2. Strengthening gender mainstreaming and gender impact assessment in Australia
This chapter examines the current framework for gender mainstreaming and gender impact assessment in Australia. It offers an assessment of strengths, challenges and gaps in relation to the governance arrangements for promoting gender equality policy. It looks at the capacity of the public administration to implement new requirements related to gender impact assessment. It also provides recommendations on how these aspects could be strengthened to support the delivery of the government’s ambitious gender equality agenda.
Despite increasing political commitment and growing awareness of the importance of gender equality, major gender gaps persist in all areas of social, economic and public life across OECD countries. Targeted policies to address gender-based discrimination and promote advancements in concerned areas have played a key role in tackling gender inequalities. However, if unchecked, gender biases and stereotypes can seep into policies and processes and inadvertently deepen existing gender gaps. The COVID-19 pandemic, with its disproportionate effects on women, has further highlighted the importance of increasing our understanding of the differential policy impacts on women, men, and other groups in society, while stressing the relevance of gender equality as an essential piece for an inclusive and sustainable recovery (OECD, 2022[1]).
Through providing relevant information on the expected impact of policy and budget measures on specific population groups, gender-sensitive policymaking allows governments to make evidence-based decisions, deliver better and more equitable outcomes, and act as agents of change for gender equality. Gender-sensitive policymaking relies not only on targeted policy actions aimed at tackling specific forms of gender-based discrimination such as the wage gap and the unequal distribution of unpaid care work, but also on the integration of a gender equality perspective into all government action (OECD, 2021[2]). Gender mainstreaming, as a core strategy for applying a gender lens to policymaking processes and a key element of gender-sensitive policymaking, can support countries to address deeply rooted issues and sector-specific barriers to gender equality and enable them to respond more effectively and fairly to future shocks and crises. A key tool of gender-sensitive policymaking is gender impact assessment (GIA). This chapter looks at gender mainstreaming and the role of GIA in strengthening gender considerations in policy decisions in Australia. The following chapter looks specifically at the application of GIAs, and other tools, in the budget process.
Considering the multidimensional nature of structural gender inequalities, a co-ordinated whole-of-government commitment is necessary to accelerate progress towards gender equality and tackle gender norms and stereotypes. This includes ensuring adequate capacities, capabilities, resources, and tools across the public administration to translate policies, programmes, services, and budgets into concrete benefits for all. By strengthening gender mainstreaming, governments can make better and more inclusive decisions and enhance the fairness and responsiveness of policy delivery and outcomes, while increasing public trust (OECD, 2017[3]) and reinforcing democracy.
This chapter provides an assessment of the current framework for gender mainstreaming in Australia, including its readiness to support increased policy action to progress gender equality objectives. The institutional arrangements for promoting gender equality policy and mainstreaming in the government of Australia are discussed, across roles, responsibilities, capacities, and capabilities of various public institutions engaged in promoting the gender equality agenda. Analysis is provided concerning the legal and strategic frameworks for gender equality and mainstreaming, proposing methods to strengthen and enhance their effectiveness and impact. An assessment of recent progress in relation to gender impact assessments (GIAs) and the implementation of accountability and transparency mechanisms for gender equality policies is outlined, as well as recommendations to further reinforce Australia’s approach.
The pursuit of gender equality in Australia has been a long and winding road. Australian women gained the right to vote in 1902 and to stand for election in 1903 (although First Nations people had to wait until 1962 to be granted the option to enrol and vote) (Parliament of Australia, n.d.[4]). They were provided access to the contraceptive pill in 1961, had the marriage bar in the public service lifted in 1966 and obtained the right to abortion in 1969. As was the case in a number of OECD countries, reforms targeted at women accelerated in the 1970s with the granting of the right to equal pay for women, the introduction of childcare avenues and the enactment of the single mothers benefit in 1973. Paid maternity leave for public servants and a range of new services were implemented from 1973, including women’s health centres and working women’s centres. Equal Employment Opportunity policies in employment, education, training and housing were also introduced that the same year. No fault divorce was introduced in 1975, the same year the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) was passed, paving the way for the national Family Court. Australia ratified the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in 1983, internalising broad gender perspectives to guide policymaking (Victorian Women's Trust, 2023[5]; Richards, 2019[6]).
A key development bolstering the government’s efforts in addressing women’s issues was the establishment of the Office of Women’s Affairs in 1974. The Office worked to achieve measures of women’s advancement, playing an important role in securing government funding for women’s services and implementing legislation and law reform. The work of the Office was supported by introduction of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth), the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (Cth) and the Affirmative Action (Equal Employment Opportunity for Women) Act 1986 (Cth), as well as State and Territory anti-discrimination legislation targeting discrimination against women (Sharp and Broomhill, 2013, p. 3[7]).
The 1980’s became a pivotal decade for gender equality in Australia, with the establishment and adoption of the National Agenda for Women in 1988. The process for developing the Agenda included a nationwide consultation involving an estimated 25 000 women, led by the Minister for the Status of Women and the National Women’s Consultative Council (Sharp and Broomhill, 2013, p. 4[7]). The government also introduced gender-sensitive policymaking with implementation of gender analyses of Cabinet Submissions, the establishment of gender focal points across government departments to promote of gender considerations in policymaking and monitoring of government actions through parliamentary oversight. Responsibility for the portfolio on gender equality lay in the Prime Minister’s department, supported by the government’s first female cabinet minister (Sharp and Broomhill, 2013, p. 3[7]; Hankivsky, 2008, p. 71[8]).
Institutional advances made during the 1980’s and early 1990’s were, however, to a large extent unwound over subsequent years as political support waned. By 2004 the renamed Office for Women was moved from its location within the Centre of Government (CoG) to the Department of Family and Community Services, thus re-positioning women’s issues under family policy and programmes. Abolition of the gender focal points during this time also removed the remaining structures for gender mainstreaming in policy development (Sharp and Broomhill, 2013[7]; Hankivsky, 2008, p. 71[8]). Departments were also no longer required to provide a published assessment of impacts of their policies on women and men (Sharp and Broomhill, 2013, p. 10[7]).
More recently, efforts to support gender equality have regained momentum. Key developments include the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-23 and the first National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010-22 delivered in 2010, replacement of the Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999 (Cth) with the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012 (Cth), charging a statutory agency, the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA), with improving and promoting equality for both women and men in the workplace. The Australian National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security was also adopted in 2012, setting out practical methods of implementing United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 and the subsequent resolutions for the period up to 2018, and committing the government to report on progress every two years (Australian Government, 2021[9]). The inaugural Women’s Economic Security Statement was released in 2018, focusing on three priority areas: workforce participation; earning potential; and economic independence (Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2018[10]). A second Statement in 2020 presented five priority areas: women’s workforce participation; closing the gender pay gap; greater choice and flexibility for families to manage work and care; support for women as leaders and positive role models; responding to the diverse needs of women; and support for women to be safe at work and home (Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2020[11]). The Cabinet Taskforce on Women’s Safety and Economic Security was established in 2021 and three new ministerial titles were created (Assistant Minister for Women, Minister for Women’s Economic Security, and Minister for Women’s Safety), focussing on advancing women’s safety and economic security. The Minister for Women was co-chair with the Prime Minister. The Taskforce provided advice on community needs through sharing experiences to better inform, co-ordinate, and address critical issues facing Australian women. The Taskforce also contributed to shaping new initiatives in the revamped Women’s Budget Statement (discussed further in Chapter 3) (Australian Government Directory, 2022[12]).
Gender equality has come further to the fore as a political priority during the most recent election in May 2022. The current government made a commitment to making Australia a world leader on gender equality through removing barriers to women’s economic participation, closing the gender pay gap, and targeted investments in social infrastructure that address gender-based violence and improve the health and well-being of women (Hon. Katy Gallagher, 2022[13]; Hon. Anthony Albanese, PM, 2022[14]). This commitment was confirmed at the 2022 Australian Jobs and Skills Summit and 2022 Jobs and Skills Summit Outcomes Paper that followed proposing immediate, medium- and long-term actions. The government’s October 2022-23 Women’s Budget Statement clearly indicated the intention to embed gender mainstreaming in the Commonwealth Government’s policy development process, with a focus on the implementation of GIA on all policies in future budgets following a GIA pilot led by the Office for Women (Australian Government, 2022, p. 13[15]).
The government aims to deliver a National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality to guide whole-of-government action. The Strategy will be informed by the advice of the Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce, targeted national stakeholder consultations led by the Office for Women, and broad community consultations examining how gender equality in Australia should be achieved (Australian Government, 2022[16]; Australian Government, 2022[17]; Australian Government Directory, 2022[12]).
The government has also stated its commitment to improving the collection and use of high-quality and accessible intersectional gender-disaggregated data. In response to the Review of the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012 (2021), the WGEA will require businesses with 500 or more employees to report on measurable targets to improve gender equality in addition to reporting on the gender pay gaps of businesses with 100 or more employees. The WGEA will also commence voluntary collection of diversity data to measure the gender pay gap more accurately over time, supported by an increase in staff from 36 to 51. A Gender Data Steering Group has been convened by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) and the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) in response to the Review to maximise the impact of the government’s major data holdings as an evidence base for gender equality policy, as well as contribute to GIA and the National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality (Australian Government, 2022[16]; Australian Government, 2022[17]; Australian Government Directory, 2022[12]).
Together, these actions demonstrate the high levels of political support that currently exist to uphold the advancement of gender equality. This provides a unique opportunity to embed a whole-of-government approach to closing gender gaps that is enduring and capable of delivering lasting impact, assigning to history the oscillating efforts around gender equality.
2.3.1. Institutional architecture
Gender equality is a cross-cutting and multidimensional public policy issue which benefits from the participation and co-ordination of multiple actors, both inside and outside of government. Robust governance arrangements for delivering gender equality policy, with clear roles and responsibilities as well as adequate capacity and resourcing, play a key role in closing gender gaps (OECD, 2016[18]). To aid promotion of a whole-of-government approach, the institutional responsibilities for achieving gender-related goals should ideally be distributed among the Centre of Government (CoG) (e.g. in Australia, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet,1 the Department of Finance, and the Treasury), a central gender equality institution, statistical bodies, line ministries and agencies (including in areas not traditionally associated with gender), as well as independent oversight institutions (OECD, 2021[2]).
Figure 2.1 provides an overview of the existing institutional framework for the promotion of gender equality in Australia.
Leverage political responsibility for the gender equality portfolio to accelerate progress
The location of political responsibility for the gender equality portfolio sends important signals to stakeholders about its importance as a policy priority. The 2015 OECD Recommendation on Gender Equality in Public Life (from here on the 2015 OECD Gender Recommendation) recommends securing leadership and commitment to gender equality at the highest political level (OECD, 2016[18]). In many OECD countries, the cabinet is considered as the epicentre of political decision making. Having political representation for gender equality issues within cabinet structures can deliver clear signals to the public administration and to the private sector about their importance (OECD, 2019[19]). The political commitment of the cabinet leader can also be helpful in ensuring that gender equality is regularly brought to discussion as part of the cabinet agenda (OECD, 2019[19]).
The highest political responsibility for the gender equality agenda in Australia lies with the Minister for Women, who has responsibility to improve outcomes for all women in the country. The Minister is supported by the Office for Women, Australia’s central gender equality institution, located in the PM&C (see Figure 2.1 and forthcoming subsection on the CoG below). Since May 2022, in the current cabinet configuration, the Minister for Women is also Minister for Finance and Minister for the Public Service, thus leading the corresponding (and mutually exclusive) portfolios.
Although holding ministerial responsibilities for three portfolios could impact the time that the Minister can devote to each one individually, these arrangements offer a unique opportunity to accelerate progress towards advancing gender equality over the current government’s 3-year political term. The wide portfolio of the cabinet minister, coupled with the strong support for gender equality expressed by the Prime Minister, offers potential to act as a catalyst to accelerate the implementation of the gender equality agenda across the Australian Public Service (APS). The broad influence of the Minister for Women can engender buy-in across the APS for ongoing reforms to introduce GIAs and re-establish gender budgeting as core strategic gender mainstreaming tools.
