Gender Institutional Transformation

The Communication is a clear commitment to Gender Mainstreaming. The Commission shows that it considers gender equality as an important issue to be included in the Commission’s work. It clarifies which expectations are raised to staff. Therefore the communication is a top-down instrument.
As the European Commission is an important institution for agenda-setting within the European Union and its Member States it demonstrates the political will for gender equality.

Due to the fact that the communication has been published by the European Commission itself it is binding for the organisation. The rules of action outlined in the example are based on knowledge of the multidimensional issue of gender inequalities. Gender mainstreaming is related to concrete political action concerning f. e. education and training of women or women´s access to the labour market. Also, the European Commission aspires to challenge existing discriminatory stereotypes inside the administration and within the European Union.

The European Commission participated in the United Nations’ Fourth World Conference on Women held in Beijing in 1995. The Communication was the outcome of a discussion in 1996, following this conference. The EU Commission publishes communications to draw attention on a topical issue. Although communications are policy documents with no mandatory authority or legal effect, it is highly recommended to all member states and various players and organisations to take it into account.

Since the communication by the European Commission was published in 1996, it is influential to the discussion on gender mainstreaming and is widely quoted. The communication was an important move for the many activities for the implementation of gender mainstreaming both within the Commission but also in Member States. It shows that a top-down approach which creates accountability is an important driver for a systematic gender equality policy.

Although the working group can also be defined as a support structure, it is an example on how to create accountability: the government members are high level executives of the Federal Ministries which are made responsible to move the process and communicating within their ministries and departments. The resolution on establishing the inter-ministerial task force for gender mainstreaming/budgeting refers to milestones of the implementation of gender mainstreaming such as the United Nations’ Fourth World Conference held in Beijing in 1995. Referring to an international context is another factor which influences all members’ accountability for gender mainstreaming.

The working group is exemplary for creating accountability for gender mainstreaming because it is deployed by the council of ministries which decisions are highly binding. It shows that commitment and accountability can be created through high level bodies if they acknowledge gender equality as an important objective of an institution.

At the request of the Federal Minister for Education and Women the IMAG was implemented by the council of ministers. The federal Minister for Education and Women is holding the presidency of the working group.

The working group was created in 2000 by request from the Federal Minister for Education and Women to the Council of Ministers and was reviewed in 2010. It is affiliated to the federal ministry for education and women.

It is important to make executives/ the management level of an institution responsible for the implementation of gender mainstreaming as defined in law. This creates incentives for the rest of the staff. Also there is more accountability if a managing and coordinating body is in place.

The SWAP shows that it is possible to create a high level of accountability by using mechanisms of accountability which are already anchored in institutions. It also shows that it is possible to define indicators for performance that are feasible and at the same time demanding in terms of achieving gender equality objectives.
The SWAP is strong on accountability. The term is explained in regard to the UN system and refers to standard accountability systems.

Its core elements were an introduction of accountability processes and mechanisms as well as results based management for the implementation of gender equality. It also takes up institutional transformation by including organisational culture as an issue. One of the 15 performance indicators is: “Organizational culture fully supports promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women” (p. 12).
Each of the 15 indicators has to be rated, with a rating system with a scale of five levels:

1. exceeds requirements,
2. meets requirements,
3. approaches requirements,
4. missing,
5. not applicable

The action plan was developed by UN Women. Within the UN system all in all 35 partner entities are involved; seven of them as piloting entities. However, all UN entities are expected to report on the SWAP. The Human Rights and Gender Equality Task Force developed a scorecard to report on the UN SWAP indicator, as well as the technical notes.

In 2006 the Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB) in a statement decided on a UN wide strategy on mainstreaming gender. Also the Economic and Social Council published a Resolution on “Mainstreaming a gender perspective into all policies and programmes in the United Nations system” in 2010. After the establishment of UN Women in 2010

The SWAP also contains good mechanisms for evaluation (see Step 3). The indicators defined in the SWAP allow evaluating of the implementation of gender mainstreaming in a systematic way.

The example shows a strong commitment from the management level, also the existence of clear statements on top level of the UN on the significance of an effective approach to mainstreaming gender equality can be seen as a success factor in creating accountability mechanisms.