Economics is no exception when it comes to falling prey to the ‘man’ centric approach to a subject. From science to liberal arts, the development of various fields of study clearly reflects the evolution of ideologies and society itself and there is a common thread running through all the subjects, however diverse. Hence the presence of a patriarchal touch in everything under the sun and around it is not a surprise, though the late acknowledgement of it is. There is no reason as to why budgeting, a component of fiscal economics, which in itself is but a branch of economics, should have been viewed through the gender lens much earlier. Or is there?
Gender budgeting, also known as gender responsive and gender sensitive budgeting, which keeps gender among one of the forefront parameters that are used to formulate as well as analyse the budget, is still in its natal stages. Gender budgeting was first formally introduced by the Australian Government in the year 1984. But unfortunately even after twenty decades, gender budgeting as a concept and as a tool has progressed minimally, especially in countries like India where its implementation is much needed. Even though by 2002 around 60 countries adopted gender budgeting, its execution in most of the cases is still primitive.
Economic progress is an almost ferocious dream of every nation, and there are enough statistics to prove how woman empowerment is required to step up short term growth and secure the long term development of an economy. Why then has it taken so long for gender budgeting, which has an obvious, direct, positive impact on the growth curve, to capture the imagination of feminists, economists and policy makers worldwide? Perhaps we were looking in the wrong directions and sometimes it takes time to lay hands on the right reasons, but now that we have, it is time we looked at its importance and ways to channel this to the society through public policies.
Gender budgeting looks at the way the expenditure and revenue of the Government can positively or negatively impact women in the society and seeks to maximise the positive effects and minimise the negative ones. The usual tools adopted in gender budgeting are checking regional imbalances in status of women, bridging the rural urban divide and special focus on schemes and grants earmarked exclusively for women. Gender discrimination contains within it a self sustaining vicious cycle of poverty, illiteracy, unemployment and the likes. Gender budgeting can help alleviate the above mentioned social evils because it attacks the imbalance, primarily in the economic status, of men and women. For instance, agriculture is witnessing an increased percentage of female workforce participation. Wise allocation of more funds for agriculture will not only boost the osteoporosis struck backbone of the country but will also improve the economic position of the women involved in agriculture. Since this will benefit the women in the rural areas, the measure also automatically bridges the urban rural divide among women. Economic improvement in the women’s status especially of the lower income groups coupled with bridging the urban rural divide, will lead to a multiplier effect of boosting development, especially in the most ignored areas.
The process of gender budgeting requires extensive data collection in all arenas pertaining to gender divide. Since numbers are considered as more substantial proof than the stark reality that meets the eye, this data collection will pave way to at least quantify and put on paper the harsh reality. That apart, this data collection is not only the foundation for appropriate gender budgeting but also paves way to bring reality into focus and automatically makes the working of the Government at all levels, more transparent. Transparency is assured in by providing various stakeholders with tools to evaluate the performance of the Government. Also the data collection process, which is an essential component of gender budgeting, will expose the truth behind the high claims of some of the political parties that portray themselves as champions of the women’s cause to merely woo one half of the voters.
Gender budgeting crept into the Indian fiscal scene when the Women Component Plan, which laid down that at least thirty percent of the funds should be utilised for women in all the ‘women related’ Ministries, was introduced in the Ninth Plan(1997 – 2002). However there is no clear definition of what ‘women related’ Ministries are. As Subrat Das and Yamini Mishra point out in their paper Women Component Plan and Gender Budgeting in India: Still a long way to go, some of the assumptions behind labelling women related schemes are patriarchal in nature, such as the notion that anything that has to do with children, contraception or family planning is exclusively to do with women. Clubbing women and children under the same Ministry is another indication. One can’t help noticing that about fifty percent of the population is to get only thirty percent of the funds that too in areas exclusively classified as women specific – clear failure of logic. Even if we disregard these wrong rooted assumptions, gender budgeting in India is just an eyewash without political will and insight. Gender budgeting in India still looks only at what meets the eye such as mortality rates. But trying to accommodate women in the budget goes beyond this and for this the illustration of relationship between improvement in women and agricultural sector can be recalled. But the Government is yet to acknowledge such areas which affect women on a large scale but not in a very direct manner. Three five year plans since the introduction of gender budgeting and India is nowhere close to boasting even its inception. Reason and political prudence calls for an immediate rethinking of the way the Finance Ministry looks at the women in this country.
The Author Janani’s fascination for Economics landed her in a BA Economics course at Stella Maris College, Chennai and she is currently in her final year. After a long internal conflict she has acknowledged her passion for writing and deciding to pursue this passion for life, she is now an aspiring journalist. To sustain the momentum she freelances and at times just blogs on her mind as she gazes at the world from a speeding train or her bedroom window. When she is not writing she is either curled up with a book or is in the middle of a debate. She believes that reporting is one strong way to create an active citizenry and is all set to prove it.
Good one Janani. I especially liked the sentence “But the Government is yet to acknowledge such areas which affect women on a large scale but not in a very direct manner.” And this comes from the govt. of a country that can boast of a woman prime minister. In fact, every country in the subcontinent – Pakisthan, Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka. Maybe it has something to do with women not being able to acknowledge these areas themselves and demanding for more!!
Shweta
Reply
[...] View post: Budgeting for Equality | Sa [...]