Strengthen the Office for Women as the lead institution co-ordinating and facilitating the implementation of the gender equality agenda
The Office for Women fulfils the role of the central gender equality institution (CGI) in Australia. As the bodies primarily tasked with promoting, co-ordinating and facilitating gender equality policy in a country, CGIs play a key function in the advancement of a government’s gender equality agenda. In recent years, their mandate has progressively expanded across OECD countries, from delivering specific programmes for women’s empowerment, to:
leading the development of gender equality strategies and the implementation of gender equality policies and programmes;
supporting ministries in integrating gender perspectives into strategic planning and policy analysis;
conducting policy research and providing government advice and recommendations around gender equality; and
monitoring the implementation of governmental gender initiatives (OECD, 2019[19]).
In some cases, CGIs can also assist departments and agencies in leveraging government tools for the promotion of gender equality (such as GIAs, gender budgeting, infrastructure investment, and public procurement) by supporting capacity building, providing expertise, and guiding the development of gender-disaggregated data (OECD, 2019[19]).
Across the OECD, there are no standard institutional arrangements for the promotion of gender equality. Since 2011, units located within the CoG have become progressively commonplace, with ten OECD countries having their CGIs located within the office of the head of government or State in 2021 (Figure 2.2).
Note: 2021 data provided by 38 respondents, 2017 data provided by 36 respondents.
Source: Information collected by OECD based on desk research and data from the 2021 OECD Survey on Gender Mainstreaming and Governance (2021 GMG Survey).
In Australia, the core mandate of the Office for Women is to provide strategic policy advice and support to the Prime Minister and the Minister for Women with the aim to close existing gender gaps. To this effect, the Office for Women works with agencies across government to progress policies and programmes that promote gender equality in Australia, empower women economically, and combat gender-based violence. In addition, the Office for Women administers the Women’s Leadership and Development Programme to fund and deliver a range of projects for women. Since October 2021, the Office for Women has also developed some in-house research capabilities through establishing a small Evidence Team. The Office for Women is also responsible for developing Australia’s first national gender strategy since the Hawke Government developed a National Agenda for Women in 1988. Moreover, in line with the government’s renewed commitment to (re)introducing gender budgeting and GIAs, the Office for Women is now leading on the staged implementation of these tools (see section below on gender impact assessments and Chapter 3).
Although previously located in the Department of Social Services (or its predecessor), the Office for Women currently sits within PM&C, aligning with the 2015 OECD Gender Recommendation to place CGIs at the highest possible level in the government (OECD, 2016[18]). The Office for Women takes considerable benefits from its institutional position in the CoG. The politically strategic location of the Office for Women indicates high-level political support for its work, ensuring authority when engaging with government departments and providing oversight of proposals being brought forward to the Expenditure Review Committee (ERC) – the cabinet committee which considers matters of expenditure and revenue of the Australian Commonwealth budget.
The central position of the Office for Women provides strong foundations for its work. To build on this and deliver on the current government’s recent commitments to increase progress in closing gender gaps, the Office for Women should be strengthened in several ways. Taking international best practice into account, the following improvements will enable the Office for Women to be fit for purpose as the lead institution co-ordinating and facilitating the implementation of the gender equality agenda:
Strengthening the policy co-ordination function of the Office for Women. The ability of the Office for Women to convene relevant stakeholders and develop a whole-of-government approach to cross-cutting challenges should be enhanced to underpin effective gender equality policy. Delivering government cross-cutting gender equality priorities requires co-ordinated action across departments and agencies. Different overarching objectives are likely to sit across multiple government portfolios, requiring government departments to work together to implement policies. For example, achieving gender equal health outcomes may involve contributions from health, housing, education, welfare, and others. Policy delivery across multiple government departments will be facilitated through central co-ordination by the Office for Women.
Clarifying and expanding the Office for Women’s role in relation to gender equality research and data. Mandating the Office for Women with the lead role in working across government stakeholders will ensure the collection and sharing of data, research, and analysis necessary to make informed policy decisions related to gender equality across the whole APS. This can be achieved through further strengthening the recently established Evidence Team that is already engaging in some strategic projects to steer the conversation on gender-sensitive data. The Office for Women would also have a role in identifying and commissioning strategic research to inform whole-of-government policy responses to the most persistent gender equality challenges. In view of this expanded role, consideration should be given to assigning a leading role to the Office for Women within the Gender Data Steering Group (see section on gender-disaggregated and intersectional data).
Ensuring that the Office for Women is appropriately resourced to enable fulfilling its mandate and strengthened functions in a credible and enduring manner. Having sufficient mandate and resources to promote gender equality and support a government-wide gender equality policy is indicative of the effectiveness of CGIs. To support increased responsibilities with respect to policy co-ordination, gender research and data, as well to support the participation of the Minister for Women in ERC processes (further elaborated in Chapter 3), it will be key to allocate and systematically review resources (e.g. time, staff, budget, skill sets, equipment, training, etc.) to enable the Office for Women to meet its strategic goals and workplans.
The Office for Women will also have a continuing role in relation to gender budgeting. This is outlined in Chapter 3.
Going forward, consideration could also be given to formally expanding the mandate of the Office for Women to focus not only on women’s issues, but also on broader gender equality and intersecting factors. This change would reflect the broader trajectories of peer OECD countries (Box 2.1) while recognising that gender inequality does not only impact women. The change would also represent an opportunity to foster engagement with a wider range of stakeholders and communicate that gender equality action is aimed at achieving positive outcomes for Australian society as a whole. Scaling up the mandate of the Office for Women in this way requires concurrent rebranding and appropriate resourcing.
Canada
For more than thirty years, between 1976 and 2018, the role of CGI in Canada was fulfilled by Status of Women Canada. In 2015, the Canadian Government gave heightened focus to gender equality as a policy priority, by naming a dedicated Minister for the Status of Women and moving the agency out of the Canadian Heritage portfolio. In subsequent years, the parliament passed the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 2 (Bill C-86) which included legislation to transform Status of Women Canada into a department and expand its mandate and functions to deal not just with women’s issues, but all gender identities. Status of Women Canada became a federal department named Women and Gender Equality Canada (WAGE). WAGE now works to advance equality with respect to sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity or expression through the inclusion of people of all genders, including women, in Canada’s economic, social, and political life.
United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom, the Government Equalities Office holds lead responsibility for policies relating to women, sexual orientation, and transgender equality, as well as for a range of equalities legislation. The Office works closely with other government departments, the Cabinet Office on civil society, and the devolved administrations in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland to deliver its priorities, maintain the equalities framework, and promote equality. In particular, the Office is in charge of: improving equality and reducing discrimination for all in the country; taking the lead on the Equality Act 2010 and on gender, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender issues; supporting the implementation of international equality measures and commitments, such as the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action.
Source: Government of Canada (n.d.[20]), “Women and Gender Equality Canada”, https://women-gender-equality.canada.ca/en.html; Government of the United Kingdom (n.d.[21]), , Government Equalities Office, https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/government-equalities-office.
Develop a clear Centre-of-Government arrangement for the implementation of gender mainstreaming
Being responsible for supporting the activities of the head of government, such as Cabinet meetings and policy co-ordination, the Centre of Government (CoG) is a key actor in providing leadership and guiding the implementation of transversal goals, including gender equality. In light of its functions, the CoG can play a significant role in promoting the gender equality agenda by highlighting the importance of gender equality as a national goal and policy practice, providing strategic guidance and oversight on the achievement of gender-related objectives, and facilitating government-wide buy-in. In particular, the CoG can empower CGIs to engage with all public sector entities to foster adequate integration of gender considerations into their work. The CoG can also clarify the expectations of departments with respect to gender equality and mainstreaming, develop measurement and evaluation of executive performance, and remove barriers to implementation. Furthermore, the CoG can contribute to promoting the strategic use of governance tools, such as GIAs, by providing oversight, setting rules, ensuring compliance, and establishing accountability mechanisms (OECD, 2019[19]). The Canadian institutional set-up offers a good practice example of the CoG’s involvement in the promotion of the gender equality agenda, as shown in Box 2.2.
In Canada, the Centre of Government – made up of the Privy Council Office, the Department of Finance, and the Treasury Board Secretariat – plays a leadership role in engaging federal departments in gender mainstreaming efforts through the implementation of Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA Plus). GBA Plus is Canada’s key policy tool for gender and intersectional analysis and requires that all departments and agencies consider its application in their work. In particular:
The Privy Council Office collaborates with the Department of Finance, the Treasury Board Secretariat, and the Department of Women and Gender Equality on the implementation and refinement of GBA Plus as it applies to Cabinet documents.
The Department of Finance advances the government's commitment to fairness and equality through gender budgeting as set out in the Canadian Gender Budgeting Act and in support of its commitment to inclusive and sustainable economic growth.
The Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) ensures GBA Plus is integrated into key products and processes, including those related to the preparation and review of Treasury Board submissions and regulatory proposals, as well as those related to research, corporate reporting (Departmental Plans, and Departmental Results Frameworks), and evaluation planning and design across programme areas. It also works with other federal organisations to ensure that TBS policies and procedures provide effective support for their GBA Plus activities.
Central agencies exercise a “gatekeeper” function, in making sure that the requirements for gender-based policy analysis are met, as well as a “challenge” function in terms of analytical rigour and quality assurance.
Source: Government of Canada (n.d.[22]), “Gender-based analysis plus – Supplementary information table”, https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/corporate/transparency/reporting-spending/departmental-results-reports/2021-2022/gender-based-analysis-plus.html; Government of Canada (n.d.[23]), Departmental Results Report 2020–21, https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/corporate/transparency/plans-performance/departmental-results-report/2021/report.html.
In Australia, the CoG plays a substantial part in the promotion of the gender equality agenda through PM&C, the Treasury (see Chapter 3), the Department of Finance (see Chapter 3), and the Australian Public Service Commission (APSC).
The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) provides policy advice to the government on how to address priority issues in Australia. In particular, PM&C supports the Prime Minister and the Cabinet, as well as portfolio ministers, by co-ordinating the implementation of key government programmes and initiatives to tackle Australia’s economic, social, and environmental challenges and ensure the safety and security of all Australians. As part of its mandate, inter alia, PM&C co-ordinates regulatory policy matters through the work of the Office of Impact Analysis, and women’s policies and programmes through the Office for Women. According to the framework developed for the GIA pilot phase (see section on GIA), PM&C also checks whether the relevant analyses have been conducted on the Cabinet Submissions, supported by the Office for Women which provided feedback on the quality of the assessments.
Within the PM&C portfolio, the Australian Public Service Commission (APSC) is a statutory agency of the government responsible for improving people management, manager capability and professional development across the APS. According to the strategic priorities included in its corporate plan 2021-2022, the APSC aims to: support quality public service workforce management; develop leadership across the Australian workforce; increase public service capabilities to improve the overall performance of the public service; and promote a culture of integrity and trust in the work of the APS. As such, one of the core functions of the APSC is represented by the co-ordination and delivery of APS-wide trainings and career development activities. To this effect, the APSC is supported by the APS Academy. The APS Academy was established in July 2021 following a review to consider the future and best role of the APSC in supporting learning and development initiatives across the APS. The review recommended the introduction of a new operational model to promote capability development in the APS, through the creation of a new specific learning and development centre. The APS Academy does not design and provide courses to civil servants directly, but connects with existing centres within the APS, as well as with external networks, academic institutions, and other specialist providers that facilitate learning on behalf of the APS. In particular, the October 2022-23 Budget and the May 2023-24 Budget included some early investment to uplift capability across the APS, including gender analysis skills. The APSC and the APS Academy also worked with the Office for Women in developing specific resources and training on GIAs to assist the preparation of the May 2023-24 Budget.
As Australia moves forward in the implementation of GIAs and gender budgeting, having the CoG institutions provide solutions and play meaningful “challenge” and “gatekeeper” function will be central to ensuring that these reforms are meaningful, and go beyond “tick and flick”. Specifically, it is envisaged that the PM&C Policy Team would – as part of its overall check of Cabinet Submissions across different policy areas – systematically check whether GIAs have been completed in a rigorous and robust manner. The Policy Team should have the authority to send proposals back to departments on the grounds of a missing or incomplete assessment. The development of standard GIA templates (see section on guidance, training and capacity development) providing details on the process, decisions, and outcomes of the assessment would help facilitate these tasks. It will also be important to ensure adequate human resources, capacity and knowledge to allow CoG institutions to question and evaluate the analytical rigour and quality of GIAs. Analysts within PM&C responsible for playing a “challenge function” should be trained to this effect. Detailing the role for PM&C in any future legislation on GIAs will help give credibility and endurance to these new responsibilities (see section on legislative framework). Similar roles for the Department of Finance and the Treasury are discussed in Chapter 3.
