SOUNDING BOARD is an outlet for opinions on good and crazy things going on at home (wherever I may be). All are welcome. You are not expected to bring anything except your common sense & sense of humor.
'If the automobile had followed the same development cycle as the computer, a Rolls-Royce would today cost $100, get one million miles to the gallon, and explode once a year, killing everyone inside.'
-Robert X. Cringely (from geek wisdom)
SOUNDING BOARD
Wednesday, April 23, 2003
_____________________________________________
How can the government of the Philippines improve compliance to the gender-responsive budgeting policy?
The question hangs in the so-called gender-circle in the Philippines for several years now. This study was completed in November 2002 in an attempt to answer the question based on a succint and no-nonsense policy analysis. The title of the paper is 'Improving Compliance to the Gender-Responsive Budgeting Policy in the Philippines: The Inside-Outside Model'. This is obviously not my usual post.
Gender-responsive budgeting in the Philippines take the form of a quota on agencies' budgets. Section 28 (or 27, it sometimes changes from year to year) of the General Appropriations Act mandates agencies, GOCCs, LGUs and other instrumentalities to utilize at least 5% of their respective budgets to programs addressing women's needs/rights. Only the Philippines uses a quota in its gender-responsive budgeting. UNDP, in its Human Development Report 2002: Deepening Democracy in a Fragmented World (page 80), defines gender-responsive budgets as '…not separate budgets for women and girls. Rather, they are analyses of public spending through the lens of gender' (UNDP 2002). This definition is based on different counties’ initiatives. Not surprisingly, it does not cover Philippines’ unique 'model'.
Although the Philippines started the policy on gender-responsive budgeting earlier than most countries, compliance rate among national government agencies is low. The causes of low compliance are as follows: (1) policy ambiguity; (2) absence of sanctions; and (3) minimal involvement of civil society in the budgeting process. Low compliance is a problem because it leads to further complications, namely: (1) it perpetuates greater ambiguity in the interpretation of the policy and in the implementation process; (2) it downplays the importance of the policy; and (3) it does not achieve the main purpose of the policy, i.e., to improve the quality of life of women.
The policy alternatives are: (1) status quo; (2) independent group’s 'outside' approach; (3) bureaucracy’s 'inside' method; and (4) the 'inside-outside' model. The first alternative is the status quo, the source of the problem on low compliance. In the outside approach, a policy oriented non-government organization (NGO) conducts analysis of previous year’s budget to determine the differentiated impacts to women and men. The inside approach is done by the government agencies. Each department conducts gender analysis of the previous year’s budget, and the department heads issue statements before the budget hearings regarding the result of the analysis. The inside-outside model is a hybrid of the Australian and South African experiences. Government departments conduct the analysis, and an NGO analysis is subcontracted periodically, e.g., every three years.
The analysis shows that the policy question can be answered by revising the policy to one that directs agencies to implement an inside-outside model – in-house gender analysis supplemented by a periodical independent work from outside the government. This model addresses the main causes of low compliance. The stakeholder analysis highlights the link between performance budgeting and gender-responsive budgeting, and the need to look into the broader mandates of agencies – on how to harmonize their expertise with the evolution of the policy. The proposed solution also brings in the vital role of civil society as 'watchdogs' in a more systematic way of giving feedback to congress or to National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women (NCRFW) and using the budget analysis as a lobby tool to push for shifts in public spending that would reflect priorities of women. This feedback can only be effective if matched by a corresponding proxy for sanctions, i.e., the threat of being called to a congressional oversight committee hearing. The hearing and 'fire alarms' serve as deterrent against implementation failure.
