8GSPR 2008 :: ArticlesGender Impact Assessmentin Korea:Current Situation and Challengesby Kyunghee Kim Director of Gender ...
The legal support for GIA is provided by thebasic local ordinance for women’sdevelopment in 16 local governments. Forexamp...
10GSPR 2008 :: Articlesare only for women or policies planned andimplemented for gender equality effects areexcluded.But s...
11GSPR 2008 Vol.1organized by the Ministry and providesconsulting. It also provides continuousconsulting on the tasks to t...
12GSPR 2008 :: Articlesprograms possible for pre- and post-implementation evaluation such as a job creationproject for sen...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5

Gender Impact Assessment in Korea (Current Situation and Challenges)


Published on

Title: Gender impact assessment in Korea
Sub Title: Current situation and challenges
Material Type: Article
Author: Kim, Kyunghee
Publisher: KWDI
Date: 2008
Journal Title; Vol./Issue GSPR:2008 Vol.1
Pages: 5
Subject Country: South Korea(Asia and Pacific)
Language: English
File Type: Documents
Original Format: pdf
Subject: Social Policy; Gender
Holding: KDI School of Public Policy and Management

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Gender Impact Assessment in Korea (Current Situation and Challenges)

  1. 1. 8GSPR 2008 :: ArticlesGender Impact Assessmentin Korea:Current Situation and Challengesby Kyunghee Kim Director of Gender Impact Assessment Center, KWDI1. IntroductionGender impact assessment (hereafter GIA) is atool to develop and enforce gender equalitypolicies through analysis and assessment onthe characteristics and the socio-economic gapbetween men and women. GIA is also one ofthe essential tools to practice gendermainstreaming, for which a legal support wasprovided by the amendment of the Basic Acton Women’s Development in 2002 in Korea.The Ministry of Gender Equality conducted apilot project of GIA system on ten programs innine government authorities in 2004 andextended to evaluate 1,524 programs in 294authorities in 2008. Especially, the localgovernments have led the increase in thenumber of participating authorities andassessed the programs by GIA. In 2008, all of16 local governments and 232 lower level localgovernments out of 234 (99%) conducted GIA.The main reason for the rapid spread of GIAis that the Ministry of Public Administrationand Security has included GIA in theevaluation of the performance by localgovernments. The Evaluation form of theMinistry of Public Administration and Securityhas a section evaluating the number ofprograms assessed by GIA and the traininghours for the officials in charge of it. Becauseits objective is to realize gender equality in allthe government policies, GIA does not assessthe gender specific policies only for women,but the general policies and programs withgender perspectives. The interest in theoutcome and achievements of GIA rosefollowing the recent increase in the number ofparticipating authorities and programsevaluated by GIA. This paper is to examine thesituation of implementing GIA and itsachievements and to make several suggestionsto effectively implement the system.2. Legal Grounds for GIAGIA is legally based on Article 10 paragraph 1of the Basic Act on Women’s Development.Article 7 and 8 of ‘Implementing Ordinance ofthe Basic Act on Women’s Developmentdefine the assignment of the departments incharge of.training and tasks, and the advisorycommittee, etc.<Box 1>Supporting Article for GIAArticle 10 of the Basic Act on Women’s Development (Analysisand Assessment of Policies)(1) The State and local governments shall, in the process offormulating and implementing policies under theirjurisdictions, analyze and assess the effects of such policieson women’s rights and interests and their participation in thesociety.(2) The Ministry of Gender Equality may assist or advise theState and local governments in or on the analysis andassessment of the policies under paragraph (1).(3) Necessary matters concerning standards of analyzing andassessing the policies under paragraph (1) shall be prescribedby the Presidential Decree.
  2. 2. The legal support for GIA is provided by thebasic local ordinance for women’sdevelopment in 16 local governments. Forexample, the Seoul Metropolitan Governmenthas Article 8 paragraph 2 of ‘the BasicOrdinance of Women’s Development in Seoul’to conduct GIA.Among the provisions on GIA for therealization of gender-sensitive policies by 16local governments, Ulsan has the ‘BasicOrdinance of Women’s Development inUlsan,’ including the articles on the productionof Gender Statistics and the disclosure ofwomen-related information (Kim, Yanghee etal, 2007: 38).3. Current Situation of GIA1) Growth of GIAThe programs assessed by GIA increased twicein 2008 compared to those in 2007.Assessment was made through GIA for 72programs in the State government, 268programs in local governments, 1,168programs in lower level local governments,and 16 programs in the educational authoritiesof cities and provinces in 2008. The drasticincrease is due to the high participation by thelower level local governments. GIA was usedfor the first time to evaluate ten programsexecuted by six central authorities and threelocal governments as pilot projects in 2004. Itextended to eight programs with in-depthevaluation and 77 programs with self-assessment in 2005 to 11 programs for in-depth evaluation and 303 programs for self-assessment in 2006. This shows 4.5 timesincrease over those of 2005 (Kim, Yanghee etal, 2007:11). The total number of programsassessed by GIA in 2008 (for both in-depthevaluation and self-assessment) is 1,531.In 2005, 53 authorities in both central andlocal governments used GIA to evaluate 85programs, and in 2006, 187 authoritiesreviewed 314 programs with GIA. The numberincreased more in 2008. By then 1,531programs by 295 authorities have beenassessed with GIA.