Considering the government’s intention to expand the scope of GIAs and embed them into policy and decision-making processes, the APSC will therefore play a key role, by supporting the development of specific capacity-building programmes on the use of GIA and other gender analysis tools as appropriate. This will require close co-operation and co-ordination between the APSC, the Office for Women and other departments (see also section on guidance, training, and capacity development).
Leverage the Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce to promote gender equality in sector-specific plans and strategies
Reporting directly to the Minister for Women, the Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce (the Taskforce) was an independent group of eminent individuals across Australia established on a temporary basis to advise the government on the promotion of women’s economic equality in the country. The thirteen members of the Taskforce were selected by the Minister for Women based on their skills and diverse backgrounds and appointed for an initial term of six months. Set up in September 2022, the Taskforce responded to an election commitment to prioritise women’s empowerment in the Australian economy, aiming to complement the government’s engagement with business and civil society on gender-related issues and provide an important support role in the development of the National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality. Ahead of the May 2023-24 Budget, the Taskforce provided its short-term priorities to the Government to improve women’s economic equality with a strong focus on women currently experiencing disadvantage and women from traditionally marginalised backgrounds. The Taskforce also contributed to the Australian Government’s Employment White Paper emerging from the Jobs and Skills Summit and due for release in 2023, discussing urgent economic challenges, proposing immediate actions, and setting a path for medium and long-term reform.
Strengthen institutional arrangements within departments to support gender mainstreaming
The involvement and co-ordination of all government institutions are essential to promoting cross-cutting and multidimensional government agendas. To ensure effective gender mainstreaming, it is therefore central to engage departments and agencies as they play a key role in integrating gender considerations within their routine functioning, decision-making processes, and management structures. Recognising this need, the 2015 OECD Gender Recommendation highlights the importance of adequate capacities and resources of public institutions to integrate gender equality perspectives into their activities (OECD, 2016[18]). OECD countries with long-standing or newly established commitments to gender mainstreaming have adopted initiatives to increase gender expertise and capacity across the public service. A common technique, as proposed by the 2015 OECD Gender Recommendation, is to establish gender focal points within each department, responsible for ensuring consistent application of gender mainstreaming across their institution (see examples in Box 2.3).
Czechia
As established by a government resolution, since 2011 all ministries in Czechia are obliged to institute gender focal points (GFPs) on at least a part-time basis to oversee the gender equality agenda and implement gender mainstreaming in their areas of responsibility. The Department of Gender Equality, the country’s CGI, is in contact with the gender focal points and organises regular meetings to inform them of relevant developments in the agenda. In 2018, the government issued a Standard of the Position of Gender Focal Points to facilitate co-ordination on gender equality issues across different ministries and to strengthen their role, by clearly defining their duties and competences, as well as the qualifications and requirements for the position.
Sweden
In Sweden, all government ministers oversee gender mainstreaming in their areas of responsibility. Since 2003, gender focal points within each ministry co-ordinate and support gender mainstreaming efforts by developing an annual action plan for their ministry. The focal point, often the Budget Officer of the ministry, also attends meetings of a standing intra-ministerial working group on gender mainstreaming in the government offices.
Source: OECD (2018[24]), OECD Toolkit for Mainstreaming and Implementing Gender Equality, https://www.oecd.org/gov/toolkit-for-mainstreaming-and-implementing-gender-equality.pdf; OECD (2023[25]), Gender Equality in the Czech Republic, https://doi.org/10.1787/c5a3086f-en.
Although the Australian Public Service Gender Equality Strategy 2021-26 sets out that agencies should have dedicated resources in place to support their work on gender equality (Australian Government, 2022[26]), and despite the heightened government commitment to progressing gender equality, institutional supports to promote gender mainstreaming, such as “champions” and gender focal points, are not yet commonplace in the APS. Where gender focal points are instituted in departments or agencies, they tend to be on a voluntary basis and thus have limited capacity to effect change. There is therefore scope to strengthen capacity within departments to embed a gender lens throughout their work, building greater awareness of the gender impact of government processes and decisions.
Establishing a requirement for gender “champions” and focal points in each government agency and department would be pivotal in facilitating the integration of gender perspectives in policymaking and guiding successful implementation of GIA. In particular, gender “champions”, appointed at the senior management level in each department, would lead change by using their authority to promote and communicate on the importance of gender mainstreaming as well as related requirements, and encourage buy-in. If appropriate, the senior-level gender “champions” could be the same champions identified by Secretaries and Agency Heads to support the implementation of the Australian Public Service Gender Equality Strategy 2021-26. In that case, by showing commitment to both promoting diversity in the workplace and advancing gender-sensitive policymaking, the gender “champions” would make sure that the inclusive approach adopted by the APS as an employer is also mirrored in all its policy action through the integration of gender equality perspectives in policymaking. Gender focal points would support the policy work of the “champions” on the ground, helping support GIA and providing a first point of contact for any questions that staff in departments and agencies may have. While all managers would be responsible and accountable for applying a gender lens to their policy areas, including through the implementation of GIAs, focal points would support various teams by providing an important first validation of the assessments accompanying Cabinet Submissions and new policy proposals. International best practice suggests that to fulfil this function meaningfully, and communicate seriousness of purpose, gender focal points should be a full-time role.
It will be important to place the gender focal points in a strategic position within departments and agencies, and to ensure that the people selected have the right profile for the role. The Office for Women can help support the secretaries of each department and agency in their decision of where to place gender focal points by setting out clearly the requirements of the role, the skills and the best fit within organisational structures, as well as what is needed to foster gender mainstreaming and undertake GIAs. This would contribute to ensuring that the gender focal points have the knowledge, influence, and resources to fulfil their functions, and be complementary to the steering role played by the “champions”. Although there is often an inclination to sit gender focal points within a social policy team, this can limit their influence and purview. Greater benefits would derive from gender focal points having a place in a more central team. The level at which the gender focal points sit also has an impact. For example, if they are too senior, then they may often not have time to fulfil the role, and if they are too junior then they could lack necessary influence.
Being the point of reference for any GIA-related matters within departments, the gender focal points would take advantage of deepened collaboration with the Office for Women and the ABS. This would help remove barriers to using of gender-disaggregated data and evidence for conducting GIAs and support the decision-making process from the earliest stages through the full policy/programme budget cycle.
Government stakeholders report varying perceptions of the goals of gender mainstreaming and would benefit from more sector-specific policy guidance to apply a gender lens to their work in various sectors and policy areas. While some departments (such as the Department of Health and Aged Care) have developed their own sector-specific gender strategies, others reportedly find it difficult to systematically integrate gender perspectives into their sectoral work. Gender “champions” and focal points that work with the Office for Women can help raise the standard and consistency of gender mainstreaming across the APS through its leading role with respect to policy co-ordination, guiding departments in incorporating gender-related objectives into their sectoral strategies.
Reinforce support role of the Australian Bureau of Statistics for gender-sensitive policymaking
A robust evidence base helps policymakers identify the most effective and efficient ways to address social and economic challenges, such as those relating to gender equality. As set forth in the 2015 OECD Gender Recommendation, this requires that governments actively promote data dissemination, enhance co-ordination among data-collecting and producing bodies and collaboration among stakeholders to develop effective gender indicators (OECD, 2016[18]). The COVID-19 pandemic has emphasised the importance of maintaining quality data collections for policymaking and for reacting in a timely manner to unexpected crises (OECD, 2021[2]). National statistics offices and bureaus play a key role in establishing and strengthening the knowledge base for informed policy decisions by ensuring the production and dissemination of relevant gender-sensitive and intersectional data and evidence.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) is the agency responsible for the collection, analysis and dissemination of official data and statistics. Established by the Australian Bureau of Statistics Act 1975 (Cth) as an independent statutory authority (though with official statistical functions exercised before that under the Census and Statistics Act 1905 (Cth)), the ABS collects, compiles, analyses and disseminates statistics and related information on a broad range of economic, environmental, population and social matters in Australia. The ABS also promotes co-ordination across the whole of government to avoid duplication in the collection of statistics and information by official bodies, improve data compatibility and integration and maximise the utilisation of information available to official bodies for statistical purposes. In particular, the ABS collaborates with Commonwealth departments and with States and Territory governments to provide guidance and advice on fostering the collection and use of data and statistics for policy and decision making (Australian Government, n.d.[27]).
The ABS regularly updates key economic and social indicators measuring equality between women and men in Australia (further information is provided in the section on data). To do so, it conducts specific surveys with the aim of collecting data disaggregated by sex, such as the Time Use Survey which has been recently reintroduced (measuring the number of hours spent daily by various age cohorts of women and men on employment activities, childcare and other unpaid housework, and free time activities).
The ABS can support the government as it moves forward with the implementation of GIA through strengthening the provision and signposting of gender-disaggregated statistical data to aid the assessment of gender impacts across all sectors. Ensuring all government stakeholders along the decision-making cycle have access to high-quality, timely and relevant data will underpin systematic and meaningful assessments of gender impacts. Given the importance of a robust evidence base for GIA, it would be helpful to ensure regular and close co-ordination between the ABS, the CoG, the Office for Women, as well as departments and agencies to clearly identify specific data needs and data gaps. Where necessary, the government may consider commissioning and resourcing the ABS to undertake supplementary data collection to increase the evidence base in a particular policy area. Aiming to use GIA as a key policy tool for gender-sensitive policymaking, the ABS can contribute to solutions to improve data integration, interoperability and exchange, to ensure that the government can leverage data to inform gender-sensitive policymaking (see also section on gender-disaggregated data).
2.3.2. Strategic framework
Strategic planning supports public decision-making processes by identifying priority areas for government focus, co-ordinating implementation across levels and functions of government and underpinning accountability around the realisation of key goals (OECD, 2019[19]). Strategic planning can greatly contribute to the promotion of the gender equality agenda by setting a clear rationale, action plans, priorities, timelines, objectives and expected outcomes as emphasised by the 2015 OECD Gender Recommendation (OECD, 2016[18]).
A gender equality strategy is the cornerstone of a strong strategic framework aimed at reducing gender inequalities. In developing the strategy, the government should engage relevant stakeholders (including non-governmental) to ensure a comprehensive and inclusive approach to gender equality. Since 2017, a growing number of OECD countries have adopted strategic frameworks to set clear objectives, targets, and outcomes for gender equality. In 2021, 30 OECD countries reported having an active strategic framework for gender equality in place, either in the form of an overarching strategy or in that of a strategy addressing specific gender equality issues, such as violence against women (OECD, 2022[1]). The COVID-19 pandemic, with its disproportionate negative effects on women, further highlighted the importance of applying a gender lens to strategic planning to close persistent gender gaps. Thus, aiming to promote an inclusive recovery path, 81% of OECD countries that developed a strategic plan in response to COVID-19 pandemic reported integrating gender equality considerations in 2021 (OECD, 2022[1]).
There is increasing consensus across OECD countries that adopting a dual approach, combining a national gender equality strategy and the integration of gender equality considerations into both sector-specific and broader national strategies, can aid in the achievement of gender-related objectives.
The government of Australia is currently in the process of finalising a National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality. The Strategy complements the government’s wider efforts to promote gender equality, such as the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-32 and the National Women’s Health Strategy 2020-2030, as well as other similar plans developed at the state and territory levels. At the end of 2022, the Office for Women started national consultations with a broad range of stakeholders, including experts, academia, women’s organisations, unions, business, and state and territory governments, to inform the development of the Strategy and ensure an inclusive and intersectional approach. The Office for Women ran a public consultation process in March and April 2023.
The forthcoming Strategy will provide the focus for whole-of-government action in relation to gender equality. Setting out clear result-oriented objectives for gender equality, that would ideally be in general alignment with those set across States and Territories, would help clarify expected outcomes while ensuring coherent efforts across the country. Linking the Strategy upwards to the broader government priorities and international goals (such as the UN Sustainable Development Goals) and downwards to the strategic planning of departments would also ensure co-ordinated and coherent government policy. In addition, the Strategy should have indicators for measuring progress in relation to its objectives, ideally linked to the new framework included in the Measuring What Matters Statement to be released later in 2023 to support the assessment of well-being outcomes (see Chapter 3).
