KWDI Korean Women’s Development Institute

The goal of gender mainstreaming has moved beyond the level of women's policy to improve general public policies which impact on gender relations. In particular, gender mainstreaming aims to prevent reproduction of gender inequalities by the gender impact assessment(GIA), starting with a recognization of gender discriminative practices and the institutional biases of policy-making process. GIA is a key tool in gender mainstreaming to develop and implement gender equal policies by analysing the elements of policy-making such as the different features of women and men, and socioeconomic disparities.

The GIA has been institutionalized in such a way that the numbers of participating organizations and GIA tasks have increased rapidly in central administrations, local governments and the offices of education for last five years. Further, as the range of tasks for GIA has been widened to incorporate the gender-sensitive perspective into general policies. However, despite such quantitative growth, it is noteworthy that the overall system of improvement based upon institutional and policy feedback according to the outcomes of GIA has not been strengthened.

This paper focuses on the outcomes of GIA for the last five years and attempts to highlight problems and put forward improvements. For this purpose, various research methods used including the analysis of GIA reports, interviews with overseas experts, civil servants surveys, and FGI of gender experts.

The paper draws conclusions about the results and future tasks for the GIA, which are categorized into the establishment of infrastructure; performance; and management of outcomes. Firstly, with regard to infrastructure-building, it is suggested that the legal system should be refashioned by the enactment of a Gender Impact Analysis Assessment Act, and that a coordinating body to liaise between different departments for the advancement of gender equal institutions. It is envisioned this body will examine the institutional improvement and policy feedback, and also to report the state of civil servant education. Secondly, with regard to GIA performance, some suggestions are made concerning improvement of the selection of tasks and the format of reports, activation of the Committee for Assessment of Task Selection, and connection of the GIA with the gender-sensitive budgeting. Lastly, with regard to outcome management, it is put forward that the GIA be included in the indicators of central agency performance evaluation. Also, it is emphasized to practice governance in the way to encourage different actors to participate in GIA, rather than government-led implementation. Specifically, it is necessary to frame the Regional Gender Mainstreaming Network(RGPN) at a local level to enhance the life quality of ordinary residences and their policy satisfactions. The local research institutes such as GIA centers are to play a leading role to incorporate gender experts, civil servants in women's units, council members, NGO activists, and journalists. The networks would encourage them to participate in the process of policy feedback, contribute the formation of the social consensus and enhance the quality of GIA.