KWDI Korean Women’s Development Institute

This study provides an analysis of management strategies and methods for Gender Impact Assessment(GIA) following the three-year implementation of the Gender Impact Analysis and Assessment Act, focusing on the mid-/long-term plans of government and the projects of public institutions in the policy areas of culture, and agriculture and forestry. Methods for GIA include the development of selection criteria for programs subject to GIA and the indicators used for GIA, based on a pilot analysis of mid-/long-term gorvernment plans and projects of public institutions, and a survey of and interviews with public officers. Moreover, management strategies for GIA are provided to help ensure that GIA results are effectively reflected in the policy improvement process.

In terms of management strategies and methods for GIA of mid-/long-term plans (whose cycles take more than 3 years according to the law), the following conclusions have been drawn. First, methods for GIA should be separately developed for newly-established and re-established plans. Second, there is a need to create a high-level cooperation framework between the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family, which directs the management of the GIA system, and central administrations / local governments in charge of the establishment of plans, in a bid to strengthen the quality of GIA. Third, amendments to the Gender Impact Analysis and Assessment Act are proposed which establish clear guidelines in order to clarify several ambiguities with regard to the selection criteria for plans subject to GIA. Fourth, in order to enhance the quality of GIA reports and draw useful policy improvement suggestions for gender equality, it is essential that more detailed checklists of analysis indicators are made, which fit the characteristics of each policy area. Fifth, a linkage between GIA on plans, laws and projects is needed, and should be extended to cover gender budget plans and reports of GIA-participating programs. Sixth, two to three experts should be placed in charge of the provision of consultation services on GIA for mid-/long-term plans, improving the current one expert system.

In order to invigorate the GIA system on the projects of public institutions under central government ministries, the following points should be considered. First, in order for GIA to succeed in improving the gender equity of policies, there is a need for a project framework under which the project planning division of the central government ministry and the project execution division of the public institution take joint responsibility for the GIA. Namely, the project execution division of the public institution should be in charge of producing a GIA report. Based on the report, both divisions should discuss how the GIA results be reflected in the project management process. The project planning division and the project execution division should then incorporate the GIA results in the project planning and execution processes, respectively. Second, when the public institution executes a project, basic data on project beneficiaries and project evaluation should be collected, which can then be used for analysis on the different needs of men and women. Specifically, qualitative data, as well as human statistics, should be produced in gender-disaggregated form. Third, regarding those projects selected for GIA, consultation services should be directly provided to the staff responsible for the execution of the project. Lastly, in an attempt to strengthen the effectiveness of the GIA system as a whole, the system management and monitoring framework should be transformed from a quantitative to a qualitative one. In this regard, the development of indicators which ensure in-depth monitoring and evaluation of the system management is necessary.

The expected outcomes of this study are as follows. First, it clarifies the locus of accountability for GIA and investigates the parameters of plans subject to GIA by building a database on mid-/long-term plans. Second, it provides improvement plans for GIA methods and highlights important points for consideration in the process of GIA through a pilot analysis of GIA for mid-/long-term plans. In future, responsible public officers can refer to these results to aid their preparation of GIA reports. Third, it draws up policy improvement plans based on the pilot analysis of mid-/long-term plans of the government and projects of public institutions, and thereby contributes to the enhancement of the effectiveness of the GIA system.