Having clear gender equality objectives in a key government document that holds political weight would also further underpin the renewed commitment of the Australian Government to implementing gender budgeting and GIAs. In this respect, the Strategy should set out the role that GIAs and gender budgeting would play in promoting an adequate and effective policy response to deliver against the Strategy, as well as the roles and responsibilities allocated to stakeholders across the government for their implementation. Potentially drawing on the Framework for Action for gender equality that the Office for Women developed for the Strategy, strong accountability frameworks would help clarify ownership and responsibilities for the promotion of specific objectives. Adequate mechanisms should also be put in place for monitoring and reporting on the achievement of identified priorities, as it is the case in other OECD countries (Box 2.4).
Given the importance of action on behalf of governmental and non-governmental stakeholders in achieving progress in relation to many gender equality objectives, wide dissemination and communication of the Strategy will help raise awareness of government priorities and increase its impact.
Czechia adopted its Gender Equality Strategy for 2021-2030 in 2021. The document provides a solid foundation for implementing gender equality commitments as it sets out high-level goals complemented by concretely defined measures and corresponding indicators and identification of roles and responsibilities for entities across the whole-of-government. The Strategy also puts in place an annual reporting and monitoring mechanism, requiring ministries and other co-operating entities to report to the Office of the Government (more specifically to the Department for Gender Equality) regarding its implementation. This mechanism consists of a self-assessment of the level of implementation by the responsible entities and an assessment by the Department for Gender Equality.
Source: OECD (2023[25]), Gender Equality in the Czech Republic, OECD Publishing, Paris; https://doi.org/10.1787/c5a3086f-en.
2.3.3. Legal framework
Legal frameworks focused on gender equality and mainstreaming can help tackle gender bias and discrimination and ensure that gender equality is upheld as a fundamental value and ethos of public policymaking, even in moments where political commitment is lower. Such frameworks encompass laws that are dedicated to gender equality as well as the integration of general guidance principles that support gender equality in other laws (e.g. budget laws, labour code, procurement laws, and civil procedure laws).
In 2021, 29 out of 33 (88%) countries that responded to 2021 OECD Survey on Gender Mainstreaming and Governance (GMG Survey) reported having some form of legal basis or a binding authority in place to underpin gender equality and/or gender mainstreaming (OECD, 2022[1]). Gender equality and mainstreaming laws can, for example, mandate ministries to develop gender action plans, clarify the roles and responsibilities of ministries and agencies to integrate a gender perspective in policymaking, set up co-ordination mechanisms for the gender equality policy, or steer the collection and use of gender-disaggregated data.
Table 2.1 offers an overview of the types of legislation relating to gender equality in select OECD countries, while Table 2.2 provides details on the general content of gender equality and mainstreaming laws.
Australia is committed to several international conventions and treaties aiming to uphold human rights, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) ratified in 1983. The Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) gives effect to Australia’s international human rights obligations, making it unlawful to discriminate against a person because of their sex, gender identity, intersex status, sexual orientation, marital or relationship status, family responsibilities, because they are pregnant or might be pregnant or because they are breastfeeding. The Sex Discrimination Act protects people from discrimination in several areas including employment, education, getting or using services, or renting or buying a house or unit. However, there is no comprehensive human rights legislation nor targeted legal frameworks focused on gender equality and mainstreaming in Australia at the Commonwealth level.
While the Sex Discrimination Act provides some form of legal basis for protection from gender-based discrimination, Australia would benefit from the adoption of a specific legal framework focused on gender equality at the Commonwealth level, which could offer the government a stronger basis for taking action to tackle gender gaps and promote equality for women, men, and other groups in the society. As the government is seeking to establish GIA and gender budgeting practices that are enduring and able to deliver outcomes over time, setting legal foundations would help ensure their sustainability in the longer term, protecting the practices from political and economic fluctuations.
New legislation should provide a definition of gender equality as a core value guiding the government and the administration in their efforts to advance gender equality in Australian society. Like other examples observed across OECD countries, the proposed gender equality law should clarify institutional roles and responsibilities relating to the promotion of gender equality and the integration of a gender lens in policymaking and budget decisions. This would include the roles and responsibilities of the Office for Women, the Department of Finance and the Treasury and other departments and agencies.
In addition, to further underpin gender mainstreaming across the government, such a legislative framework would benefit from the inclusion of a specific requirement to conduct intersectional GIAs and gender budgeting. For example, it could mandate that GIAs are undertaken at the earliest stages of policymaking, are conducted in relation to all new policy proposals and systematically accompany Cabinet Submissions. Specific legal provisions relating to gender budgeting could also be introduced through amending the Charter of Budget Honesty Act 1998 (Cth), for example, to formalise the requirement for the Women’s Budget Statement as a key document accompanying the budget and its contents. Legislative provisions in relation to gender budgeting are discussed in more detail in Chapter 3.
Enacting legislation that mandates the inclusion of intersectional gender considerations in departmental plans and reports, sets up co-ordination mechanisms for gender equality policy, steers the collection and use of gender-disaggregated data and establishes a system for accountability, will enable parliament, independent oversight institutions and civil society to assess the extent to which the government is delivering against legislated commitments. Alternatively, these more detailed arrangements could be set out in regulations. Box 2.5 provides some good practice examples of similar provisions included in gender equality and mainstreaming laws across select OECD countries.
Belgium – gender mainstreaming law
Gender mainstreaming and gender budgeting both have legal underpinning in Belgium via a dedicated law on gender mainstreaming adopted in 2017, called “Law aimed at monitoring the application of the resolutions from the world conference on women held in Beijing in September 1995 and at integrating the gender perspective into the whole of the federal policies” (“Loi visant au contrôle de l'application des résolutions de la conférence mondiale sur les femmes réunie à Pékin en septembre 1995 et intégrant la dimension du genre dans l'ensemble des politiques fédérales” in French). This law created an obligation for gender mainstreaming in the development of public policies at the federal level in Belgium. It calls for the declaration of strategic objectives for gender mainstreaming when each new government is formed and outlines the responsibilities of government institutions in delivering these objectives. For example, it sets out that ministries must annually present information regarding the actions and measures they will take to fulfil objectives and details ministerial requirements in relation to gender budgeting. The integration of a gender lens across a range of administrative actions encompassing strategic planning frameworks, data and statistics and gender-sensitive indicators are also prescribed.
Iceland – gender equality law
Gender mainstreaming has legal underpinning in Iceland via a gender equality act adopted in 2020, the Act on the Equal Status and Equal Rights Irrespective of Gender. The legislation provides the foundation for prevention of discrimination based on gender across multiple forms, as well as maintaining gender equality and equal opportunities for the genders in all spheres of society. It lays the basis for gender and equality mainstreaming in decision making on the part of ministries and public institutions and identifies the key areas of work where gender gaps exist, such as pay discrimination, reconciliation of work and family life, education, gender-based violence and gender norms and stereotypes. The Act also acknowledges the importance of using statistics disaggregated by gender and increasing research around gender and equality. In addition to these legal provisions, gender budgeting is legislated in Iceland’s Public Finance Act, No. 123/2015, which states that the minister of finance, in consultation with the minister responsible for gender equality, will lead the formulation of the gender budgeting programme, to be considered in the drafting of the Budget Bill. It also states the Budget Bill shall outline its effects on gender equality targets.
Source: (Belgian Federal Parliament, 2007[28]); (Institut pour l'égalité des femmes et des hommes, n.d.[29]); (Government of Iceland, 2021[30]); (Althingi, 2015[31]).
A broader gender equality law would have greater public and political visibility and offer the opportunity to incorporate legal protections related to gender-based discrimination and affirmative actions to address inequalities. In the longer term, the new legislation would benefit from being set in a broader piece of legislation relating to human rights.
2.3.4. Gender mainstreaming tools: gender impact assessments
GIAs are a key policymaking tool for promoting gender equality and mainstreaming and are widely used in OECD countries. By helping identify the gender-specific impacts on women, men, and other societal groups, GIAs allow policymakers to adopt corrective measures to remove or counterbalance any unintended negative effects of public policies in a timely manner, as well as build on lessons learnt to feed into future policy development cycles.
As of 2021, 26 out of 34 OECD countries reported having a formal requirement for GIAs in place, and at least 6 countries reported introducing or revising the scope of GIA requirements since 2017 (OECD, 2022[1]). GIAs can be performed ex ante, at the design and development stage, or ex post, at the evaluation stage. Across OECD countries, requirements to conduct ex ante GIAs are more common (76%) than provisions to undertake ex post GIAs (15%). Some countries (15%) also report having requirements to perform continuous GIAs.
GIAs can be conducted for a variety of decision-making instruments, including those pertaining to policies, budgets, and programmes, as shown by Figure 2.3.
There is no single blueprint for the process or methodology GIAs involve. In some OECD countries, for instance, GIAs are undertaken as a standalone exercise, while in others they are conducted as a component of a unique regulatory impact assessment (RIA) (OECD, 2022[1]).
In line with its commitment to improve the promotion of gender equality, the government of Australia is taking active steps to strengthen the implementation of GIA processes with a view to monitoring progress, assessing outcomes, and achieving longer-term maturity of GIA to support better-targeted policy and spending decisions.
The Office for Women undertook a GIA pilot on select Cabinet Submissions and new policy proposals (NPPs) for the October 2022-23 Budget in the areas of jobs, housing, and the care economy. As the institution leading on gender issues across the government, the Office for Women undertook the bulk of the analytical work for the pilot, identifying relevant issues and partnering with seven lead agencies on the analysis of sixteen items. The high-level findings of four of the GIAs were included in the October 2022-23 Women’s Budget Statement published alongside the Budget. Later, the May 2023-24 Budget applied a gender lens across a wider range of new policy proposals, with some key measures subject to a more detailed GIA.
It was announced as part of the May 2023-24 Budget that, going forward, all new policy proposals will be required to be accompanied by gender analysis. A set of criteria has been developed to guide the depth of analysis required for different types of budget measures (further detail is provided in Chapter 3).
In Australia, the tradition for impact analysis to accompany new policy proposals has become well-established. The process involves the provision of a preliminary impact analysis for each new policy initiative and the Office of Impact Analysis (OIA) reviewing the preliminary assessment and providing analysis advice. Compliance with the OIA framework is deemed high across government. The lessons that can be drawn from OIA when developing a framework for GIAs most notably include mandatory assessment for all policy proposals with monetary value and the establishment of clear institutional responsibility for assessment review. The focus of impact analysis overseen by OIA does however differ from that of GIA. Furthermore, the Australian Government Guide to Policy Impact Analysis does not provide specific guidelines on assessing gender impact. A separate process for GIA, where a similar status as regulatory impact assessments is established, is therefore desirable.
The GIA framework designed for the pilot phase (October 2022-23 Budget and 2023-24 Budget) set out for the Office for Women to work with the lead department(s) during the proposal development process to prepare a short GIA report providing details on the process, decisions, and outcomes of the assessment. The GIA report was not shared with the Cabinet during the first pilot in October 2022-23, but rather, sponsoring departments provided a paragraph with key GIA findings for the Cabinet Submission or NPP. Then, as part of the Coordination Draft stage, the Office for Women could prepare individual comments on draft submissions to share its views on the impact of the proposal on gender equality with Cabinet ministers.
The Office for Women also drafted a briefing on the assessed impacts for the Prime Minister and the Minister for Women to inform considerations by the Cabinet and the ERC. During the 2023-24 Budget, a GIA Summary was also produced to allow the Cabinet to identify whether the proposal improved gender equality, kept the status quo, or had a negative effect on gender equality. The Office for Women provided assistance to departments and agencies in making any changes to proposals to help improve their impact on gender equality. The Office for Women also planned to support departments and agencies in measuring the realised impacts of proposals to ensure they deliver their intended benefits for gender equality.
In many cases the GIA pilot exercise directly resulted in adjustments to the design of policies being put forward by departments and agencies. The process revealed understanding among agencies for the need to consider gender in policy development and willingness to engage further in gender mainstreaming efforts, but also limited capacity and capability across the APS to conduct GIAs. In addition, doubts were reported within agencies and departments about the functioning of GIAs.
