, and Quality of Life, https://www.budget.canada.ca/2023/report-rapport/gdql-egdqv-01-en.html.
Lastly, the Women’s Budget Statement could provide a venue for reporting on the progress of implementing gender budgeting and its impact. This may include information on milestones reached as well as indicators for the quantity and quality of gender budgeting outputs (see forthcoming section on Developing a framework to measure the impact of gender budgeting).
Integrate a gender dimension to a strengthened evaluation process
Applying gender budgeting tools only to new budget measures risks creating a gap in terms of understanding the gender impact of baseline expenditures. In Australia, at the Commonwealth level, only about 25% of government expenditure is authorised by the annual appropriation bills. The remaining 75% is authorised by what are referred to as special appropriation bills. This type of bill appropriates funds for a specified purpose, such as a particular project or programme (Parliament of Australia, 2023[32]). Although the majority of the expenditures are non-discretionary, there are often some discretionary elements that may be adjusted, such as programme design or service delivery. Understanding the impact of baseline spending on gender equality would highlight challenges that could be addressed with changes to current programmes or with new initiatives. Examples of different approaches to analysis of baseline expenditure are provided in Box 3.9. In the Australian context, the gender impact of baseline spend may be identified through adding a gender lens to regular monitoring and evaluation processes.
It is worth noting that the Australian Government has committed to strengthening the culture of evaluation in the APS with funding in the October 2022–23 Budget intended to help identify priority areas for improvement and support reinvestment in APS capability, including best-practice programme development, evaluation and delivery (Australian Government, 2022[33]). This process presents an opportunity to implement gender analysis of baseline spending through an updated evaluation framework or programme.
Canada
The Canadian Gender Budgeting Act (2018) also prescribes that the President of the Treasury Board must annually make available to the public analysis of the impacts of existing Government of Canada expenditure programmes on gender and diversity. Federal organisations report annually on the impacts of programmes on gender and diversity in a GBA Plus Supplementary Information Table as part of their Departmental Results Reports. For each departmental programme, target population and key impacts are described. GBA Plus impacts are identified based on indicators relevant to the government programme. Treasury Board Secretariat releases a webpage highlighting key programme impacts reported.
Iceland
In the absence of regular programme performance evaluation in Iceland, a separate process for assessing the gender impact of baseline spending was developed. Gender analysis of selected existing programmes was conducted on a pilot basis during the initial phase of implementing gender budgeting. Each ministry would choose one or two programmes or policies and perform an in-depth analysis of their gender impact. The findings were published in the annual Budget Bill. As of 2019, a baseline report has been published annually in which gender and equality perspectives in each policy area are mapped and gender impact of selected government policies or programmes within the policy areas assessed. The findings inform strategic planning as well as all gender mainstreaming initiatives, including GIA of budget proposals.
Source: (Government of Canada, 2023[34]) and (Government of Iceland, 2022[35]).
Integrate a gender dimension to planning, performance setting and reporting
Planning and performance frameworks that are linked to the budgeting process can strengthen the link between national priorities and spending decisions. The integration of a gender lens to performance setting is the most common tool of gender budgeting across OECD countries (implemented by 52% of countries practicing gender budgeting in 2022 (OECD, 2023[9]). Countries have applied different approaches in developing and enhancing their performance framework and similarly there have been different ways in which a gender lens has been incorporated. For example, in Austria’s Annual Budget Statement up to five outcome objectives are defined for each chapter, where at least one should be directly addressing gender equality. In Iceland it is required for performance indicators, presented in the 5-year Fiscal Strategy Plan, to be disaggregated by gender whenever possible.
In Australia, the Commonwealth Performance Framework requires departments and agencies to report on how their performance is measured and assessed. The performance framework includes Portfolio Budget Statements at portfolio level, Corporate Plans at entity level and Annual Performance Statements and Annual Reports that report on performance results for the past year against the performance measures and targets in the Corporate Plan and Portfolio Budget Statements (see Figure 3.6). The integration of a gender lens to these planning and performance documents could be useful to help ensure that gender budgeting is integrated from the planning to reporting phases of the policy and budget cycle, as recommended in the OECD Best Practices (OECD, 2023[3]). To best facilitate a gender dimension to planning and performance setting, the performance metrics should focus on outcomes for citizens rather than outputs relating to internal processes.
Source: Australian Government Department of Finance (2021[36]), “What is an annual performance statement?”, https://www.finance.gov.au/what-annual-performance-statement.
One of the key components to an effective performance budgeting approach is having clear links between goals set for departments and/or policies with government-wide strategic objectives, e.g., systematic linking of new policy proposals to relevant development plans, government programme commitments and other statements of strategic direction and priority. With the publication of Australia’s new National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality there is an opportunity to make it mandatory to identify in both of the forward-looking planning and performance documents (Corporate Plans and Portfolio Budget Statements) how key activities and targets will contribute to the objectives laid out in the Strategy. The Office for Women may wish to work with gender focal points in each entity so that expectations around what this might include are clear. For example, experiences from other OECD countries show that departments sometimes mistakenly focus on gender equality within the administration instead of across their policy work. The Office for Women may also have an ongoing role in ensuring the quality of these statements. An example of what such quality assurance can look like is provided in Box 3.10.