<Table 1>The Number of Participating Authorities andPrograms in GIA2) The Programs Assessed throughGIAGIA can be conducted in two ways: self-assessment and in-depth evaluation. Throughself-assessment, the officials in charge executeevaluation and produce reports on it; in in-depth evaluation, the essential policies orpolicies related to social issues are analyzedand evaluated by a gender analysis expert(s),who are commissioned by the Ministry ofGender Equality.The criteria to choose which programs andpolicies to be assessed are set up by theMinistry of Gender Equality. First, the policieswhich benefit are different or potentiallydifferent between genders according to therelevant statistics. Second, major policies thathave many beneficiaries and significantimpact. Third, the policies which have a largebudget with national interests. Policies which9GSPR 2008 Vol.1No. of programs /No. of governmentsState government 7/6 51/37 60/38 78/37 78/31Local governments 3/3 34/16 75/16 137/16 266/16Lower level localgovernmentsEducationalauthoritiesofcities and provinces- - - 15/15 16/16Total 10/9 85/53 314/187 720/278 1,531/295- - 179/133 490/210 1,171/2322004 2005 2006 2007 2008
  3. 3. 10GSPR 2008 :: Articlesare only for women or policies planned andimplemented for gender equality effects areexcluded.But some of the policies evaluated with GIAare only for women or for children andfamilies for gender equality effects. Even thepilot project in 2004 included eight policiesonly for women and six for children andfamilies, which means that 14 programs intotal were selected inappropriately.The in-depth evaluations and the self-assessmentsthrough GIA by central, local and lower level localgovernments in 2007 showed that there was adecrease in the portion of the policies for women,children, and families, but there were still 29programs for women and 80 for children andfamilies among the programs assessed through GIA.Because it is a very important procedure of GIA tomake a proper selection of the target policies andprograms in GIA, a systematic support is required toimprovethesituation.3) The System and Procedure of GIAThe Ministry of Gender Equality is in chargeof conducting GIA. The Ministry makes plansand manages the general procedure for GIA. Itprepares the entire system of GIA,commissions in-depth evaluations, organizesworkshops with experts, and holds jointmeetings with experts and officials in chargeof the relevant authorities. In addition, theMinistry awards prizes for good cases basedon the comprehensive evaluation, and forms anadvisory committee on policy-analysis in orderto search improvement plans.The relevant authorities are administrativebodies at different levels that execute policiesand programs which are the subjects of GIA,select target programs, and makes evaluationplans. The department of women’s affairs, ifany, or a department in charge of taskperformance evaluation would be in charge.The department in charge distributes theguideline for evaluation, encouragesparticipation in the training on GIA, sets up anassessment plan, and synthesizes evaluationresults.The person in charge is the Official in Charge ofWomen’s Policies at the central government(Article 13, the Implementing Ordinance of theBasic Act on Women’s Development), and thedirector or head of the department in charge ofevaluation. In the case of self-assessment, in whichofficials produce reports, the department in chargeof the target programs would execute the GIA andproduce a GIA report. Depending on the situationof the authorities, they may commission it toexperts. In the case of in-depth evaluation, thegovernment authority would provide informationand materials on the target programs to thecommissioned experts. It is the responsibilities ofboth of the executive department and thedepartment in charge of evaluation to participate invarious workshops and advisory meetings on GIA,and to search the measures to incorporate thesuggestions of the evaluation into other policies andprograms (Kim, Kyunghee et al, 2007; 343).The researchers would conduct in-depthevaluation through GIA in cooperation withrelevant authorities for information andconsulting. If necessary, it would form anadvisory committee and execute assessmentwith advice and support of GIA supportinginstitutes such as the Center for GIA in theDepartment of Gender Mainstreaming in theKorean Women’s Development Institute. TheCenter continues to play a role in providing anoverall support on the tasks of in-depthevaluation and self-assessment by the Ministryof Gender Equality in 2006 and 2007. TheCenter works closely with the Ministry insupporting the joint meetings and workshops
  4. 4. 11GSPR 2008 Vol.1organized by the Ministry and providesconsulting. It also provides continuousconsulting on the tasks to the institutesexecuting GIA on the selected programsaccording to each phase of the research,formation of advisory committee, and linkagewith experts.4. Analysis Tools and Methods ofGIAGIA has nine indicators, as shown in Table 2.It is a basic task to collect, analyze and use theGender Statistics properly in order to assessthe gender impact of policies more objectively.The survey on the evaluation reports producedby the central and local governments in 2007shows that 37% used existing gender-disaggregated data; 44% produced and usednew data for the assessment; 18% did not usegender-disaggregated data due to the lack ofstatistics; and 1% did not apply the data eventhough they mentioned the existence ofrelevant gender-disaggregated data (Kim, Yanghee, 2008: 165).