As explained above, the Office for Women continued expanding the scope and coverage of GIA in the pilot phase, through adding a further priority area to broaden the application of GIA in the May 2023-24 Budget and conducting GIA on a revenue proposal and ongoing recurrent measures agreed to by Cabinet. As gender analysis is now required for all new policy proposals, the responsibility for gender analysis shifts to departments. To support this process, it will be necessary to continue building capacity across the APS and continue to refine guidelines that explain the type of analysis requires, and clarify roles, responsibilities, and expectations, as discussed in the related section on guidance, training and capacity development below. It will be important to ensure that GIA is integrated sufficiently early into the policymaking cycle in order to be impactful.
It is not enough to require gender analysis, the Australian Government will also need to make efforts to ensure the analysis is of sufficient quality. The government should aim to conduct robust GIAs for all policies, programmes, regulations, and budgets, informed by detailed guidance to ensure the quality and rigour of the analysis. This can take time and will likely require continued investment in the development and redevelopment of guidelines, training and strong validation procedures. To support this, a solid evidence base for gender-sensitive policymaking should also be built, improved, and ensured over time (see following section on data).
Taking Canada and the Australian State of Victoria as examples (Box 2.6), consideration should be given to the integration of intersectional perspectives into GIAs already in the short term, by adding analysis relating to individual characteristics that are known through collected data, such as age and income level. Conducting intersectional GIAs from the start would explicitly recognise that discrimination can be experienced through a combination of multiple, intersecting factors, and require policymakers to integrate this understanding throughout all government action. The improved understanding of needs brought about through intersectional analysis can help support more targeted policy action that is more effective at closing gender gaps. Since the rigour of intersectional analysis is currently limited by the availability of adequate disaggregated data, a strategy to strengthen the required evidence base would be helpful in view of consolidating the intersectional aspects of GIA (see next section on gender-disaggregated data).
Canada uses GBA Plus as an analytical tool to assess gender and diversity impacts of government decisions. GBA Plus provides a framework to assess and address systemic inequalities, and to inform the design and implementation of policies, programmes and services that meet the diverse needs of people across the country. This allows analysts, researchers, evaluators, and decision makers to constantly improve their work and attain better results for all people by being more responsive to their specific needs and circumstances.
The “Plus” in GBA Plus acknowledges that the analysis goes beyond biological (sex) and socio-cultural (gender) differences. It examines how multiple characteristics intersect by considering several identity factors such as: race, ethnicity, religion, age, and mental or physical disability. There is a broad recognition in Canada that without GBA Plus, there is a risk of missing or misreading the experiences of a significant portion of the Canadian population and, as a consequence, risk developing policies and initiatives that do not meet the needs of all people and that can inadvertently increase inequalities. It is therefore important that GBA Plus is applied to enhance the impact and effectiveness of all federal initiatives.
The Victorian State Government in Australia has obligations to apply an intersectional approach to gender impact assessment under the Gender Equality Act 2020. Section 6(8) of the Act outlines that “gender inequality may be compounded by other forms of disadvantage or discrimination that a person may experience based on Aboriginality, age, disability, ethnicity, gender identity, race, religion, sexual orientation and other attributes.” Through applying an intersectional approach to a gender impact assessment, it aims to encourage thinking about the different experiences of people in the communities that the Victorian Government serves, and consideration of how their experience of gender inequality may be shaped by other aspects of their identity.
Guidance around undertaking intersectional gender impact assessments encourages those undertaking the analysis to avoid considering intersectional attributes individually and then merely adding the impacts together, but instead try to understand the issue from the perspective of other people with multiple, intersectional attributes and how they interact or experience it. Organisations are also encouraged to include people of diverse, intersectional attributes in the assessment team where possible.
Source: OECD (2018[32]), Gender Equality in Canada: Mainstreaming, Governance and Budgeting, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264301108-en; Additional information provided by the Government of Canada in 2023; (Victorian Government Commission for Gender Equality in the Public Sector, 2022[33]); (Victorian Government Commission for Gender Equality in the Public Sector, 2022[34]).
2.3.5. Gender-disaggregated data and intersectional analysis
High-quality, reliable, and easily accessible data provides a foundation for evidence-based policymaking. The importance of having a stock of quality evidence to inform policy- and decision-making processes has been further highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic, with governments having to face increasingly volatile, cross-cutting, and complex policy challenges (OECD, 2021[2]). A sound knowledge base, as well as qualitative and quantitative analysis of where a country stands in terms of gender equality, are crucial for setting gender equality objectives, developing strategic plans, and defining policy priorities and sequencing (OECD, 2021[2]). A robust corpus of gender-disaggregated and intersectional data and related research and analysis are also essential for rigorous GIAs to be undertaken at all stages of the policymaking process.
Increase the understanding of the concepts of sex and gender across the government
Australia has a long history of collecting data disaggregated by sex or gender. Over the decades, successive government administrations have shown a strong interest in understanding the needs of Australian society by applying a gender-sensitive lens. For example, for more than a century, labour market data, being it administrative or survey data, has included a disaggregation by sex, thus allowing to explore differences between male and female and to assess specific gaps. Consequently, the majority of data collection efforts in Australia still use sex disaggregation as the norm. However, stakeholder discussions revealed that a progressive shift is occurring in the country, sustained by political discussions as well as movements advocating for a cultural change that would allow data collection to rather focus on gender identity. As such, the Australian government published specific Guidelines on the Recognition of Sex and Gender in 2013 (then updated in 2015) stating that the preferred approach is for departments and agencies to rather collect gender and not sex information (Australian Government, 2013[35]).
There is scope to promote a broader and more homogenous understanding of the concepts of sex and gender across the government. Although the ABS released a Standard for Sex and Gender Variables in 2016 (updated with the 2020 Standard in January 2021), with the aim of maximising the statistical efficacy of the topic/variable, in practice government agencies and departments continue interpreting the two concepts in various ways or using them interchangeably. Therefore, while data disaggregation by sex remains the norm in Australia, some statistical exercises provide information that falls into broader categories. For instance, data collected by the ABS in some labour market surveys may reflect gender rather than sex, or a combination of gender and sex depending on the understanding, perception or preference of different groups of survey respondents, including employers. Some OECD countries have recently adopted new approaches to collecting data on gender diversity as illustrated in Box 2.7.
Canada
Following introduction of Bill C-16 in 2016, the Government of Canada led efforts to modernise how it collects, uses and displays sex and gender information. In 2018, following extensive consultations across jurisdictions, with academics, members of the transgender, non-binary, and two-spirit community and the public at large, Canada presented its recommendations through the Policy Direction to Modernize the Government of Canada’s Sex and Gender Information Practices, which systemically supports Canada’s gender impact assessment (GBA Plus).
In addition, in 2021 in Canada, following country-wide consultations with the population, the national census was updated to reflect broader societal changes by adding new content on gender. Before 2021, the census questionnaire used to include only a question on sex. In 2021, the precision of “at birth” was added to the sex question, and a new question on gender was included, thus helping fill a significant information gap on gender diversity.
United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom censuses have historically collected information on sex but not about gender identity. However, following feedback from the Census 2021 topic consultation, United Kingdom’s Office for National Statistics committed to exploring whether and how to collect information on gender identity and published a “Gender identity research and testing plan”. The 2021 Census was therefore the first one to include a question on gender identity, answered on a voluntary basis by people in England and Wales.
Source: Statistics Canada (2022[36]), “Canada is the first country to provide census data on transgender and non-binary people”, https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/220427/dq220427b-eng.htm; Office for National Statistics (2023[37]), “Sexual orientation and gender identity”, https://census.gov.uk/census-2021-results/phase-one-topic-summaries/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity.
Strengthen the breadth and depth of gender-disaggregated data
The ABS, as Australia’s national statistical agency, is the country’s main source of data and information. Since 2011 the ABS has annually released specific gender indicators to measure equality between women and men in six key areas: gender pay gap; work; education; health and well-being; crime; and work-life balance. It collaborates closely with government departments and agencies to reflect their priorities in the design of its surveys and to share relevant information. Teams with data evaluation functions exist in each department, thus complementing the role played by the ABS. In addition, while most sex-disaggregated data is available on the ABS’s official website, the ABS can also conduct targeted research based on departments’ needs. However, the availability of disaggregated statistics in some areas not traditionally associated with gender equality, such as transport, remains limited as that data is mainly collected through censuses conducted every five years.
As highlighted during stakeholder discussions, Australia’s unique geography sometimes makes it challenging to collect disaggregated data, especially in remote areas of the country. In fact, in those regions which account for a large geographic area but a very small share of the total population, it may be difficult to produce specific gender-disaggregated data, especially from sample surveys, with the risk of failing to capture and report on specific issues in a comprehensive way. Taking those challenges into account and striving to overcome them, the ABS works closely with other parts of the Australian government and with States and Territory governments to maximise the geographic richness of their registration, programme and service delivery data and analysis, including on births, deaths, marriages, education, and on gender-based violence. Vertical data exchange and integration across levels of government are supported by a network of working groups, relationship managers, as well as embedded/outposted offices in some key departments, such as the Treasury, the Department of Social Services, and the Department of Health and Aged Care.
Continue efforts to foster data integration and expand availability and accessibility of cross-sectional data
In Australia, significant efforts have been made recently to enhance data integration across government. For example, the ABS has led the development of the Multi-Agency Data Integration Project (MADIP), established in 2015 in response to a review of the Commonwealth arrangements for data integration that found more focus was needed to access the substantial value inherent in public data. The MADIP consists of a secure data asset combining information on health, education, government payments, income and taxation, employment, and population demographics over time. Led by the ABS and enabled through partnerships with a broad range of departments and agencies across the government, the MADIP provides approved government and non-government users with access to a wealth of cross-sectional data (Australian Bureau of Statistics, n.d.[38]). Still, as highlighted during the fact-finding mission, there is scope to further expand the availability and accessibility of cross-sectional data to help develop an accurate picture of the Australian population at any given time.
Improve data collection to support broader equality and intersectional analysis
Since the COVID-19 pandemic, OECD countries have increasingly recognised intersectional analysis as a key tool for increasing the awareness of diversity between individuals in policymaking and taking a holistic and inclusive approach to gender equality (OECD, 2022[1]). Intersectionality refers to the understanding that each individual’s identity is made of several aspects which can combine and intersect in various ways, thus increasing the risk of multiple and overlapping forms of discrimination and exclusion for some groups more than others. By taking these combinations into account, intersectional analysis has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of government action to promote gender equality, through providing a more comprehensive overview of the compounding discriminations that can affect individuals. As of 2021, 9 out of 26 OECD countries that responded to the GMG Survey reported having adopted practices for intersectional impact assessment (OECD, 2022[1]). Box 2.8 provides an example.
In Finland, human impact assessments (HuIA) are a form of ex ante analysis that integrates different social and health impact assessments and is used by municipalities and regions in the preparation of their policy decisions. HuIA brings together different perspectives or angles to analyse the impacts of a policy decision on the population, including:
child impact assessment, to analyse the impacts of decisions and measures on children;
gender impact assessment, involving assessment of measures and decisions with respect to their potential impacts on gender equality;
health impact assessment, taking into account the impacts on both physical and mental health of a project or decision;
social impact assessment, to examine the impacts on people’s living conditions, comfort, and welfare;
equality impact assessment, to identify potential discriminations and ways to improve equality;
linguistic impact assessment, including considerations of the impacts on the realisation of the linguistic rights on all individuals;
environmental impact assessment, to assess impacts of plans and programmes on the environment, as well as on health, comfort and living conditions of individuals;
impact assessment in land use planning, to examine related economic, social, cultural, and other types of impacts;
economic impact assessment, evaluating economic costs and savings of specific measures, such as their effect on income transfers and households’ disposable income;
business impact assessment to assess the impact of decisions on the operating conditions of companies, including impacts on entrepreneurs, employment, and labour supply.
Source: Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (n.d.[39]), “Human Impact Assessment”, https://thl.fi/en/web/management-of-health-and-wellbeing-promotion/management-of-wellbeing/practices/human-impact-assessment.
