1. Gender equality in the EU budget: Recent developments and state of play
Dr. Anna Elomäki
University of Helsinki
Hearing: Gender budgeting: State of play and way forward
European Parliament, 20. June 2018

2. How does the EU fund gender equality?
Gender equality funding only a small proportion of the EU budget (0.3% in )
Only a few programmes fund specific action, difficulty to track spending on GE
Main source of GE funding: Structural and Investment Funds
Visibility of GE in the ESF has gradually declined, but increase in GE funding in ESIF in
Disappearance of specific budgets for gender equality
From EQUAL and DAPHNE programmes to ‘Rights, Equality and Citizenship’, no more earmarked funding
Commitments to gender mainstreaming in particular in ESIF, but insufficient implementation
I want to start with a short overview of how the EU funds gender equality and what have been
the main changes in this respect in the past years.
Firstly, the specific funding for the advancement of the EU’s gender equality covers only a very
small proportion of the EU’s budget. Only a few funding programmes at the moment support
specific action. It is difficult to track spending, so the EU budget is not transparent in this regard.
The main source of funding for specific action are the Structural snd Investmend Funds – in
particular the ESF but also ERDF. There is a long-term tendency that the visibility of gender equality
in the ESF has gradually declined – in the same way than the visibility of gender equality in the EU’s
employment policy has declined. In period GE was one of 5 priorities, at the moment it is
one of 19 priorities. Meanwhile funding has slightly increased sinve the period.
One clear develoment in gender equality funding is the disappearance of specific budgets for
gender equality. Small funding programmes related to the promotion of gender equality have been
merged into bigger and bigger programmes. Instead of DAPHNE programme to combat violence
we now have the Rights, Equality and Citizenship –programme. At the same time, the strive for f
lexibility within the EU budget means there is less earmarking within programmes. Whereas
in the period the gender equality strand of the Progress programme had an
earmarked budget, the gender equality strand of the REC does not.
Gender budgeting is not, of course, about specific budgets for the promotion of gender equality
but about making sure that all EU spending promotes gender equality. There have been
several commitments to gender mainstreaming in particular in ESIF, and plenty of good tools
have been developed at the EU and national level. Implementation has, however, been insufficient . 2

3. Gender equality in the EU budget in 2014-2020 period
MFF and funding programmes
Gender equality not recognized as a horizontal priorities in the MFF (cf. climate change)
GE objectives and GM obligations integrated in the regulations of funding programmes inconsistently
GE not addressed in the mid-term review of MFF
Annual budgetary process
Inter-institutional declaration on gender budgeting in annual process attached to the MFF decision
GE objectives not visible in budget documents
GE not taken into account in all stages of budget process
Improvements: ‘Programme Statements’ of the draft budget, EP discharge report
How is gender equality perspective integrated in the EU’s budget in the current period?
When we look at the current MFF decision and the funding programmes we see first that gender equality
is not recognized as a horizontal principle or priority in the MFF. In cotrast, climate change and biodiversity
have this cross-cutting status.
Some of the funding programmes have gender equality objectives and indicators and gender mainstreaming
obligations. But majority of them do not.
The current MFF recognizes climate change and biodiversity as horizontal priorities that the whole MFF -
that is all proggrammes - contributes to. Gender equality not recognized in a similar manner.
Gender equality was not addressed in the mid-term review of the MFF.
Also in the annual process there is plenty of room for improvement.
The EU’s gender equality objectives – expressed in the European Commissions strategic framework for gender
equality – are not at all visible in budget documents.
Like Elisabeth said earlier, in gender budgeting gender equality should be integrated in all stages of the budget cycle.
At the moment this is not the case_ gender equality is to some extent visible during budget preparation as well as in
the discharge process, but not in reporting or audit.
There has, however been some improvements in the current funding period. The annexes of the EC draft budget now
take gender equality better into account, and the European parliament’s discharge report has in recent years drawn attention
to gender equality. 3

4. GE and the cross-cutting objectives of the EU budget
Result and performance orientation
Opens up opportunities for gender budgeting: gender equality objectives and indicators
Link to economic governance and EU’s priorities
Gender equality not necessarily visible in the key priorities that shape the budget
Administrative simplification
Risk of gender mainstreaming becoming ‘red tape’
Flexibility
Risk of gender equality funding having to give way to new, urgent priorities
The broad principles guiding the EU budget – both the MFF and the funding programmes and the
annual process – have an impact on the possibilities to integrate a gender perspective in the budget
process. I will next say a few words of some of these broader objectives or princples.
Firstly, result and performance orientation means that the EU wants to spend its money better and
focus on the results achieved with the budget. In many countries shifts to prefromace based budgeting
has provided opportunities for gender budgeting and this also holds at the EU-level. It is an
opportunity to make the EU budget a better tool to achieve the EU’s gender equality objectives and
to monitor progress towards these goals.
There is the tendency to link the EU’s budget to the EU’s key priorities (EU 2020, Juncker Plan).
Unfortunately these key priorities are gender blind. Another, related development is the link
between the EU’s budget and the EU’s economic governance. Because the visiblity of gender
in the economic governance is very low, this tendency may not help to make gender visible in the b
udget process either.
Then there is the objective of administrative simplification to reduce administrative burden and costs.
The idea that there should be less rules and that the same rules should apply to several funding
innstruments. From the perspective of gender equality, however, there is the risk that gender
mainstreaming obligations might be seen as part of these burdens. When the spirit is to reduce
administrative work, it is not simpel to establish new responsibilities in terms of gender budgeting
Finally, there is the call for increased flexibility between and within funding programmes. From the
perspective of gender equality the question is, whether specific funding for gender equality might
have to give way to new, urgent priorities. As we all know to well, gender equality rarely is the number
one priority. 4