The performance budgeting system in Austria requires that outcome objectives of the budget chapters align with international strategies (e.g., EU 2020), the Federal Government’s Programme and sectoral strategies (e.g., Strategy for Research, Technology, and Innovation). During budget preparation, the Federal Performance Management Office (FPMO) in the Federal Ministry for Civil Service and Sport provides quality assurance of the proposed objectives and indicators, including checking the alignment of objectives with national and sectoral strategies. If the objectives and indicators do not fulfil the quality criteria, the FPMO will make recommendations to the ministries to amend the draft during the drafting phase. In addition, evaluation results are published by the FPMO after the ex post evaluation phase of the performance information.
Source: OECD (2019[37]), OECD Good Practices for Performance Budgeting, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c90b0305-en.
When a gender dimension is integrated into forward-looking planning and performance documents, the gender dimension automatically flows through to reporting documents, such as Annual Performance Statements and Annual Reports. This helps identify whether or not departments and policies are achieving their intended goals and helps facilitate learning and generate a discussion around how activities may be redesigned or refocussed to capitalise on good performance or help improve performance in the future.
The Australian National Audit Office could incorporate a gender dimension to performance audits
The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) can help in holding departments and agencies to account for the gender goals that they set through incorporating a gender dimension into their performance audits. This would mean that as part of the regular performance audit process, the ANAO would seek to identify if policies and programmes delivered against stated gender targets. An example of how this is done by the Austrian Court of Auditors is provided in Box 3.11.
Performance audits can greatly enrich public accountability. Almost a third of OECD countries practising gender budgeting incorporate a gender dimension into evaluation or performance audit (OECD, 2023[9]). As well as helping the improve public accountability in relation to gender equality, incorporating a gender dimension into performance audits would also help the ANAO align with the requirement that “Agencies will continue to progressively embed or strengthen gender equality outcomes in the course of their everyday work” set out in the Australian Public Service Gender Equality Strategy 2021-26 (Australian Government, 2022[26]).
The Austrian Court of Audit is the supreme audit institution for Austria, responsible for both financial and performance audits. Internal guidelines specify that each performance audit should consider complementary questions in the area of gender equality. This includes questions such as:
How appropriate is the level of ambition for measures and indicators?
Are women and men appropriately represented in the governing bodies?
For example, an audit of “Agricultural Investment Subsidies and its Outcomes” as part of Austria’s rural development programme found that gender equality was not systematically covered by the programme, with just 30% of the monitoring committee members being women (despite rules of procedure aimed at gender balanced representation), gender specific investment needs were not analysed despite women predominantly having smaller farms than men and programme data was not systematically reported and analysed from a gender perspective.
Source: Downes and Nicol (2019[21]), Designing and Implementing Gender Budgeting: A Path to Action, https://www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/designing-and-implementing-gender-budgeting-a-path-to-action.pdf.
Further integrate gender budgeting into any forthcoming budget reforms
Budget reforms can offer an important window of opportunity to introduce or further embed practices such as gender budgeting (OECD, 2023[3]). Several OECD countries, such as Austria and Iceland, have followed this approach. Integrating the initiative as part of a larger package of reforms ensures that gender budgeting is built-in to the overall approach to budgeting, rather than an “add-on”.
If budget reforms such as performance budgeting or spending reviews were to be introduced in Australia, consideration should be given to how they could support and further embed the broader gender-budgeting effort. For example, a number of OECD countries have introduced performance budgeting reforms in recent years and incorporated a gender dimension to this. Spending reviews are another budget reform that has been growing in use across OECD countries in recent years. Spending reviews with a gender dimension could be an efficient tool to identify appropriate offsets that would not increase gender gaps, but instead support the achievement of gender goals.
Overview of proposed approach to gender budgeting in Australia
The individual tools proposed for gender budgeting come together to form an overall approach which builds on the strengths of the existing budget process and helps create a stronger link between the budget and gender equality as a national priority. The overall approach incorporates a gender perspective at all the different stages of the budget process (see Figure 3.7). This will facilitate the Australian Government in continually improving the effectiveness of the budget in meeting gender goals.
Source: Developed by OECD authors.
3.3.3. Enabling environment
Gender budgeting is most effective where there is a supportive enabling environment. Elements such as guidance, training and capacity development, opportunities for independent oversight and the development of a framework to measure the impact of gender budgeting all help create a supportive enabling environment conducive to an effective and enduring gender budgeting practice. In assessing the enabling environment for gender budgeting in Australia, this section looks at the extent to which these elements are in place.