While most statistical exercises in Australia collect data disaggregated by sex, some of them also include variables such as age, economic status, migrant status, geographical location, and whether individuals are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Still, very few surveys reportedly capture other individual characteristics, such as disability status or sexual orientation.
Stakeholder interviews highlighted that intersectional analysis is still limited in Australia. For example, in 2021 the ABS used monthly Labour Force Survey data to show how labour force participation rates have changed over time by examining data for different generational cohorts of women, yet these types of analyses are not conducted regularly.
Stakeholders also revealed that there is increasing interest in Australia in improving the collection and analysis of data on specific groups of the population, such as migrants and First Nations peoples. The MADIP, for example, enables such exercise, by guiding users towards the key data needed for this type of analysis. Leveraging this, there would be benefits to integrating an intersectional perspective into current GIA exercises. An intersectional analysis would engender a richer understanding of the varied nature of gender inequalities and enable more targeted government policies to be developed. Partnering with States and Territories would provide the government with the opportunity to learn from their experience in collecting and using data to foster the analysis of the impacts of policies of different groups of the population in their diversity.
Develop a data action plan to increase awareness of existing data holdings
While the collection of disaggregated data is supported by the work of both the ABS at the Commonwealth level and the statistical offices of States and Territories, stakeholder interviews pointed out that there is still limited awareness of existing data holdings that could be useful as an evidence base for GIAs and the development of gender equality policies. Some recent efforts have been made to progress in this respect, through the establishment of a new Gender Data Steering Group in October 2022. Convened by PM&C and the ABS as a sub-group of the Deputy Secretary Data Group, the Gender Data Steering Group comprised, in its early membership, the:
The Gender Data Steering Group has been convened to maximise the impact of the government’s major data holdings as an evidence-base for gender equality policy. Part of this involves mapping the data holdings across government with a view to raise awareness of their availability and identify gaps, as well as promote better use of the stock of disaggregated data in Australia. This helps progress towards a more mature capability for GIA and gender budgeting. As part of its work programme, the Group is tasked with: 1) conducting an analysis of the data holdings across the government; 2) identifying how to make greater use of publicly held data to improve gender analysis (for example, gender pay gaps); 3) supporting data-related recommendations from the 2021 review of the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012. The Group is expected to report on the work conducted with respect to all workstreams mentioned above in the second half of 2023.
It is important that an action plan flows from the work of the Gender Data Steering Group, setting out the key steps to be addressed to remove data-related barriers to the development of gender equality policies and the implementation of GIA and gender budgeting, as well as to fill any data gaps that could emerge when undertaking GIAs. The plan would also benefit from setting out how data needs to be strengthened over time to support an intersectional lens to this work. Similar efforts have recently been made in other OECD countries, as shown in Box 2.9.
Canada’s Disaggregated Data Action Plan
In its Budget 2021, the government of Canada announced funding for Statistics Canada over five years to implement a Disaggregated Data Action Plan to produce better and more detailed statistical information for policymaking. Among other objectives, the action plan aims to: expand disaggregated data on diverse populations (such as women, Indigenous peoples, racialised populations and people living with disabilities) at various levels of geography; improve access to such data by the public, the government and other data users; increase analytical insights on diverse groups of people to shed light on inequities and promote more inclusive decision making; strengthen national statistical standards; and foster engagement and communication to ensure the voices of diverse groups are heard and their data needs are met in an effective way.
Colombia’s Guide for differential and intersectional focus in the National Statistics System
In Colombia, Law 1448 of 2011, known as the Victims’ and Land Restitution Law, introduced a new approach to guide Colombian state entities in the development of policies for victims of the armed conflict, calling for the collection of relevant information at higher levels of disaggregation for decision making. Responding to this requirement, in December 2020 the National Administrative Department of Statistics (DANE), Colombia’s national statistical office, published a Guide for the inclusion of the differential and intersectional focus in the statistical production of the National Statistics System (Guía para la inclusión del enfoque diferencial e interseccional en la producción estadística del sistema estadístico nacional in Spanish). The Guide provides conceptual, normative, and methodological guidelines to encourage the collection and use of data disaggregated by gender and other factors, to increase visibility on the diversity of the Colombian population and inform public and private decision making that advances equality. The guide is intended for the DANE and all public and private entities in Colombia that produce statistics (Sistema Estadístico Nacional) and underlines the importance of collecting data disaggregated by several variables to allow for analyses of gaps and situations of vulnerability. These variables include: gender, age, ethnic origin, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation, geographic location, educational level, socioeconomic situation, victim status, migrant status, access to health and social security services, health status, rural status, and other characteristics.
Source: Statistics Canada (2021[40]), “Disaggregated Data Action Plan: Why it matters to you”, https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11-627-m/11-627-m2021092-eng.htm; OECD (2023[41]), OECD Review of Gender Equality in Colombia, https://doi.org/10.1787/a559fc5e-en.
2.3.6. Guidance, training, and capacity development
The integration of a gender perspective into policymaking and budget decisions is often a new concept for government actors, who face competing demands for their time. In this context, the successful implementation of practices such as GIA and gender budgeting rely on training and capacity development. The 2015 OECD Gender Recommendation highlights the importance of the adequate capacity and resourcing of public institutions to integrate gender equality perspectives in their activities (OECD, 2016[18]). This can be achieved through, for example, establishing gender focal points across government, providing training courses and workshops, promoting collaborative approaches with knowledge centres to produce gender-sensitive knowledge, leadership and communication and providing clear guidelines and templates.
To support GIA in becoming a core tool of policymaking that is integral to budget decision making, the Australian Government will need to develop relevant guidance and training materials that expand gender competence and expertise on gender mainstreaming at all levels across the APS. More than a third (34%) of OECD countries that responded to the 2021 OECD Survey on Gender Mainstreaming and Governance reported the lack of gender expertise of policymakers as one of the greatest challenges to the integration of GIA in routine policymaking. Regular, optional trainings for civil servants emerged as the most common measure adopted by governments (38%) to strengthen the robustness of GIAs (OECD, 2022[1]).
To support the implementation of the GIA pilot phase in 2022, the Office for Women developed guidance material, templates, and process maps to raise awareness and assist the departments involved in the exercise. Stakeholder interviews highlighted that Australian Government departments and agencies are broadly aware of the importance of integrating gender perspectives into their work and are willing to engage, but internal capacities and capabilities remain limited. There is a limited understanding of the value of GIA and the role of gender analysis in improving policy development across the APS and departments and agencies find it challenging to understand the links between gender equality and the whole GIA process, as well as identify stakeholder roles and responsibilities. These challenges and limitations point to the need to further develop capacity through formal training and guidance resources. The Office for Women commenced work with the APS Academy to design a first set of trainings for staff in departments and agencies undertaking GIA, to help build their capability around gender literacy in view of preparation of the next Budget.
Since it was announced as part of the May 2023-24 Budget that, going forward, all new policy proposals will be required to be accompanied by gender analysis, the PM&C has developed an APS Guide to Gender Analysis and Gender Impact Assessment. This outlines a set of criteria to be used to determine when an in-depth GIA is required (see also Chapter 3) and includes some information on intersectional gender analysis. Moving forward, the following actions are crucial for broader roll-out of GIA:
Continued strengthening of guidance material for departments in relation to intersectional GIA and gender analysis, following the examples of other OECD countries (Box 2.10). Materials should include templates for analysis and help government staff understand when the analysis should be undertaken in the policymaking cycle, key questions that should be asked, how policies should be tailored in response to the findings, and the quality control/validation process to be followed. They should also provide good practice examples and information on where to go if further information is needed. Similarly, it will be important to support departments in building capacity for using and analysing gender-disaggregated and intersectional data, as a key element of evidence-based policymaking and precondition for rigorous GIAs.
The development and provision of general training and awareness raising initiatives on GIA across the public service (see also Canada’s example in Box 3.12 in Chapter 3), as well as tailored training for key stakeholders – such as the Department of Finance and the Treasury – focused on their specific role. While the Office for Women would have a critical role in helping specify training needs across the public service, the APSC could be an important partner in designing the training and rolling it out across government.
The integration of a gender perspective in trainings on other relevant topics, such as budgeting, strategic planning, and policy analysis, to foster gender-sensitive policymaking across the whole of government.
Finland
Finland’s Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, which is responsible for gender mainstreaming in the country, has developed a handbook to support ministerial work on gender equality. The handbook explains why it is important to integrate gender perspectives in decision-making processes and provides civil servants with practical guidance on GIA, project implementation, legislative preparation and planning of ministries’ operations and finances. With respect to GIA, while the actual methodology varies per the function of the authority in concern, the guidelines outline the first steps as follows: i) examination of each matter at every stage of preparation from the gender perspective; ii) assessment of the gender impact; iii) consideration of the results of the gender impact analysis when drawing up the final proposal or measure.
In New Zealand, in 2019, the Ministry for Women launched Bringing Gender In (BGI) as an online analysis tool to help policymakers explore the gender impacts of their policies. Bringing Gender In replaces and updates the Ministry’s 1996 gender analysis tool “The full picture guidelines for gender analysis”. The Bringing Gender In tool has several stages, which encourage gender issues to be considered at multiple steps of the policy process, including in forming the policy issue, in developing the policy options, in consultation, in implementation, and in monitoring and evaluation. It provides several prompting questions, as well as links to potential data sources. In late 2022, the Ministry for Women commenced a review of the tool to enhance its usability and increase the focus on Māori women and girls.
The Ministry for Women and the Treasury introduced gender budgeting in 2021, first through a pilot programme for Budget 2022, then followed by an expanded Gender Budgeting Exercise for Budget 2023. The Budget 2022 pilot focused on ex ante GIAs. Five participating agencies working in education, employment and training areas applied a gender lens across 19 budget initiatives, by completing a gender assessment template (GAT) as an annex to the Budget template. Following the pilot’s success, a second exercise was conducted for Budget 2023 and similarly used GIAs. The Ministry for Women provided additional support to agencies to identify the gendered impacts of initiatives through a “Gender Budgeting Toolkit” which included: an agency guide to gender budgeting (provided to agencies in addition to the main Budget Guidance provided by the Treasury), group gender analysis workshops, one-on-one support, a peer-review service, and the Bringing Gender In tool.
Source: Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (n.d.[42]), “Gender mainstreaming”; Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (2013[43]), “Gender Glasses in Use a handbook to support gender equality work at Finnish ministries”; information provided by the government of New Zealand in 2023; (Ministry for Women, n.d.[44]).
As explained in the previous section dedicated to departments and agencies, gender focal points or “champions” for GIA can be important drivers of a well-functioning system of gender mainstreaming by contributing to strengthening departments’ capacities. In the Australian context, gender focal points would be critical in helping deliver new legislative commitments. Staff whose role is dedicated to developing expertise relating to GIA in their own area of government can help drive change from the inside. A “hub and spoke model” for institutional leaders would be a desirable solution for the APS, whereby the Office for Women is the central agency developing guidance, training, and capacity development, to be implemented through the network of institutional leaders across government departments and agencies (further detail is provided in Chapter 3).
2.3.7. Transparency and accountability
Transparency is key to nurturing public trust in government action and can support evidence-based policymaking and better gender policy outcomes through increasing access to information, raising awareness on the extent of existing gender gaps, and improving understanding of the specificities of the groups most affected (OECD, 2021[2]). Similarly, sound public accountability mechanisms can contribute to the success and sustainability of government gender-related initiatives, by helping identify needs, gaps, and challenges in achieving gender goals, evaluating the impacts of their efforts in an objective manner, and providing methods for redress and recourse. Thus, in combination, transparency and accountability processes can build on each other to support the fulfilment of gender equality goals. For example, open government practices allow citizens and non-governmental organisations to better identify and advocate for their needs, thereby putting positive pressure on policymakers to be more accountable for their actions – or inactions – on gender equality (OECD, 2021[2]).