5. Key challenges for gender budgeting
Little room for gender equality in the negotiations between MS on the EU budget
EU’s commitments to gender equality overshadowed by gender blind key priorities in MFF and annual process
Emphasis on streamlining and administrative simplification may narrow down spaces for gender equality
Lack of gender equality expertise in the drafting of funding programmes and the annual budget process
Lack of data on distribution and impacts of the EU budget / funding programmes from a gender perspective 5

6. Gender equality and the MFF 2021-2027: preliminary remarks
Proposal for the MFF
Gender equality not at all visible in the proposal
Common Provisions for seven shared management funds
No gender mainstreaming clause
European Social Fund +
GE not an independent objective and narrow focus on women’s market participation and work/life balance
Possibility to fund GE under all objectives
Rights and Values Programme
Less funding for equality, rights and combating violence (from € 439 million to € 409 million)
Gender equality, anti-discrimination and anti-racism merged into one objective
Where is the EU budget heading in terms of gender equality in the next funding period? The Commission has already published several proposals concerning the next MFF. In terms of gender equality, there is a lot to improve during the negotiations.
First of all gender equality is not visible in the Commission’s proposal for the MFF. It has not been turned into a horizontal priority. On a positive side, that the word ‘values’ has been integrated into an MFF heading can be seen as an important symbolic move. We have to make sure that gender equality is seen part of these values.
I mentioned before, that one aspect of administrative simplification is the idea that same rules should apply to several funding instruments. At the moment there a common regulation for 5 shared amangement funds, and in the next period there will be common regulations for seven funds, including the structural funds as well as others. The proposal for this common regulation has a major problem: it does not have a gender mainstreaming clause. Yet gender mainstreaming is as important – or even more important – in the regional development fund as it is in the future European Social Fund Plus.
European Social Fund + has a gender mainstreaming clause, which importantly mandates that projects promoting gender equality can be financed under all objectives. But the list of objectives confirms my earlier claim that the visibility of gender equality in the ESF is declining. Gender equality is no more an independent objective but grouped together with other objectives. Moreover, gender equality is defined in this objective narrowly as women’s labour market participation and work-life balance.
Finally, there is the new Rights and Values programme that continues the work of Rights, Equality and Citizenship. Also here we see this idea of merging of objectives: gender equality, anti-discrimination and racism are merged into one objective. There is a risk, then, that gender equality disappears in the broader equality and anti-discrimination agenda. 6

7. Recommendations in the context of MFF negotiations
Negotiations on the MFF key moment for the integration of gender budgeting!
Integrate gender equality as a horizontal priority in the MFF with practical implications
Ensure regulations of funding programmes provide a firm bases for the promotion of GE
Meaningful GE objectives and indicators
Possibility to fund specific action
Gender mainstreaming/gender budgeting obligations
Obligation to produce gender disaggregated statistics
Gender equality addressed in implementation reports and evaluations
Use the MFF decision for inter-institutional commitment to gender budgeting
I would like to close with a few recommendations. There is obviously plenty that could be said about integrating gender budgeting in the annual process, but I want to focus on the current MFF negotiations. These negotiations are a key moment for the integration of gender budgeting, and their outcome will set the conditions for the promotion of gender equality at the EU-level for the next financial period.
First of all, there is the question of seeing gender equality as a horizontal priority for the MFF as a whole. In order to make a difference, there should be some concrete implications, such as the obligation to track gender equality spending (like there is an obligation to track climate change spending)
This is very likely not possible to achieve. Meanwhile, a lot can be done to ensure that the regulations of funding programmes provide a firm ground for the promotion of gender equality. The programmes should have meaningful gender equality objectieves and indicators. The regulations should mandate the programmes to fund specific action. The regulations must contain strong gender mainstreaming obligations, as well as obligations to produce gender disaggregated statistics. Finally, they should require that gender equality is addressd in implementation reports and evaluations.
Finally, the MFF decision should be used as an occasion to make a new inter-institutional commitment to gender budgeting – this time, the commitment should have practical implications and mandate DG Budget to go forward with developing and implementing gender budgeting. 7