Gender-Responsive Budgeting and Performance-Based Budgeting in Korea

Gender-Responsive Budgeting and Performance- Based Budgeting in Korea : Towards Overcoming the Awkward Marriage

Contents PBB System in Korea GRB and Its Relationship with PBB How to Improve the Relationship

PBB System in Korea

PBB System in Korea Hierarchy of Performance Management System Performance Management Spearheaded by PMO A Broader Managing for Results Framework. Performance Management Spearheaded by MoEF Performance Management of Budgetary Programs The latter is a constituent part of the former The PMO-Driven Performance Management Specified Appraisal Self Appraisal Designated Appraisal The MoEF-Driven Performance Management Performance Goals Management Self-Assessment In-Depth Evaluation

PBB System in Korea The PMO-Driven Performance Management Specified Appraisal Purposes: To assess each ministries/agencies efforts made to enhance the promotion of national priorities in specified areas. Targeted Entities : All Ministries and Agencies(central government) Specified Areas of Appraisal: key policies (2-4 selected by each ministries/agencies), regulatory innovations, government innovations, and policy communication. Presiding Entities : Key policies area and regulatory innovations area are presided by PMO. Government innovations area by Ministry of Interior and Safety, and policy communication area by Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism. Feedback : Promotion of best practices, policy reformulation/innovation, no feedback to budgetary decision- making.

PBB System in Korea Self Appraisal Purposes: To make each minisry/agency assess its own policies/projects pursued to achieve performance goals and feedback the findings to change the way policies/projects are pursued, the budget decisions, and the mid-term strategic plans. Key Documents : Performance Management Plans(Strategic Plans & Action Plans) and Performance Reports prepared by ministries/agencies. Strategic goals, objectives(output, outcome), indicators are set. Annual Plan for Self Appraisal, and Annual Report of Results made by ministries/agencies, guided by PMO. Targeted Entities : Each ministry/agency(central government) targets itself Areas of Appraisal and Presiding Entities:

Areas Presiding Entities Key Policy Measures: All Projects/Policies in the Annual Performance Plan PMO Budget Measures : Projects/Policies in the Annual Performance Plan that need budget allocations to be implemented. Ordinary Budgetary Projects MoEF R&D Projects MoSIT Projects for Disaster Response and Public Safety MoIS Projects for Balanced Regional Development National Committee for Balanced Development Publicly-funded Job Creation Projects MoEL Projects for supporting SMEs MoSS Administrative Capacities Organization MoIS Personnel MoPM Information MoIS

PBB System in Korea Self Appraisal Method : On the Basis of Sectoral PMPs and PRs. According to four criteria : Plan, Implementation, Performance, improvement + area-specific criteria (e.g. job-retention rate in the area of public- funded job creation). Feedback : The results are used in budgetary decision-making by spending entities, feedbacked to Organizational change, HR management (promotions, salaries), Naming and shaming.

PBB System in Korea Designated Appraisal Purposes: To authorize a ministry to assess some of other ministries policies/projects which have to be coordinated by the ministry to achieve common goals in a cross-cutting issue. For example, MoHW is the leading ministry responsible for coordinating social security policies all across the government and ensuring the accomplishment of whole-of-government goals in the area of social security. The Designated Appraisal authorizes MoHW, as a ministry designated to preside over all social security policies across the government, to assess how successfully other ministries implement their social security-related policies/projects even if MoHW is not a central performance management authority like PMO or MoEF, . Presiding Entities : Ministries designated as leading entities in coordinating policy measures with common objectives among several other ministries. Currently, MoEL, MoHW, MoIS etc., are among designated entities. Target projects/policies : All projects/policies in other ministries that seeks, in concert, to fulfill common performance goals set by a presiding ministry in an area that needs a whole-of-government approach.

PBB System in Korea Designated Appraisal Method : The ministry designated to preside over the Appraisal sets up Plan for Designated Appraisal, hands it over to target ministries and implements the Appraisal. Target projects/policies and appraisal criteria are decided by the presiding ministry. Results of the Appraisal are sent to target ministries, policy recommendations are suggested. All of these are reported to PMO Feedback : Implications and recommendations for improving performance are given to target ministries. Promoting best practices. No feedback to budgetary decisions.

PBB System in Korea The MoEF-Driven Performance Management Performance Goals Management Purposes: To help each ministry/agency monitor how it performs in pursuing its budget programs, and in so doing help it produce good performance information being used in the performance management of the ministry/agency. Targeted Entities : All Ministries and Agencies(central government) Key Documents: Performance Plan (mission, strategic goals, program objectives, performance indicators, budget measures to achieve the program objectives). Submitted to National Assembly as an annex to the Annual Budget Bill. Performance Report (information of whether the PP has been successfully accomplished, how and why). Submitted to National Assembly as an annex to the Annual Budget Execution Report.

PBB System in Korea Performance Goals Management Presiding Entity : MoEF, giving guidelines and advise to ministries/agencies when they draft their sectoral PPs and PRs, collecting sectoral PPs and PRs and submitting them to National Assembly as the Annual PP and PR. Use of Performance Information contained in PPs and PRs : For monitoring the implementation of budget programs. Being used as data evidence for conducting the Self Assessment of Budget Measures. Being referenced in the process of budget examination by standing committees of National Assembly.