Foster transparency and citizen engagement
As the Australian government is seeking to embed enduring GIA and gender budgeting practices that can deliver positive outcomes over time, it will be important for robust government-wide accountability and transparency mechanisms to be developed. As previously mentioned, the Women’s Budget Statement accompanying the October 2022-23 Budget included a high-level summary of four GIAs undertaken by the Office for Women and departments in the GIA pilot phase (see section on GIA). In further developing the GIA model, consideration could be given to publishing GIAs of all final policy decisions following completion of the deliberative phase of policymaking, even when the results of the analysis are negative. GIAs could be made available either as summaries or in full format, as is the case for RIAs in Australia. This practice would foster citizen trust in the work of the Australian Government and help raise the quality of the analysis. In addition, publishing GIAs would facilitate access and shared learning among government officials and allow external stakeholders to form a view on the quality, rigour, and relevance of GIA, as well as draw upon GIA findings for inclusion in independent research.
The publication of GIAs will also set the tone for heightened engagement with societal stakeholders which, as stated in the 2017 OECD Recommendation on Open Government, is critical to foster citizen trust and contributes to achieving different outcomes in various policy areas (OECD, 2017[45]). Civil society perspectives have the potential to enrich the quality and the inclusive and responsive character of gender policymaking. Departments and agencies could thus also benefit from engaging with societal stakeholders (including women’s organisations and academic institutions) during the GIA process to gain a better understanding of the potential or actual impact of government policies. Australia has a knowledgeable and engaged corpus of civil society stakeholders that are willing to contribute to the promotion of the country’s gender equality agenda. Through bringing societal stakeholder perspectives into the policymaking process, the government can ensure that policies reflect the diverse needs of the Australian society.
As explained in the section on strategic framework above, the Office for Women has been tasked with the development of Australia’s first National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality. At the end of November 2022, the Office for Women started targeted national consultations with a wide range of stakeholders, including experts, academia, women’s organisations, unions, business, and state and territory governments, to inform the early development of the Strategy. To ensure an inclusive and intersectional approach, the Office for Women aims to engage with a broad spectrum of the Australian society, including people experiencing gender inequality, people with disabilities, First Nations peoples, the LGBTQIA+ community, culturally and linguistically diverse people, migrant and refugee women, people living in remote areas, and people from all backgrounds and classes. In 2023 the Office for Women conducted a larger community consultation process to better understand how to achieve gender equality and how this should be reflected in the Strategy. In 2022, the Minister for Women also established the Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce mandated to contribute to the development of the Strategy (see section on the Taskforce for further information). The Taskforce aimed to complement government efforts to engage with business, community, and advocacy sectors on gender equality issues.
In the future, departments and agencies may consider strengthening channels for stakeholder consultation by creating opportunities for citizen input into their gender-related sectoral policy. Civil society organisations and academic institutions could play a key role in increasing the information available for gender-sensitive policymaking, thus also contributing to boosting the quality and effectiveness of GIAs.
Strengthen the accountability role of the parliament to promote gender equality
Parliaments and parliamentary committees hold the government to account for their actions and progress in relation to the gender equality agenda. As part of this, they can provide checks on various government entities and support the sustainability of gender equality reforms during phases of political change. Similarly, independent monitoring mechanisms, such as dedicated commissions, can support recourse for complaints related to gender-based discrimination or other forms of injustice, and oversee implementation of the government’s gender equality commitments. These mechanisms can play both a pre-emptive and a remedial role (OECD, 2021[2]), encouraging compliance with gender equality policies, identifying deficiencies and challenges in fulfilling gender equality goals and helping provide neutral and objective evaluations on the impact of the efforts of government actors.
In Australia there is no parliamentary committee that specifically deals with gender equality issues. However, since 2012, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights (PJCHR) has technically examined and reported on the compatibility of all bills and legislative instruments that come before the Parliament, against Australia’s human rights obligations. These cover the commitments declared in seven international human rights treaties Australia is signatory to, including the CEDAW. After an initial analysis, the Committee can request that relevant departments or agencies provide any additional information needed to prepare its concluding assessment. The completed inquiries, as well as annual reports on the work of the PJCHR, are made publicly available on the Australian Parliament’s website. The PJCHR is made up of five members from the Senate and five from the House of Representatives and is supported by a legal adviser and secretariat staff.
While the Committee’s scrutiny represents a valuable contribution to encouraging early and ongoing consideration of human rights issues – including gender equality – in policy and legislative development, there is scope to adopt additional parliamentary accountability arrangements for government actions to promote gender equality. As an example, in the medium-longer term Australia could consider introducing a requirement to undertake GIAs in relation to all bills brought forth to parliament. Other recommendations to strengthen the accountability role of the parliament in relation to gender budgeting are presented in Chapter 3.
Strengthen accountability for gender equality and mainstreaming through independent oversight institutions
In OECD countries, various levels of accountability are enabled by independent oversight institutions such as equality bodies, Ombudsman’s offices, and supreme audit institutions (SAIs). Oversight and accountability institutions can play a significant role in communicating to citizens about gender equality outcomes, gender mainstreaming strategies and gender equality concerns, such as violence against women and the gender pay gap. In Sweden, for example, an audit by the supreme audit institution revealed the existence of barriers to gender mainstreaming and helped remove them, resulting in reform of the country’s institutional arrangements for gender mainstreaming (Box 2.11).
The Swedish National Audit Office (NAO) is an independent organisation under the Swedish Parliament, called Riksdag, and ensures that the Riksdag receives a co-ordinated and independent audit of the state finances. The NAO audits the whole chain of the executive power, through performance and financial audits.
In 2014-15, after an increase in resources for specific gender policy measures, the NAO audited the government’s gender equality initiatives to assess conditions making the results of specific gender policy measures sustainable and leading to permanent improvements. The aim was also to evaluate whether the government’s design and management of the initiative was effective and whether there was an institutional framework for acting on the results so they could be sustained over time. The 2015 NAO report stated the need for an institutional structure that strengthened gender equality work and helped ensure a long-term approach and sustainability. It called for a more robust structure for good gender governance, strengthened gender mainstreaming in the administrations, as well as improved conditions to make results from temporary initiatives permanent. Following the findings of the audit, the Swedish government expressed its intention to create a gender equality agency to be operational at the beginning of 2018. In response, the Swedish Gender Equality Agency was established on 1 January 2018 to contribute to the effective implementation of Swedish gender equality policy.
Source: OECD (2018[24]), OECD Toolkit for Mainstreaming and Implementing Gender Equality, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/gov/toolkit-for-mainstreaming-and-implementing-gender-equality.pdf.
The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) assists the Auditor-General by supporting accountability and transparency in the Australian Government through independent reporting to the parliament. Every year in July, the ANAO publishes its annual audit work programme informing the parliament, government institutions and citizens of the planned audit activities of the year, including financial statement audits, performance audits, and other assurance reviews. The work programme is established reflecting current government priorities. At present, the ANAO does not apply a specific gender lens to its work. Still, the Office reported having recently conducted an audit to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Social Services’ in implementing the National Plan to Reduce Violence Against Women and their Children 2010–2022, as well as of its procurement of national telephone and online counselling and support services.
In the medium-long term, as GIAs become an embedded practice in Australia, a greater oversight role related to gender equality and mainstreaming could be envisaged for the ANAO. Taking Canada’s experience as example (Box 2.12), the ANAO could consider undertaking specific GIA audits, to assess the level of its application across the government and throughout the policy cycle and provide recommendations to strengthen GIA implementation across the APS. Additional recommendations related to performance audits are provided in Chapter 3.
In Canada, the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) provides the parliament with objective, fact-based information and advice on government programmes and activities through financial and performance audits, as well as special examinations. Following a recommendation of the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women, the OAG has undertaken several audits on the implementation of GBA Plus. The audits performed in 2009 and in 2015 found that, despite efforts to improve GBA Plus, significant implementation barriers remained. In response to the gaps identified in the Fall 2015 Report, Status of Women Canada, the Privy Council Office, and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat which were scoped into the audit committed to working together, along with other federal departments, through a plan to overcome the highlighted gaps, covering specific activities and deadline targets for each institution.
A follow-up audit was performed in 2022, focusing on determining whether the Privy Council Office, the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat and Women and Gender Equality Canada advanced on the implementation of GBA Plus in government through examination of their responses to selected OAG recommendations from the Fall 2015 report. The overall results highlighted that the three institutions had taken action to identify and address the barriers to implementing GBA Plus, yet further scope existed to strengthen and intensify the effort to help departments and agencies fully integrate GBA Plus. Moreover, it was found that gaps persist in departments' and agencies' capacity to perform GBA Plus, including the availability and use of disaggregated data. The audit also found weaknesses in monitoring and reporting across the government.
Source: Government of Canada (2022), Action Plan on Gender-based Analysis (2016-2020), https://women-gender-equality.canada.ca/en/gender-based-analysis-plus/resources/action-plan-2016-2020.html; Office of the Auditor General of Canada, Report 3 – Follow-up on Gender-Based Analysis Plus, https://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_202205_03_e_44035.html.
The preceding sections in this Chapter have highlighted the strengths and challenges of the governance arrangements for integrating gender considerations into policymaking in Australia at the Commonwealth level. Drawing on these insights and lessons learned from international experiences in implementing gender mainstreaming and GIA across the OECD, this section presents a path forward for Australia in the shorter and medium-longer term. The staged approach presented recognises current capacity constraints, as well as political windows associated with the electoral cycle and the need to implement changes in the short term that will help lay the foundations for effective and enduring practices over the medium and longer term.
2.4.1. Short term (next 1-2 years)
Expand and strengthen the role of the Office for Women to reflect the governments heightened commitment to reducing gender inequalities. This should include:
Reinforcing the policy co-ordination function of the Office for Women to increase its ability to convene relevant stakeholders and develop an effective, coherent, and whole-of-government response to gender equality issues.
Clarifying and expanding the role of the Office for Women with respect to gender equality research and data. Establishing a lead role for the Office for Women in working with government stakeholders across government will ensure there is collection and sharing of data, research, and analysis necessary to make informed policy decisions related to gender equality. Further, an opportunity exists for the Office for Women to commission strategic data collection to gather evidence on a particular policy area and produce additional statistics.
Ensuring that the Office for Women is appropriately resourced to fulfil its broader mandate and strengthened functions.
As the National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality is finalised, ensure that it is rooted in evidence in relation to the needs of Australia in social and economic terms, including:
Setting out clear objectives aligned with those set across States and Territories, as well as targets, allocation of roles and responsibilities, and lines of accountability for implementation and fostering gender mainstreaming through the use of GIAs and gender budgeting;
Linking the Strategy with government priorities and to strategic planning processes across government to maximise policy coherence and co-ordination;
Putting in place adequate mechanisms for monitoring and reporting on the achievement of the National Strategy’s objectives, such as developing a Framework for Action, including indicators that can be used to monitor and report on the achievement of the National Strategy's objectives;
Widely disseminating the Strategy to ensure its principles and vision are understood both within and outside of government.
Strengthen the legal framework for gender equality by adopting legislation on gender equality and/or gender mainstreaming at the Commonwealth level to future proof equality as a core value and GIA as a core government process. Legislation should focus on:
Providing a definition of gender equality as a core value to guide society and the APS;
Setting out a specific requirement to conduct GIA with an intersectional perspective in relation to key government decisions to underpin gender mainstreaming across the government;
Clarifying roles and responsibilities of key government institutions with respect to the advancement of gender equality and the integration of a gender lens in policy and budget decisions.
Specifying requirements in relation to gender budgeting (see also Chapter 3).
The legislation could also include provisions that mandate the inclusion of intersectional gender considerations in departmental plans and reporting, set up co-ordination mechanisms for gender equality policy, steer the collection and use of gender-disaggregated data and establish a system for accountability, enabling parliament, independent oversight institutions and civil society to assess the extent to which the government is delivering against legislated commitments. Alternatively, these more detailed arrangements could be set out in regulations.
Ensure that the new set of criteria for GIAs results in expanded scope and coverage of new policy proposals with accompanying GIAs. The screening criteria should mean that budget measures of potentially significant impact on gender equality are subject to in-depth GIA. No sectoral area should be omitted. Undertaking GIA at an early stage of the policymaking cycle would allow departments and agencies the opportunity to redesign policies so as to better progress gender equality objectives.
Expand on the intersectional nature of GIAs to take into account, to the extent possible, cross-cutting and overlapping mechanisms of discrimination faced by various groups in the society. This will facilitate greater understanding around the causes of gender equality and enable more targeted policy responses with potentially greater impact. In order to provide a strong foundation for this expansion, it would be beneficial to further strengthen the availability of data for different population groups, such First Nations peoples.
