Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Efficacy of Gender Budgeting in Reducing Gender Inequality:A Panel Study in Asia-Pacific Countries


Affiliations
1 School of Social Sciences, IGNOU, New Delhi 110068, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Gender budgeting is a fiscal policy measure that seeks to use a country’s national and/or local budget(s) to reduce inequality and promote economic growth and equitable development. While literature has explored the connection between reducing gender inequality and achieving growth and equitable development, more empirical analysis is needed to determine whether gender budgeting really curbs gender inequality. This study follows the methodology of Stotsky and Zaman (2016) to investigate across Asia-Pacific countries the impact of gender budgeting on promoting gender equality, and also increasing fiscal spending on health and education. It classifies Asia- Pacific countries as ‘gender budgeting’ or ‘non-gender budgeting’ according to whether they have formalized gender budgeting initiatives in laws and/or budget call circulars. To measure the effect of gender budgeting on reducing inequality, we measure the correlation between gender budgeting and the Gender Development Index (GDI) and Gender Inequality Index (GII) scores in each country. The data for gender inequality variables are mainly drawn from the IMF Database on gender indicators and the World Development Indicators database over 1990-2013. Result shows that gender budgeting has significant effect on increasing GDI and small but significant potential to reduce GII. These results strengthen the rationale for employing gender budgeting to promote inclusive development. However, the results show no prioritization for gender budgeting in the fiscal space of health and education sectors in the region.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Agarwal, B. (2010), Does Women’s Proportional Strength Affect their Participation? Governing Local Forests in South Asia, World Development, 38(1): 98–112.
  • Agarwal, B. (2010), Gender and Green Governance: The Political Economy of Women’s Presence Within and Beyond Community Forestry, New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Aguirre, D., H. Leila, R. Christine, and S. Karim (2012), Empowering the Third Billion, Women and the World of Work in 2012, Booz and Company.
  • Allendorf, K. (2007), Do Women’s Land Rights Promote Empowerment and Child Health in Nepal? World Development, 35(11): 1975–1988.
  • Andrabi, T., J. Das and A. Khwaja (2008), A Dime a Day: The Possibilities and Limits of Private Schooling in Pakistan, Comparative Education Review, 52(3): 329–355.
  • Arenello and Bond (1991), Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations, The Review of Economic Studies, 58(2): 277-297.
  • Bandiera, O. and N. Ashwini (2013), Does Gender Inequality Hinder Development and Economic Growth? Evidence and Policy Implications, World Bank Research Observer (WBRO), 28(1): 2-21.
  • Begzsuren, T. and A. Dolgion (2014), Gender Overview - Mongolia: A Desk Study, in Attitudes toward Gender Equality: A Survey Experiment in Mongolia, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation and IRIM.
  • Berik, G., Rodgers, and Seguino (2009), Feminist Economics of Inequality, Development, and Growth, Feminist Economics, 15(3): 1-33.
  • Budlender, D. (2015), Budget Call Circular and Gender Budget Statements in the Asia Pacific: A Review, New Delhi: UN Women.
  • Chakraborty, L. (2014), Gender-Responsive Budgeting as Fiscal Innovation: Evidence from India on Processes, Working Paper No. 797, New York: Levy Economics Institute.
  • ---------- (2016), Asia: A Survey of Gender Budgeting Experiences, International Monetary Fund Working Paper 16/150 (Washington, DC: IMF).
  • Chattopadhyay, R. and Duflo (2004), Women as Policy Makers: Evidence from a Randomized Policy Experiment in India, Econometrica, 72(5): 1409–1443.
  • Chinkin, C. (2001), Gender Mainstreaming in Legal and Constitutional Affairs: A Reference Manual for Governments and Other Stakeholders, Gender Management System Series, London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
  • Costa, M. and R. Sharp (2010), Gender Budgeting in Mongolia, Australia: UNISA.
  • Cuberes, D. and T. Marc (2012), Gender Gaps in the Labor Market and Aggregate Productivity, Sheffield Economic Research Paper, SERP 2012017.
  • ---------- (2014), Gender Inequality and Economic Growth: A Critical Review, Journal of International Development, 26(2): 260-276.
  • Dollar, D. and G. Roberta (1999), Gender Inequality, Income, and Growth: Are Good Times Good for Women? Policy Research Report on Gender and Development, Working Paper Series 1, World Bank.
  • Elson, D. (2006), Budgeting for Women’s Rights: Monitoring Government Budgets for Compliance with CEDAW. (New York: UNIFEM).
  • Esteve-Volart, B. (2004), Gender Discrimination and Growth: Theory and Evidence from India, The Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines (STICERD) Development Economics Papers, 42, London School of Economics.
  • Hill, M.A. and K. Elizabeth (1995), Women’s Education and Economic Wellbeing, Feminist Economics, 1(2): 21–46.
  • International Monetary Fund (2015), Fiscal Policy and Long-Term Growth, IMF Policy Paper (Washington, DC: IMF).
  • Kabeer, N. and N. Luisa (2013), Gender Equality and Economic Growth: Is there a Win Win? IDS Working Paper, No. 417, Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.
  • Klasen, S. (1999), Does Gender Inequality Reduce Growth and Development? Evidence from Crosscountry Regressions, Policy Research Report on Gender and Development (Washington DC: World Bank).
  • Klasen, S. (2002), Low Schooling for Girls, Slower Growth for All? Cross-Country Evidence on the Effect of Gender Inequality in Education on Economic Development, World Bank Economic Review, 16(3): 345–73.
  • Knowles, S., L. Paula and O. Dorian (2002), Are Educational Gender Gaps a Brake on Economic Development? Some Cross-Country Empirical Evidence, Oxford Economic Papers, 54(1): 118–149.
  • Kolovich, L. and S. Sakina (2016), Middle East and Central Asia: A Survey of Gender Budgeting Efforts, International Monetary Fund Working Paper 16/151 (Washington, DC: IMF).
  • Lahiri, A., L. Chakraborty and P.N. Bhattacharyya (2002), Gender Budgeting in India, Follow the Money Series, New York: UNIFEM (UN Women).
  • Mushi, V. and E. Mamkwe (2010), Challenges and Successes of Gender Budgeting Initiatives: A Case Study of Tanzania, Accountancy and Business Review Journal, 7(2): 19-24.
  • Nakray, K. (2009), Gender Budgeting: Does it really work? Some experience from India, Policy and Politics, 37(2): 307-310.
  • Qian, N. (2008), Missing Women and the Price of Tea in China: The Effect of Sex-Specific Earnings on Sex Imbalance, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(3): 1251–1285.
  • Seguino, S. (2008), Gender, Distribution, and Balance of Payments Constrained Growth in Developing Countries, Working Paper 133, Political Economy Research Institute.
  • Sharp, R. and D. Elson (2008), Improving Budgets: A Framework for Assessing Gender Responsive Budget Initiatives, Mimeo, Adelaide: Hawke Research Institute for Sustainable Societies, University of South Australia.
  • St. Hill, D. (2002), The United Kingdom: A Focus on Taxes and Benefits, in Gender Budgets Make More Cents: Country studies and good practice, Eds. D. Budlender and G. Hewitt, Commonwealth Secretariat, London.
  • Stotsky, J.G. (2016), Gender Budgeting: Fiscal Context and Overview of Current Outcomes, International Monetary Fund Working paper, 16/149 (Washington, DC: IMF).
  • Stotsky, J.G. and Z. Asad (2016), The Influence of Gender Budgeting in Indian States on Gender Inequality and Fiscal Spending, International Monetary Fund Working paper 16/227 (Washington, DC: IMF).
  • Udry, C. (1996), Gender, Agricultural Production, and the Theory of the Household, Journal of Political Economy, 104(5): 1010–1046.
  • UN Women (2012), Gender Responsive Budgeting in the Aid Effectiveness Agenda: End-of-Programme Evaluation (Revised Evaluation Report), Universalia.
  • United Nations (2005), Progress towards the Millennium Development Goals, 1990–2005. Secretary--General’s Millennium Development Goals Report, New York and Geneva: United Nations Publications.
  • Wooldridge (2002), Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England.
  • World Bank (2011), World Development Report 2012: Gender Equality and Development (Washington, DC: World Bank).