PBB System in Korea Self Assessment Purposes : As a constituent part of the Self-Appraisal, it makes each ministry/agency assess its own budgetary policies/projects, focusing on whether they accomplished program objectives on the basis of performance information contained in PPs and PRs. Spending entities use the findings to change budgetary decisions, including a budget consolidation plan if necessary. Targeted Entities : Each ministry/agency(central government) targets its own budgetary policies/projects Presiding Entity : MoEF only confirms a budget consolidation plan presented by spending entities

PBB System in Korea Self Assessment Method : Self-Assessment Plan set up by a spending entity (target policies/projects, assessment criteria, how to rank each target policy/project on a 5-point scale). Conducting the Assessment (delegated to an experts committee ). Releasing the results (including actions required to improve low-performance policies/projects, a budget consolidation plan for the lowest-ranked policies/projects). MoEF confirms the consolidation plan (if any) and ensures the budget allocation is cut as planned. Feedback : The results are used to improve poor-performance policies/projects and promote best practices. Also reflected in making expenditure consolidation plan(budget-cuts imposed on retard policies),

PBB System in Korea In-Depth Evaluation Purposes : To do a more professional and systematic research on a cluster of budgetary policies/projects whose impact goes beyond the ordinary performance management gambit of a single spending entity, or which shows chronically poor performances for several years, or which has so complex problems with respect to performances that the Self Assessment cannot be of much help in improving the situation. Targeted entities : Any ministries/agencies involved in the designing and implementing of the cluster of policies/projects selected for In-Depth Evaluation. Presiding Entity : MoEF. As a special case of Designated Appraisal under the PMO- driven performance management system.

PBB System in Korea In-Depth Evaluation Method : Target clusters chosen by MoEF. Evaluation is commissioned to external experts groups. Guidelines are provided by MoEF but a considerable leeway is allowed for the commissioned experts. Focuses are placed on the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, usefulness, and sustainability of the target policies. Feedback of the results: To redesign policy reform initiatives and improve the implementation of existing policies. To change the institutional foundation shaping the selected cluster of policies. To suggest expenditure restructuring by combining similar budgetary projects and exterminating redundant ones.

PBB System in Korea Boundary of PBB within a broader managing for results framework Self Appraisal Specified Appraisal Self Assessment/ PPs and PRs Designated Appraisal Core Parts of PBB System In-Depth Evaluation

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB Why GRB has to be made congruent with PBB ? Theoretical Explanation - OECD Defines PBB as the systematic use of performance information to inform budget decisions, either as a direct input to budget allocation decisions or as contextual information to inform budget planning. Its purpose is to instill greater transparency and accountability throughout the budget process by providing information to government officials, legislators, and the public on the purposes of spending and the results achieved. (emphases added)

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB - OECD Defines GRB as an application of gender mainstreaming in the budgetary process. It means a gender-based assessment of budgets, incorporating a gender perspective at all levels of the budgetary process and restructuring revenues and expenditures in order to promote gender equality.

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB - We can re-phrase the definition of GRB in terms of PBB as follows - GRB is the systematic use of performance information on gender equality to inform budget decisions, either as a direct input to budget allocation decisions or as contextual information to inform budget planning. Its purpose is to instill greater transparency, accountability and gender-responsiveness throughout the budget process by providing information to government officials, legislators, and the public on the purposes of spending and the results achieved with regard to the promotion of gender equality.

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB Why GRB has to be made congruent with PBB ? Organizational Explanation - In many cases including Korea, the central government is organized in such a way that the ministry of finance is in charge of both PBB and GRB. - If GRB and GBB fall under the same organizational jurisdiction, it is the best and most natural way of doing things to make the two system fit with each other.

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB Why GRB has to be made congruent with PBB ? Practical Explanation - It is possible in many cases to make GRB compatible with any other types of budgeting, even with line-item budgeting. - However, If PBB already put in place as the dominant budgeting system, there could be no other way to get GRB working but to make it well-connected to PBB. - It is impractical to impose gender equality goals on a budget process which does not consider achieving goals as the leading principle of budgeting.

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB : How are the two related in a budget cycle Planning - MTEF Reporting & Evaluation - Sectoral PRs - Self Assessment - In-Depth Evaluation Budget Request - Sectoral PPs Budget Approval - Sectoral PPs - Other Performance Information available Budget Execution - Performance monitoring - Performance Data Gathering

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB : How are the two related in a budget cycle Planning - MTEF - GE Framework Reporting & Evaluation - Sectoral PRs - Self Assessment - In-Depth Evaluation -Sectoral GBERs -GB Performance Assessment -In-Depth GIA Budget Request - Sectoral PPs - Sectoral GBSs Budget Approval - Sectoral PPs - Other Performance Information available - Sectoral GBSs Budget Execution - Performance monitoring - Performance Data Gathering