Developing guidance and training in relation to gender budgeting to support its rollout in the short and medium term
While existing budget guidance materials can set out high-level requirements relating to gender budgeting for departments and agencies, it is pivotal for this to be supplemented by detailed guidance that aims to increase the understanding of gender budgeting methods to support the implementation of measures by officials (OECD, 2023[3]). In this respect, it would be beneficial for the Gender Budgeting Steering Group to work together to develop central guidance for gender budgeting. Gender budgeting guidance may cover aspects such as:
An overview of the approach to gender budgeting (tools and methods);
Roles and responsibilities of different government stakeholders;
Detailed instructions for government departments and agencies on how to implement gender budgeting, with practical examples;
How to access training and where to go for additional information;
While guidance is important, its successful implementation also depends on public officials having relevant knowledge and technical expertise (OECD, 2023[3]). Although 70% of OECD countries in 2022 have guidelines on the application of gender budgeting in place, a lack of relevant knowledge or technical expertise remains one of the main challenges faced in implementing gender budgeting in more than half of OECD countries (57%) (OECD, 2023[9]).
The implementation of gender budgeting will be supported through the upskilling of the APS in undertaking GIAs and how they are being integrated into the budget process. The development of a strategy for training and capacity development in relation to GIAs and gender budgeting will be optimised if it is offered in collaboration between the APS Academy, the Office for Women and gender focal points across departments and agencies. The Gender Budgeting Steering Group and gender focal points will have an important role in identifying and specifying the immediate and ongoing training needs of officials.
In line with the direction of learning within the APS, the training strategy can include a broad range of methods for officials to develop capacity in relation to gender budgeting. For example, training courses can be reinforced with key events throughout the year focussed on particular topics. An example is provided by the Canadian public service where an annual GBA Plus Awareness Week provides an opportunity for civil servants to learn more about the topic through a series of focussed events (see Box 3.12). Holding a series of talks with high profile and engaging external speakers, open to the whole APS, could also be an effective way to generate improved knowledge and awareness around the new topics.
GBA Plus is one of Canada’s main instruments of gender budgeting. GBA Plus Awareness Week is a training and development initiative that was developed by Women and Gender Equality (WAGE) Canada. It has been in place since 2012 and provides an opportunity for federal public servants to learn more about GBA Plus and its important role in the development and implementation of federal policies, programmes, and services. In recent years, WAGE has partnered with the Canada School of Public Service on GBA Plus Awareness Week.
The week has been an opportunity for WAGE to raise awareness around GBA Plus training accessible to all public servants, to introduce new tools (such as the GBA Plus step-by-step guide and compendium of tools introduced in 2021), to conduct bootcamps, and have experts and senior executive GBA Plus champions speak at events. Each year, GBA Plus Awareness Week focusses on a specific theme. The theme for GBA Plus Awareness Week in 2022 was #GBAPlusinAction. It aimed to highlight how the systematic application of GBA Plus can lead to more responsive and inclusive policies, programmes, and initiatives. It included three events delivered virtually and open to all public servants at all levels. These were:
1. Opening Event: This brought together Deputy Ministers from across the federal public service to share their perspectives on GBA Plus and discuss the importance of this process in advancing government priorities in line with public service values.
2. Best Practices Exchange: This gathered specialists from the different functional communities to share their experience in implementing GBA Plus initiatives, their lessons learned and how GBA Plus has helped to strengthen their initiatives.
3. Closing Event: This brought together GBA Plus champions from across the federal public service to discuss the future of GBA Plus and how to strengthen the delivery of responsive and inclusive federal initiatives.
In addition, Government of Canada central agencies and line departments organised their own events, frequently led by the GBA Plus focal point in the agency or department.
Source: Government of Canada (2023[38]), Gender-based Analysis Plus Awareness Week 2022: GBA Plus in Action – Opening Event, https://www.csps-efpc.gc.ca/events/gba-plus-awareness-week-2022/opening-event-eng.aspx.
Training should focus on upskilling relevant officials in departments and agencies, including gender focal points, external budget teams and policy managers involved with developing new policy proposals. There are also benefits to be gleaned from developing a strategy for training and capacity development for each of the central agencies on the Gender Budgeting Steering Group. The skills-sets of budget experts are not necessarily attuned to reforms such as gender budgeting and its tools and methods. There is scope to improve understandings of the type of budget interventions that can help progress gender equality objectives, as well as how to assess the impact of different new policy proposals on gender equality. Training for the central budget authorities can focus on broadening traditional skillsets of relevant staff so that they are equipped to fully understand the actions needed to drive change in key gender equality policy areas, as well as how to use the information gathered through gender budgeting to strengthen advice on new policy proposals for the ERC.
Independent oversight of gender budgeting
As discussed in Chapter 2, accountability institutions, such as the parliament, are responsible for holding the government to account publicly for its policies and their implementation. As part of this, these institutions should ideally have the opportunity to hold the government to account for its actions on gender budgeting, for example, through posing questions to government in relation to any gender information published as part of, or alongside, the draft budget. Effective oversight of this information promotes the integrity, quality, and credibility of national budgeting (OECD, 2023[3]).