Enhance institutional capacity for gender mainstreaming and GIAs across government departments and agencies through:
Establishing a requirement for gender “champions” and focal points in all departments and agencies, at an adequate level and with appropriate positioning within each institution. Gender “champions”, appointed at the senior management level, would drive change by using their authority to promote the importance of gender considerations in policy action, promote awareness about related requirements, and encourage buy-in. While all policy managers would be responsible and accountable for the implementation of GIA, gender focal points would build a framework across the public service to support these assessments in practice, as well as foster the broader systematic integration of gender perspectives into all areas of policymaking. The development of a systematic approach and guidance for departments and agencies will allow them to incorporate gender-related objectives as a part of their sectoral strategies to foster horizontal alignment and implementation of the gender equality agenda.
Further developing guidance, templates, and other relevant material to support the implementation of GIA and the use and analysis of gender-disaggregated and intersectional data. This should provide any updates to the screening criteria to be used to identify whether GIA is required to be performed, as well as examples of types and sources of data to be used. Guidance material may evolve over time to clarify aspects such as when in the policymaking cycle the analysis should be conducted, key questions to ask when undertaking a GIA, how policies should be revised in response to findings and the quality control/validation procedure.
Providing general training and awareness raising initiatives on gender mainstreaming as well as tailored training on GIA for key stakeholders focused on their specific role. This should be developed by the APS Academy in co-ordination with the Department of Finance, the Treasury and the Office for Women.The integration of a gender perspective in trainings on other relevant topics, such as budgeting, strategic planning, and procurement, would contribute to promoting gender-sensitive policymaking across the whole of government.
Strengthen the corpus of data and analysis available to support the implementation of GIA and gender budgeting, including:
Building on the work of the Gender Data Steering Group and developing a gender data action plan, setting out key steps to be addressed to remove data-related barriers to the development of gender equality policies and the implementation of GIAs and gender budgeting, as well as to fill any data gaps that could emerge when undertaking those assessments. Clarifying in the plan how data would need to be strengthened over time to support an intersectional lens to this work would provide stronger basis to support systematic intersectional analysis over time.
Taking initial steps to enhance the collection and dissemination of data disaggregated by sex, gender, and other individual characteristics on a systematic basis while further promoting the understanding of the concepts of sex and gender across the government. Additional efforts to improve the collection and availability of disaggregated data and statistics in all policy areas would help build a stronger evidence base for gender-sensitive policymaking. Reinforcing analytical capacities would help in interpreting and making effective use of such data.
Cementing the role of the ABS as a key supporting stakeholder in gender-sensitive policymaking. Structured engagement between the ABS, the Office for Women and departments and agencies will help bring the ABS into regular discussions around data gaps and needs to support the implementation of GIAs across policy sectors. The ABS may be asked – and resourced – to provide supplementary data in specific sectoral areas to help address gaps.
Fostering further vertical data exchange and promoting sharing of good practices on the collection and use of intersectional data with States and Territories, to learn from their experience and improve the analysis of the impacts of policies on diverse population groups.
Strengthen channels for stakeholder consultation and engagement, to allow departments and agencies to create opportunities for citizen input.
2.4.2. Medium-long term (year 3 and beyond)
As GIA becomes a well-established practice across the APS, reinforce the “challenge” and “gatekeeper” functions of PM&C for non-budget submission. While the Department of Finance and the Treasury play an important role in validating GIA accompanying new policy proposals as part of the budget process, the PM&C Policy Team can play an important role in systematically checking whether GIAs have been completed as necessary for the non-budget submissions brought before the Cabinet. This includes having the authority to send proposals back to departments on the grounds of a missing or incomplete assessment. Ensuring adequate human resources capacity and knowledge would allow PM&C to meaningfully contribute to improving the analytical rigour and quality of GIAs, thus also increasing their impacts.
Strengthen the intersectional nature of GIAs for all policies, programmes, regulations, and budgets, in order to further underpin gender-sensitive policymaking and the ability of the Australian Government to make progress towards its gender equality objectives. Expanding the requirement to perform GIA for all legislative materials, including bills brought forth to parliament, would also contribute to reinforcing the parliament’s oversight and accountability role with respect to the government’s equality policy.
Publish ex ante GIAs of all final policy decisions – either as summaries or in full format – after the deliberative phase of policymaking has been completed, including when the results of the analysis are negative. This would increase government transparency, increase citizen trust in the work of the government and improve the quality and rigour of the analysis.
As GIA becomes an established practice across the APS, continue developing and strengthening solutions to improve data integration and interoperability to ensure high-quality and comparable data is available and accessible across the whole-of-government to conduct analysis of gender impacts and inform gender-sensitive policymaking. Continuing to expand the availability and accessibility of cross-sectional data would further support the implementation of GIA across the whole of government.
Formally expand the mandate of the Office for Women to focus not only on women’s issues, but also on broader gender equality and its intersecting factors with the aim to maintain and reinforce the ongoing reform process in Australia. Expanding the mandate of the Office for Women should be accompanied by a corresponding rebranding of its name. Resourcing of the Office may need to be revisited so as to enable the Office to deliver in relation to this expanded mandate.
Expand the oversight role of the ANAO. This should include regularly examining the implementation of GIA across the government and assessing the extent of its application throughout the policy cycle.
Further strengthen the legislative framework for gender equality by adopting broad human rights legislation to provide robust protection to the rights of all population groups and help embody equality as a key value in Australian society.
References
[31] Althingi (2015), Public Finance Act, https://www.althingi.is/lagas/nuna/2015123.html.
[38] Australian Bureau of Statistics (n.d.), Multi-Agency Data Integration Project (MADIP) Research Projects, https://www.abs.gov.au/about/data-services/data-integration/integrated-data/multi-agency-data-integration-project-madip/multi-agency-data-integration-project-madip-research-projects.
[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.
[16] Australian Government (2022), National Strategy to Achieve Gender Equality, https://www.pmc.gov.au/office-women/national-strategy-achieve-gender-equality (accessed on 16 November 2022).
[15] 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).
[17] 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).
[9] Australian Government (2021), Australian National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security 2021-31, https://www.dfat.gov.au/sites/default/files/australias-national-action-plan-on-women-peace-and-security-2021-2031.pdf (accessed on 23 February 2023).
[35] Australian Government (2013), Australian Government Guidelines on the Recognition of Sex and Gender, https://www.ag.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-03/AustralianGovernmentGuidelinesontheRecognitionofSexandGender.pdf.
[27] Australian Government (n.d.), Australian Bureau of Statistics Act 1975 No. 60, 1975, https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2019C00184.
[12] Australian Government Directory (2022), Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce,, https://www.directory.gov.au/portfolios/prime-minister-and-cabinet/department-prime-minister-and-cabinet/womens-economic-equality-taskforce (accessed on 15 November 2022).
[28] Belgian Federal Parliament (2007), Loi visant au contrôle de l’application des résolutions de la conférence mondiale sur les femmes réunie à Pékin en septembre 1995 et intégrant la dimension du genre dans l’ensemble des politiques fédérales, http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/eli/loi/2007/01/12/2007002011/justel.
[11] Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (2020), Women’s Economic Security Statement: 2020, https://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv%3A92002 (accessed on 23 February 2023).
[10] Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (2018), Greater choice for Australian women: Women’s Economic Security Statement 2018, https://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv%3A81932 (accessed on 23 February 2023).
[39] Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (n.d.), Human Impact Assessment, https://thl.fi/en/web/management-of-health-and-wellbeing-promotion/management-of-wellbeing/practices/human-impact-assessment (accessed on 5 February 2023).
[43] Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (2013), Gender Glasses in Use. A handbook to support gender equality work at Finnish ministries, Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/74721/rep_memo201312_genderglasses.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
[42] Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (n.d.), Gender mainstreaming, https://stm.fi/en/gender-equality/mainstreaming.
[23] Government of Canada (n.d.), Departmental Results Report 2020–21, https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/corporate/transparency/plans-performance/departmental-results-report/2021/report.html (accessed on 22 February 2023).
[22] Government of Canada (n.d.), Gender-based analysis plus – Supplementary information table, https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/corporate/transparency/reporting-spending/departmental-results-reports/2021-2022/gender-based-analysis-plus.html (accessed on 22 February 2023).
[20] Government of Canada (n.d.), Women and Gender Equality Canada, https://women-gender-equality.canada.ca/en.html.
[30] Government of Iceland (2021), Act on Equal Status and Equal Rights Irrespective of Gender, https://www.government.is/library/04-Legislation/Act%20on%20Equal%20Status%20and%20Equal%20Rights%20Irrespective%20of%20Gender.pdf.
[21] Government of the United Kingdom (n.d.), Government Equalities Office, http://Government Equalities Office - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).
[8] Hankivsky, O. (2008), “Gender mainstreaming in Canada and Australia: A comparative analysis”, Policy and Society, Vol. 27/1, pp. 69-81, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2008.07.006.
[14] 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).
[13] 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).
[29] Institut pour l’égalité des femmes et des hommes (n.d.), Loi Gender Mainstreaming, https://igvm-iefh.belgium.be/fr/activites/gender_mainstreaming/loi_gender_mainstreaming.
[44] Ministry for Women (n.d.), Gender budgeting, https://women.govt.nz/women-and-work/gender-budgeting.
[25] OECD (2023), Gender Equality in the Czech Republic: Strengthening Government Capacity for Gender-sensitive and Inclusive Recovery, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c5a3086f-en.
[41] 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.
[2] OECD (2021), Policy Framework on Gender-sensitive Public Governance, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/mcm/Policy-Framework-for-Gender-Sensitive-Public-Governance.pdf.
[19] OECD (2019), Fast Forward to Gender Equality: Mainstreaming, Implementation and Leadership, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/g2g9faa5-en.
[32] OECD (2018), Gender Equality in Canada: Mainstreaming, Governance and Budgeting, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264301108-en.
[24] OECD (2018), OECD Toolkit on Mainstreaming and Implementing Gender Equality, OECD, https://www.oecd.org/gov/toolkit-for-mainstreaming-and-implementing-gender-equality.pdf.
[45] OECD (2017), “Recommendation of the Council on Open Government”, OECD Legal Instruments, OECD/LEGAL/0438, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438.
[3] OECD (2017), Trust and Public Policy: How Better Governance Can Help Rebuild Public Trust, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264268920-en.
[18] OECD (2016), 2015 OECD Recommendation of the Council on Gender Equality in Public Life, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264252820-en.
[37] Office for National Statistics (2023), Sexual orientation and gender identity, https://census.gov.uk/census-2021-results/phase-one-topic-summaries/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity (accessed on 23 February 2023).
[4] Parliament of Australia (n.d.), Women’s Suffrage in Australia, https://www.aph.gov.au/Visit_Parliament/Whats_On/Tour/~/~/link.aspx?_id=0C2840022B6F4203BA2C1FEF86FAC306&_z=z.
[6] Richards, J. (2019), “Women’s rights in Australia: The legacy of Gough Whitlam”, Research and Stories through a Gendered Lens, https://www.broadagenda.com.au/2019/womens-rights-in-australia-the-legacy-of-gough-whitlam/ (accessed on 22 February 2023).
[7] Sharp, R. and R. Broomhill (2013), A Case Study of Gender Responsive Budgeting in Australia, Commonwealth Secretariat.
[36] Statistics Canada (2022), Canada is the first country to provide census data on transgender and non-binary people, https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/220427/dq220427b-eng.htm (accessed on 23 February 2023).
[40] Statistics Canada (2021), Disaggregated Data Action Plan: Why it matters to you, https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11-627-m/11-627-m2021092-eng.htm (accessed on 4 February 2023).
[33] Victorian Government Commission for Gender Equality in the Public Sector (2022), Applying Intersectionality, https://www.genderequalitycommission.vic.gov.au/applying-intersectionality.
[34] Victorian Government Commission for Gender Equality in the Public Sector (2022), Applying intersectionality to gender impact assessments, https://www.genderequalitycommission.vic.gov.au/applying-intersectionality/gender-impact-assessments.
[5] Victorian Women’s Trust (2023), Gender Equality Milestones, https://www.vwt.org.au/gender-equality-timeline-australia/ (accessed on 22 February 2023).
Note
← 1. In Australia, the central gender equality institution sits within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.