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB : Incongruencies Between the Two and Their Consequences Key Ingredients of PBB Counterparts Gender- Perspective Incongruencies Consequences MTEF GE Framework - Lack of long-term estimates of required budget in GE Framework - No indicators nor concrete targets for strategic objectives - Lack of cross-reference between MTEF and GE Framework - Spending entities find it difficult to rely on GE Framework when they draft their own performance plans - Failure of GE Framework to be a well-informed guideline for drafting sectoral GBSs by spending entities

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB : Incongruencies Between the Two and Their Consequences Key Ingredients of PBB Sectoral PPs, PRs Gender- Perspective Counterparts Sectoral GBSs, GBERs Incongruencies Consequences - No program objectives, no indicators in GBSs - Focusing on the lowest level of performance management in GBSs/GBERs (detail project level or lower) - Weak incentive for program managers with regard to gender performance management - GBSs and GBERs cannot be used to show whether strategic goals in gender equality were accomplished - Performance information contained in GBSs/GBERs is not used in budget request and budget approval stages

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB : Incongruencies Between the Two and Their Consequences Key Ingredients of PBB Gender- Perspective Counterparts Incongruencies Consequences Self Assessment GB Performance Assessment - GB Performance Assessment is not self assessment - Nor mandated by the Performance Management department of MoEF - Weak incentive for program managers to get a higher ranking in GE Performance Assessment - Low autonomy, Low accountability - Weak feedback mechanism to budgetary decisions in GB Performance Assessment.

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB : Incongruencies Between the Two and Their Consequences Key Ingredients of PBB Counterparts In-Depth Evaluation conducted by MoGEF - Experts pool is shallow - Not a part of Designated Appraisal. - No institutionalized links between In- Depth Evaluation and In-Depth GIA Gender- Perspective Incongruencies Consequences In-Depth GIA - In-Depth GIAs are - Lack of established methodologies in conducting In-Depth GIAs - Lack of high-powered incentive for spending ministries to pay attention to recommendations offered by In-Depth GIAs - In-Depth GIAs focus on improving policy design and implementation, having little implications for budgetary decisions.

GRB and Its Relationship With PBB : Incongruencies Between the Two and Their Consequences In Korea, GRB is placed in a marginalized and isolated position within the PBB system led by MoEF, Which makes GRB remain quite helpless and ineffective as a tool for gender-based performance management in the budgetary process.

How to improve the Relationship ?

How to improve the Relationship ? By Re-Coupling GRB to PBB By De-Coupling GRB From PBB and Integrating it to the Managing for Results Framework run by PMO.

How to improve the Relationship ? The Re-Coupling Scenario Change the format and contents of GBSs and GBER so that they can be in a good match with those of PPs and PRs. A new GBER as a gender version of PR - Add gender-related objectives and indicators to the program(s) - Provide further description on how to manage the lower level projects in order to achieve the additional gender-related program objectives Conduct GIAs on all the programs. Identify one(s) that needs to be managed with gender-related objectives - Show if the performance objective(s) of the gender- related program(s) was accomplished - Provide further description on the success(or failure) factors of the lower-level performance management - Propose how to improve gender-related performance A new GBS as a gender version of PP

How to improve the Relationship ? The Re-Coupling Scenario Conduct a gender-version Self Assessment based on a new version of GBS and GBER, which should be run by the same organization in charge of Self Assessment within a spending ministry. Results of the gender-version Self Assessment should be feedbacked to the budget process just as the results of any other Self Assessments are supposed to be. ( with MoEF confirming and enforcing budget consolidation plans) Conduct an In-Depth GIA on any of the gender-related programs either as a part of In-Depth Evaluation run by MoEF or in any other forms under the collaboration of MoEF and MoGEF

How to improve the Relationship ? The De-Coupling Scenario 1 : Being integrated into the Self Appraisal system. At first, MoGEF has to earn a presiding entity status for Self Appraisal from PMO. Then MoGEF presides over the performance management on gender equality promoting projects done by other ministries/agencies, just like MoEL does on publicly-funded job- creation projects or MoSIT does on R&D projects.

Areas Presiding Entities Key Policy Measures: All Projects/Policies in the Annual Performance Plan PMO Budget Measures : Projects/Policies in the Annual Performance Plan that need budget allocations to be implemented. Ordinary Budgetary Projects MoEF R&D Projects MoSIT Projects for Disaster Response and Public Safety MoIS Projects for Balanced Regional Development National Committee for Balanced Development Publicly-funded Job Creation Projects MoEL Projects for supporting SMEs Projects for promoting GE MoSS MoGEF

How to improve the Relationship ? The De-Coupling Scenario 2 : Being integrated into the Designated Appraisal system. At first, MoGEF has to earn a presiding entity status for Designated Appraisal from PMO. Then MoGEF designates certain projects pursued by other ministries/agencies as promoting those gender equality goals put forward in the GE Framework. MoGEF runs Designated Appraisal on the GE promoting projects as any other ministries designated as presiding entities would do for the performance management of their own multi-ministry policy initiatives.

How to improve the Relationship ? Which Scenario Do You Think is the best and most promising one? Why? Any questions or comments on Korean GRB and GBB will be welcome

Thank You for Listening