The Australian Parliament appropriates moneys from the Consolidated Revenue Fund on either an ongoing or annual basis in order to fund expenditure by the government. Annual appropriations and estimates debates aid the parliament in its scrutiny of the government’s proposed expenditure. The appropriations debate in the House of Representatives is known as the “budget debate” and offers the opportunity to question the Speaker and Ministers regarding the proposed expenditures for the relevant portfolio areas. More detailed consideration of the budget is typically undertaken through Senate Estimates hearings, which occur three times a year, totalling around four weeks. This is where Ministers are questioned on the budget, portfolio by portfolio, prior to formal Senate consideration of the Appropriation Bills.
Although the Women’s Budget Statement has been presented as part of the annual budget documentation for several years, it has until recently received limited attention at parliament. Dedicating specific time slots within the appropriations and estimates debates to consideration of the Statement would provide concrete opportunities for parliamentary budget oversight to hold the government to account for its actions in the area of gender budgeting.
Develop a framework to measure the impact of gender budgeting
Establishing a framework that provides visibility to stakeholders on the impact of gender budgeting over time will improve the likelihood that the practice of gender budgeting in Australia is sustainable and provides an opportunity to demonstrate the value of the practice to politicians, the APS and civil society (OECD, 2023[3]).
Measuring the general impact of gender budgeting on gender equality outcomes is complex for various reasons. The changes may be difficult to detect and measure, progress depends on the actions of several actors, indicators can be impacted by a number of exogenous factors, and the time that it takes to see changes may exceeds the temporary horizons of any monitoring exercise. Nevertheless, it is possible to select certain indicators to identify how gender budgeting is contributing to changes in public policy.
One important way in which gender budgeting can have impact is through helping increase awareness among government stakeholders of how budget measures impact gender equality. Requirements for gender analysis to accompany new policy proposals can help draw attention to gender equality issues, affecting the awareness, attitudes, and perceptions of policymakers. Assessing progress in this regard could be done in different ways, for example, through tracking the percentage of budget measures that are assessed as gender neutral in different policy areas, and how this evolves over time.
Gender budgeting can also have impact through affecting the design and content of policies, so that they are better-targeted to achieve gender equality objectives. One way to measure this is to try and capture where gender budgeting efforts have resulted in the redesign of policies or programmes. For example, the Canadian Government looks at the budget programmes where its gender and diversity impact analysis (GBA Plus) has identified negative impacts and captures information on whether – as a result - steps have been taken to lower or mitigate these. This information is presented in its Impacts Report, published alongside the budget (Government of Canada, 2023[31]).
To ensure ownership for the impact of gender budgeting, any framework for measuring the impact should be developed by the proposed Gender Budgeting Steering Group. The Women’s Budget Statement provides a platform through which information on the impact of the practice can be communicated with external stakeholders.
In parallel with the Australian Government’s pivot towards strengthening gender considerations in policy and budget decisions, the government has committed to developing an indicators framework to track progress in relation to well-being. Many OECD countries have developed outcomes frameworks inspired by the OECD’s Framework for Measuring Well-being and Progress, placing a greater emphasis on non-economic measures of advancement, such as living standards, quality of life, opportunity and meaning (Australian Government, 2022[33]). These frameworks have helped provide a common understanding of objectives across levels of government, enabled more consistent evaluation of policy performance to inform targeted action and address implementation issues, and highlighted the interactions of different policies to avoid unintended consequences (Australian Government, 2022, p. 140[33]).
The Australian Government has stated its objective to adapt the OECD’s Framework to its national context to reflect the country’s unique conditions and priorities, while addressing its limitations in tracking progress and well-being of diverse population cohorts, and taking account of conditions such as the structure of local markets, policy settings, community aspirations, social cohesion and resilience to natural disasters and climate change (Australian Government, 2022[33]).
The forthcoming Measuring What Matters Framework (the Framework) will track progress and well-being across a broad set of central indicators that complement existing Commonwealth, State and Territory reporting methods – both economic and non-economic – to provide a fuller perspective and improve visibility of advancements made on agreed priorities (Australian Treasury, 2022[39]). The Australian Government has stated its intention to release a Measuring What Matters Statement in 2023 and put out a call for community consultation to facilitate holistic discussions of the type of economy and society Australians want to build together.
The government’s October 2022-23 Budget included a literature review on well-being frameworks and indicators. Although the Budget did not include targets related to well-being, the Australian Government signalled its movement towards a well-being budgeting approach – over time, aiming to use the well-being outcomes framework to support budget decision making (Australian Government, 2022, p. 119[33]; Australian Treasury, 2022[39]), as is the case in New Zealand (see Box 3.13).
The Australian Government has not yet indicated how the Measuring What Matters framework could be applied to policy development. The options are likely to be guided by approaches adopted internationally, for example, in guiding discussions relating to priorities in the budget planning process such as in Ireland or a fully integrated well-being budgeting approach as adopted in New Zealand (see Box 3.13).