<Table 2>GIA Indicators(2008)Some of the reports from self-assessmentargue that ‘there is no gender discrimination’without any supporting data of gender statisticsor usage of simple statistics of sex ratio. Itreflects the lack of awareness of officials on theimportance of gender-disaggregated data andthe seldom practice to produce and utilize it.Relevant statistics is needed to apply suchindicators as gender equality in policy benefit.But in many cases, there is no gender-disaggregated data on beneficiaries, whichpresents obstacles in analyzing who receivesmore benefits from the policies. There areseveral cases to show the gender ratio of thebeneficiaries rather than to analyze thepercentage of the beneficiaries by gender incomparison with the population. For instance,there are several cases that conclude that ‘thepolicy to support single parent families isunequal because single mother families getmore benefits from the policy,’ whichdisregards the fact that the population of singlemother families is bigger than that of singlefather’s (Kim, Yang Hee, 2008; 166).There are frequent complaints from the officialswho prepare the GIA reports that it is not easy forthem to understand and apply the nine indicatorsmostly composed of qualitative indicators ratherthan quantitative ones. There are some programsand projects needed to conduct pre-implementationevaluation such as new town construction projectsand mid-and-long term basic plans. There are otherEvaluation indicatorsProduction and utilization of gender-disaggregated dataIdentification of gender relevancy of the targeted policiesGender equal participation in decision-making process of the policyGender equality in budget allocationGender equality in delivery methods of the policy servicesGender equality in the method of advertising policy servicesGender equality in policy benefit including budget allocationGender equality in policy impactImprovement plan based on the result of assessmentsAll stages<Phase 1>Drafting and Decision-making process of the policy<Phase 2>Implementation of the policy<Phase 3>Evaluation of the policy
  5. 5. 12GSPR 2008 :: Articlesprograms possible for pre- and post-implementation evaluation such as a job creationproject for seniors and an IT training project, butthe present GIA indicators demand both pre- andpost-implementation evaluation. Therefore, expertssuggest that the indicators should be improved byconsidering the characteristics of each program.5. ConclusionThe GIA has expanded rapidly in the past fiveyears by the government authorities in Korea.Accordingly, the training on gender impact hasspread expansively for the officials in charge.Experts pointed out several achievements ofassessment through GIA in the countries thathave used GIA in advance of Korea (Walby,2005; Kim, Yanghee and Kim, Kyunghee,2006).Firstly, gender sensitivity has been improvedby analyzing general policies with genderperspectives. Secondly, the assessment withGIA has provided an opportunity to be awareof the necessity of gender statistics, which isthe basic data for understanding the situation.Thirdly, each authority voluntarily introducedprovisions and regulations for improvementbased on the outcome of GIA. Fourthly, it hasshown the possibility of Gender Budgeting byreflecting the efforts in budgeting to improvegender equality in general programs. Fifthly,the improvement plans from the GIA reportswere incorporated in the policies whichenabled the gender equality of other policiesand programs.Along with these expectations, there are somechallenges to effectively implement GIA in Korea.First of all, the training on gender perspectivesshould be enhanced for officials who need help forproper use of the tools and the analysis methods ofGIA. It is needed to provide a legal ground tostrengthen the procedure including the selection oftarget programs for GIA. For example, it may beconsidered to set up GIA selection and evaluationcommittees, or to let committees related to women’spolicies, such as the Women’s Policy CoordinationCommittee, play a role in effective operation ofGIA. Finally, it is important to form the trio ofalliance among femocrats, experts, and those of thewomen’s movement in order to effectively continuegender mainstreaming (Woodward, 2004). Thegovernment takes initiatives in GIA but it isrequired that women’s organizations participateactively for the realization of gender equality withthe GIA system.REFERENCEKim, Kyunghee et al. (2007). A Study on Gender Budgeting inconnection with Gender Impact Assessment, theMinistry of Gender EqualityKim, Yanghee (2008). “Institutionalization of GenderMainstreaming in Korea”, Korean Women’sDevelopment Institution, A New Global Trend on GenderMainstreaming and Its Implications for Womens Policiesin Korea, Booklet for International Symposium, April 24,2008.Kim, Yanghee et al (2007). A Study to Strengthen SupportingSystem of Gender Impact Assessment 2007, theMinistry of Gender Equality and Family.Kim, Yanghee & Kim, Kyunghee (2006). ‘ A Study on GenderBudgeting-linked Gender Impact Assessment, TheState Government Budgeting, Gender Budgeting andGender Impact Assessment’, 32nd Forum on Women’sPolicy, Co-organized by Korean Women’s DevelopmentInstitution & the Korean Association of Public Finance.The Ministry of Gender Equality (2008). A Guide on Gender ImpactAssessment 2008Walby, Sylvia (2005). Gender mainstreaming: productive tension intheory and practice, Social Politics: International Studiesin Gender, State & Society, Oxford University Press.Woodward, Alison (2004). ‘Buildiy velvet triangles: gender andinformal governance’, Informal Governance in theEuropean Union, eds. Thomas Chritiansen and SimonaPiattoni. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.