Abstract Views: 209

PDF Views: 0




  • Efficacy of Gender Budgeting in Reducing Gender Inequality:A Panel Study in Asia-Pacific Countries

Abstract Views: 209  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Pradeep Kumar Panda
School of Social Sciences, IGNOU, New Delhi 110068, India

Abstract


Gender budgeting is a fiscal policy measure that seeks to use a country’s national and/or local budget(s) to reduce inequality and promote economic growth and equitable development. While literature has explored the connection between reducing gender inequality and achieving growth and equitable development, more empirical analysis is needed to determine whether gender budgeting really curbs gender inequality. This study follows the methodology of Stotsky and Zaman (2016) to investigate across Asia-Pacific countries the impact of gender budgeting on promoting gender equality, and also increasing fiscal spending on health and education. It classifies Asia- Pacific countries as ‘gender budgeting’ or ‘non-gender budgeting’ according to whether they have formalized gender budgeting initiatives in laws and/or budget call circulars. To measure the effect of gender budgeting on reducing inequality, we measure the correlation between gender budgeting and the Gender Development Index (GDI) and Gender Inequality Index (GII) scores in each country. The data for gender inequality variables are mainly drawn from the IMF Database on gender indicators and the World Development Indicators database over 1990-2013. Result shows that gender budgeting has significant effect on increasing GDI and small but significant potential to reduce GII. These results strengthen the rationale for employing gender budgeting to promote inclusive development. However, the results show no prioritization for gender budgeting in the fiscal space of health and education sectors in the region.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.21648/arthavij%2F2019%2Fv61%2Fi3%2F185878