In New Zealand, the overarching budget process follows a similar procedure as in other countries, where there is a strategic phase that maps out the general strategy and a decision phase where different ministers put forward budget proposals for consideration. The overarching focus of the budget is informed by the Strategic Intentions of the Treasury, which draws together the strategic objectives that departments and their agencies intend to achieve and contribute to. This document places a priority on the well-being of citizens.
In 2019, New Zealand launched its first well-being budget, which committed to putting citizen´s well-being and the environment at the heart of its policies. The budget is designed to use social, environmental, economic, and fiscal indicators to guide funding decisions. It is the New Zealand Government that determines what acts of well-being should be addressed and who is responsible for delivering them and how. Certain priority areas have been chosen where there are the greatest opportunities to make a difference.
For the budget process, departments try to align budget proposals with the priority areas, with each new spending initiative focused on the well-being priority areas or explained in terms of how it contributes to well-being. Further, ministries identify a certain portion of spending with lower value for money for reprioritisation, such as spending cuts or redirection to other more important spending areas. This approach entails a shift in discussion around the budget and encourages departments to co-ordinate budget bids and programme delivery to ensure a collaborative approach that addresses the well-being budget priorities. This is still a work in progress and further developments are needed to reframe the budgetary process so that budget proposals specifically address well-being priorities and bring together all stakeholders that should be involved.
Integration of well-being into budget planning and negotiations
The development of the 2019 Well-being budget helped to develop a set of five policy priorities to focus spending that is aligned to well-being priorities and political commitments:
1. Taking Mental Health Seriously – Supporting mental well-being for all New Zealanders, with a special focus on under 24-year-olds;
2. Improving Child Well-being – Reducing child poverty and improving child well-being, including addressing family violence;
3. Supporting Māori and Pasifika Aspirations – Lifting Māori and Pacific incomes, skills, and opportunities;
4. Building a Productive Nation – Supporting a thriving nation in the digital age through innovation, social and economic opportunities;
5. Transforming the Economy – Creating opportunities for productive businesses, regions, iwi [indigenous communities] and others to transition to a sustainable and low-emissions economy.
This process involved the Treasury utilising the Living Standards Framework (LSF) along with input from ministries, agencies, and technical experts to identify a set of 12 priority areas on well-being. This was then narrowed down to a final set of five determined at the Cabinet level.
Under New Zealand’s well-being budget, ministries were required to present budget proposals for new spending which met one of the following criteria:
Measures that are focussed on one or more of the five well-being policy priorities of the government.
Shown to be non-discretionary cost pressures (i.e., initiatives which the government has no discretion over funding).
Any other initiatives which did not meet the above criteria (including those related to coalition commitments) were “out of scope”. They could still be funded but had to meet a higher bar to be considered for funding. Specifically, the initiatives needed to demonstrate alignment with the government’s overall priorities, present a strong intervention logic and evidence, show detailed cost understandings and provide a strong narrative on how the assumed outcomes of the initiative impacts on wellbeing domains. Where applicable, the initiatives also had to demonstrate cross-agency and/or cross-portfolio collaboration, a high-level summary of how the initiative affects the four capitals of the Living Standards Framework, and how the initiative responds to risk and/or maintains or builds resilience.
Ministries were also asked to identify the lowest priority 1% of their spending for “re-prioritisation” towards higher-priority programme areas. By framing budget proposals in relation to the country’s well-being policy priorities, well-being is automatically considered during budget discussions. This whole-of-government approach in New Zealand has helped to bring greater focus on areas such as mental health and the environment than previously seen.
Source: Developed by OECD authors.
The development of an overall vision for how gender budgeting and well-being budgeting will co-exist will be important for Australia so that stakeholders understand both their distinct and their common purposes. In doing so, the Commonwealth Government of Australia may wish to look to how other countries approach this (see Box 3.14 for the example of Canada). Commonalities between strategic budget initiatives such as gender budgeting and well-being budgeting mean that, when implemented well, these initiatives can be mutually reinforcing. For example, these initiatives are generally aiming to improve the outcome-focus of budgeting and create stronger links between the high-level priorities of government and the budget process. They also require employment of analytical tools which will help improve the evidence base for budget decisions and provide greater transparency on the impact of the budget.
The Canadian federal government has introduced a Quality of Life Framework which tracks well-being and aims at supporting inclusive and sustainable growth. Drawing on the evidence of what makes for a good quality of life, the Framework is composed of five interrelated domains – prosperity, health, society, good governance, and environment. The Framework is about measuring what matters most to Canadians through a suite of 84 indicators that take a holistic view of societal progress.
The Framework also has two cross-cutting lenses, the fairness and inclusion lens, and the sustainability and resilience lens. The fairness and inclusion lens is intended to inform policy and programme development, leading to greater equity and equality. The fairness and inclusion lens was developed based on Canada’s experience with Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA Plus) and gender budgeting. GBA Plus ensures that the federal government has a gender and diversity-sensitive approach to the policy-making process, so that it understands who is impacted by its policies, and mitigates unintended consequences that perpetuate existing inequities.
Taken as whole, the Framework provides a structured means for the government to think in an integrated, inclusive, and long-term way about how its decisions impact the lives of Canadians. The Framework is about measuring what matters most to Canadians through a suite of 84 indicators that take a holistic view of societal progress.
The government is committed to applying GBA Plus and Quality of Life indicators in decision making, to ensure that policies and programmes take into account impacts on people from a variety of perspectives. Gender budgeting demonstrates how an inclusion lens can be incorporated into the budget decision-making process and into the budget itself, and a cross-cutting component of a Quality of Life Framework. The Fairness and Inclusion lens is intended to promote greater equity and equality by assessing the distribution of all outcomes across different populations, and builds on the base already established by GBA Plus.
Results of this analysis are published as an annex to the budget, in the Budget Impacts Report. For example, in the Budget 2023 Impacts Report, for each budget measure, information is provided on the key impacts of the measure from a gender and diversity and quality of life perspective, including direct and indirect impacts, both positive and negative. Details include:
Quality of Life Impacts: the domains of the Framework that each budget measure is expected to advance, and relevant indicators.
Expected Benefits – Gender: information on the expected gender characteristics of the benefitting group, ranging from predominantly men to predominantly women.
Gender Results Framework (if applicable): the goal or objective that each measure is expected to advance within Canada’s Gender Results Framework.
GBA Plus Responsive Approach (if applicable): any effort in place to minimise possible negative impacts of a measure on certain individuals or groups, or any specific design elements which have been incorporated to reduce potential barriers to participation or access that a certain group may phase.
Source: Government of Canada (2023[31]), 2023 Budget: Statement and Impacts Report on Gender, Diversity, and Quality of Life, https://www.budget.canada.ca/2023/report-rapport/gdql-egdqv-01-en.html and Quality of Life Hub, https://www160.statcan.gc.ca/index-eng.htm
Despite potential synergies, there is a risk that the introduction of new requirements relating to both gender budgeting and well-being budgeting at the same time will overburden the APS. For this reason, as part of the overall vision for both approaches, the government will benefit from detailed consideration of how their introduction can be staged over time, as well as providing the opportunity for gender budgeting to “settle-in” before well-being budgeting is introduced.
Care should also be taken to ensure that these initiatives are not implemented in silos. Those leading both initiatives should liaise closely with each other to discuss approaches and opportunities for synergies. For example, it will be important to ensure that the gender indicators being set out in the well-being framework align with those in the new National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality. Concerting government efforts towards the same objectives ensures more coherent and effective government policy (OECD, 2023[3]). Over time, adding a gender equality lens to relevant well-being indicators in the framework will also help in moving towards a whole-population view of well-being.
The preceding sections in this Chapter have highlighted where the strengths and challenges lie across the key pillars underpinning an effective approach to gender budgeting that is impactful and enduring. Given these insights, this section presents a path forward for gender budgeting in Australia in the short and medium-long term. This roadmap draws on international best practice and also reflects lessons from the history of gender budgeting in Australia.
3.5.1. Short term (next 1-2 years)
Establish a Gender Budgeting Steering Group to help oversee and co-ordinate the introduction of gender budgeting as a core pillar of budget decision making in the Australian Government over coming years. The implementation of gender budgeting will involve multiple government actors and the Steering Group will help ensure co-ordinated and coherent action. The Steering Group would be convened by the Office for Women and include the three central agencies with core roles in the budget process: PM&C, the Department of Finance and the Treasury. Its business would include setting out an action plan for the implementation of gender budgeting, taking forward legislative changes to give gender budgeting legal underpinning, co-ordinating on guidance material, and developing a framework for measuring the impact of gender budgeting, among other tasks.
Entrench gender considerations in the annual budget process through embedding legal provisions for gender budgeting in the Charter for Budget Honesty. Provisions within the Charter will ensure the sustainability of gender budgeting beyond changes in the political environment. To solidify a meaningful approach, the legal provisions should set out the requirement for a Women’s Budget Statement to be tabled alongside the budget.
Solidify GIAs as the core tool of gender budgeting in Australia by ensuring that gender analysis and GIA accompanying all new policy proposals are of sufficient quality and depth. GIA should consider both the gender impacts of new spending proposals as well as corresponding offsets. Highlighting summary information from GIAs in the strategic briefing to the ERC relating to each new budget proposal and including the Minister for Women as a permanent member of the ERC, will support the government in making budget decisions that help progress gender equality as a national priority. Each of the centrals may raise issues arising from the GIA in formulating their advice on each budget proposal.
Strengthen the link between the objectives set out in the National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality and the budget. The integration of gender priorities in Minister priority letters and in existing budget advisory materials helps highlight gender equality as a national priority. Publication of these letters would support greater transparency and accountability. Tagging new policy proposals aiming to significantly progress gender objectives can be used to give insight into the policy action being taken in relation to these objectives. Digital solutions can help facilitate tagging and make it easier to collate summary information. Summary information can be used internally to help support better budget decisions and can also be presented externally in the Women’s Budget Statement to facilitate greater transparency and oversight.
Integrate a gender dimension into planning and performance frameworks, as well as evaluation and audit activities during the policy development cycle. Incorporating gender goals into Portfolio Budget Statements and Corporate Plans and reporting on these in Annual Performance Statements will help encourage strategic thinking by departments and agencies about how they can progress gender equality through their work. The integration of a gender dimension to evaluations and performance audits will then provide insights on the extent to which spending programmes are achieving their stated gender goals, facilitating improvement over time.
Build an institutional framework to support the implementation of gender budgeting across the public service through instituting gender focal points within departments and agencies. These focal points can communicate new requirements for gender budgeting and help support staff in implementing them consistently. Capacity for gender budgeting can be further strengthened through integrating clear instructions for gender budgeting in existing budget guidance materials and supporting this with guidance and templates for departments and agencies. Through working with the APS Academy, the Gender Budgeting Steering Group can also develop training courses that support different stakeholders in learning, applying, and monitoring gender budgeting.
Continue to build and strengthen the content of the Women’s Budget Statement as the approach to gender budgeting matures. Integrating summary information from gender impact assessments accompanying new policy proposals, and gender budget tagging would help align the Australian Statement with that of international peers. The government may also use the Statement as a platform to report on measures designed to capture the impact of gender budgeting, helping to demonstrate its value to stakeholders.
Ensure accountability for gender budgeting through allocating time within the Appropriations and Estimates debates in parliament to discuss the Women’s Budget Statement. There is already the opportunity for the Women’s Budget Statement to be scrutinised by the Senate Committee as part of its oversight of Estimates. Consideration of the Statement by parliament will promote the integrity, quality, and credibility of gender budgeting.
Develop a vision for how gender budgeting and the new Measuring What Matters Framework will co-exist – along with any subsequent evolution towards well-being budgeting. This will ensure appropriate consideration of how the two initiatives can be mutually reinforcing. It will also limit the risk of the two initiatives being implemented in silos, potentially confusing and overburdening the APS.
3.5.2. Medium-long term (year 3 and beyond)
Consider the integration of a gender dimension into any new budget reforms introduced by the central budget authorities. This will ensure that gender budgeting continues to be built-in to the overall approach to budgeting, rather than an “add-on”.
Review the institutional arrangements for gender budgeting and the quality and scope of gender impact assessments accompanying budget measures in light of initial years of operation and revisit if necessary to ensure that it continues to be an impactful and enduring practice.
References
[25] Australian Government (2023), 2022-23 Tax Expenditures and Insights Statement, https://treasury.gov.au/publication/p2023-370286.
[20] Australian Government (2023), Budget 2023-24 Women’s Budget Statement, https://budget.gov.au/content/womens-statement/download/womens_budget_statement_2023-24.pdf.
[24] Australian Government (2023), Charter of Budget Honesty Act 1998, https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2020C00126.
[26] Australian Government (2022), Australian Public Service Gender Equality Strategy 2021-26, https://www.apsc.gov.au/publication/australian-public-service-gender-equality-strategy-2021-26.
[33] Australian Government (2022), Budget Statement 4: Measuring What Matters, https://budget.gov.au/2022-23-october/content/bp1/download/bp1_bs-4.pdf (accessed on 16 November 2022).
[18] Australian Government (2022), “Women’s Budget Statement 2022-23”, Budget October 2022-23, https://budget.gov.au/2022-23-october/content/womens-statement/download/womens_budget_statement_2022-23.pdf (accessed on 30 January 2023).
[12] Australian Government (2022), “Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce”, Australian Government Directory, https://www.directory.gov.au/portfolios/prime-minister-and-cabinet/department-prime-minister-and-cabinet/womens-economic-equality-taskforce (accessed on 15 November 2022).
[14] Australian Government (2022), “Women’s Budget Statement 2022-23”, Budget 2022-23, https://archive.budget.gov.au/2022-23/womens-statement/download/womens_budget_statement_2022-23.pdf (accessed on 30 January 2023).
[13] Australian Government (2021), “Women’s Budget Statement 2021-22”, Budget 2021-22, https://archive.budget.gov.au/2021-22/womens-statement/download/womens_budget_statement_2021-22.pdf (accessed on 30 January 2023).
[15] Australian Government (2020), Women’s Economic Security Statement, https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/images/wess/wess-2020-report.pdf (accessed on 16 November 2022).
[5] Australian Government (1985), National Agenda for Women: The Commonwealth Government’s plan of action for advancing the status of women toward the year 2000.
[36] Australian Government Department of Finance (2021), What is an annual performance statement?, https://www.finance.gov.au/what-annual-performance-statement.
[22] Australian Government, Department of Finance (2023), The Budget Process, https://www.finance.gov.au/government/federal-budget/budget-process (accessed on 30 January 2023).
[39] Australian Treasury (2022), Measuring what matters, https://treasury.gov.au/consultation/measuring-what-matters-2022#:~:text=The%20Government%20is%20committed%20to,can%20better%20measure%20what%20matters. (accessed on 31 January 2023).
[29] Belgian Institute for the Equality of Women and Men (2010), Manual for the application of gender budgeting within the Belgian federal administration.
[27] Blondal, J. (2008), “Budgeting in Australia”, OECD Journal on Budgeting, Vol. 8/2, https://www.oecd.org/australia/42007191.pdf.
[11] Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (2019), Women’s Budget Snapshot, https://www.pmc.gov.au/resource-centre/office-women/womens-budget-snapshot (accessed on 16 November 2022).
[21] Downes, R. and S. Nicol (2019), Designing and Implementing Gender Budgeting: A Path to Action, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/designing-and-implementing-gender-budgeting-a-path-to-action.pdf.
[34] Government of Canada (2023), 2020-21 Gender and diversity: Impacts of programs, https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/transparency/impacts-gba-plus/2020-21-gender-diversity-impacts-programs.html.
[31] Government of Canada (2023), 2023 Budget: Statement and Impacts Report on Gender, Diversity, and Quality of Life, https://www.budget.canada.ca/2023/report-rapport/gdql-egdqv-01-en.html.
[38] Government of Canada (2023), Gender-based Analysis Plus Awareness Week 2022: GBA Plus in Action - Opening Event, https://www.csps-efpc.gc.ca/events/gba-plus-awareness-week-2022/opening-event-eng.aspx.
[35] Government of Iceland (2022), Stöðuskýrsla 2022, https://www.stjornarradid.is/library/02-Rit--skyrslur-og-skrar/_Kortlagning_kynjasjonarmida_vefur.pdf.
[28] Government Offices of Sweden (2021), BUDGe for Gender Equality - A Swedish Tool for Gender Budgeting, https://www.government.se/4ad946/contentassets/5f2e26dd77084ac08f6dc721acd81c37/budge-for-gender--equality.
[17] Hon. Anthony Albanese, PM (2022), A New Labor Playbook for National Productivity Reforms: Address to the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, https://anthonyalbanese.com.au/media-centre/a-new-labor-playbook-for-national-productivity-reforms-acci (accessed on 30 January 2023).
[16] Hon. Katy Gallagher (2022), Labor invests over $7 billion to drive gender equality, https://ministers.pmc.gov.au/gallagher/2022/labor-invests-over-7-billion-drive-gender-equality (accessed on 30 January 2023).
[10] Hon. Kelly O’Dwyer (2018), Women’s budget 2018-19 snapshot, https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/kelly-odwyer-2016/media-releases/womens-budget-2018-19-snapshot (accessed on 26 January 2023).
[19] Karvelas, P. (2022), “The women’s budget statement signals a massive shift in how federal budgets are formulated and framed”, ABC News, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-26/womens-federal-budget-statement-rewrites-paradigm/101574396.
[8] National Foundation for Australian Women (2022), Gender Lens on the October 2022-23 Budget, https://nfaw.org/policy-papers/gender-lens-on-the-budget/gender-lens-on-the-october-2022-23-budget/ (accessed on 26 January 2023).
[2] Nicol, S. (2022), “Gender budgeting: The economic and fiscal rationale”, OECD Journal on Budgeting, https://doi.org/10.1787/9ca9b221-en.
[3] OECD (2023), Best Practices for Gender Budgeting.
[9] OECD (2023), Gender Budgeting in OECD Countries 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/647d546b-en.
[30] OECD (2023), OECD Review of Gender Equality in Colombia, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a559fc5e-en.
[1] OECD (2022), Report on the Implementation of the OECD Gender Recommendations, https://www.oecd.org/mcm/Implementation-OECD-Gender-Recommendations.pdf.
[37] OECD (2019), OECD Good Practices for Performance Budgeting, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c90b0305-en.
[23] OECD (2018), Gender Equality in Canada: Mainstreaming, Governance and Budgeting, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264301108-en.
[32] Parliament of Australia (2023), Infosheet 10 - The budget and financial legislation, https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/House_of_Representatives/Powers_practice_and_procedure/00_-_Infosheets/Infosheet_10_-_Budget_and_financial_legislation (accessed on 7 Fenruary 2023).
[4] Sharp, R. and R. Broomhill (2013), A Case Study of Gender Responsive Budgeting in Australia, Commonwealth Secretariat.
[7] Sharp, R. and R. Broomhill (2002), “Budgeting for Equality: The Australian Experience”, Feminist Economics, Vol. 8/1.
[6] Victorian Government (1992), Women’s Budget: Part 1: 30 June 1992, Women’s Policy Co ordination Unit, p. 1.
Notes
← 1. The gender budget statement was characterised as the ‘Women’s Budget Statement’ during this time.
← 2. This was required as part of the gender budgeting pilot and exercises for Budget 2022 and Budget 2023. Note that the continuation of gender budgeting in New Zealand (and its size and scope) is dependent on Ministerial direction.
← 3. Introduced in Budget 2018, Canada’s Gender Results Framework (GRF) represents the Government’s vision for gender equality, highlighting the key issues that matter most. Under this framework, the federal government has identified six key areas where change is required to advance gender equality.