Towards gender-inclusive recovery

 Informing policy making through gender analysis, information sharing and consultations

In a number of countries where well-established gender-mainstreaming systems6 were in place prior to the pandemic, governments used gender analysis to help inform decision making with gender equality considerations at the onset of the pandemic. In particular, 42% of countries responding to the OECD survey reported using assessments of the different impacts of policies on men and women to assess the responses to the pandemic. This was often facilitated by legal requirements, embedded existing procedures, an efficient system of sex-disaggregated data, or the results of assessments of the different impacts of policies on men and women conducted prior to the pandemic. For example, in Sweden, where GIAs have been made mandatory by a government decision, early observations by the Unit for Gender Equality at the Ministry of Employment showed that a majority of policy actions have included GIAs, although a more thorough analysis is needed to assess their quality.7 In Iceland, gender budgeting has been embedded as a tool in the budget process since 2015. The Government of Iceland used this tool to ensure key measures of a budget bill, which was adopted in response to the pandemic, were gender-inclusive. Furthermore, Iceland reported in response to the OECD survey that previous gender analysis of most public expenditure areas allowed the government to draw on this existing knowledge and facilitate the integration of gender-inclusive considerations into the budget. For more information on budgeting that takes into account the different needs of men and women in crisis responses, see Box 3.

In addition, some countries highlighted the role of institutional co-ordination and information-sharing mechanisms in addressing the impacts of the pandemic on women and men, including through mainstreaming gender-inclusive considerations into broader emergency and recovery measures. For example, in Canada, a new Taskforce on Equity-Seeking Communities and COVID-19 was launched to provide an interdepartmental forum for sharing information; aligning strategies, policies and initiatives; and engaging with representatives from equity-seeking communities.8 In Switzerland, the Federal Office for Gender Equality has been working with the national taskforce for COVID-19 to try to mainstream policies that promote gender-inclusive considerations in the Swiss Government’s response measures. In Italy, a women-specific taskforce, “Women for a New Renaissance”, was set up by the Minister of Family and Equal Opportunities to analyse, inform and propose policies to promote gender equality, particularly in the exit and recovery periods. In Mexico, the National Institute for Women (INMUJERES) ensured co-ordination and collaboration among Secretariats of the Federal Government and local governments to implement a gender-inclusive approach in addressing gender-based violence, unpaid care responsibilities, employment and income generation, and social protection measures for women.

There are also examples of governments consulting with external stakeholders to help account for the needs of women of diverse backgrounds. The United States, for example, has prioritised consultations with local organisations and implementing partners to improve inter-agency understanding of the different impacts of COVID-19 on men and women globally. To account for the speed at which decision making must be made, flexible structures such as expert advisory bodies on gender equality can help identify potential obstacles to gender equality and the potential gender impacts of emergency measures. Digital consultation platforms also provide another flexible and efficient avenue for convening and engaging with a broad range of stakeholders to source ideas and co-create solutions throughout the policy cycle. Furthermore, having well-developed mechanisms for consultation and co-ordination for decision making already in place can save time and effort. For example, to co-ordinate communication across its provinces and territories during the pandemic, Canada mobilised its Federal-Provincial-Territorial (FPT) Forum for the Status of Women.

 Integrating gender-inclusive policies into emergency management plans

Almost all OECD countries have adopted national strategies to guide the risk and emergency management cycle (OECD, 2018[24]), and there are some promising examples of strategies taking into account gender equality considerations. For example, Japan applied a gender perspective in developing its disaster risk management strategies following the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011 (Government of Japan, n.d.[25]) (Gender & Disaster Pod, 2016[26]). In May 2020, the Basic Disaster Management Plan was revised to include a new clause that instructs local governments to encourage their disaster management and gender equality divisions co-operate, and to clarify the respective roles of the gender equality division and the gender equality centre during ordinary times and at each stage of disaster response. The Government of Japan also issued the “Guidelines for Disaster Planning, Response and Reconstruction from a Gender-equal Perspective” in May 2020, setting out the basic actions to be taken by local governments at each stage of disaster response.

Other national and regional governments have also been developing such frameworks. In British Columbia (Canada), the provincial government adopted an interim disaster recovery framework that promotes gender-inclusive recovery agendas, drawing on the Draft Principles that Guide the Province of British Columbia’s Relationship with Indigenous Peoples, as well as Gender-Based Analysis Plus (Government of British Columbia, 2019[27]). In Australia, the National Gender and Emergency Management Guidelines were developed as a federally funded project, in line with the growing interest in the link between gender equality and emergency management, to incorporate gender considerations into national guidelines (Gender & Disaster Pod, 2016[26]).

Moving forward, countries could consider reviewing existing risk assessment frameworks and emergency management cycles, taking into account the different impact on men and women from diverse backgrounds and subsequently update them to incorporate gender equality considerations, especially in light of lessons learned and experiences from the pandemic. This could help to ensure that women’s and men’s differential needs are addressed in a timely manner in the future, and that policy responses to pandemics and future crises are proactive rather than reactive.

 Promoting inclusive decision making

Given the multi-dimensional impacts of the pandemic, most countries have set up central policy co-ordination structures to address emergency situations, primarily under the authority of the Prime Minister or the President9 (OECD, 2020[28]). Importantly, in a number of countries, these structures included officials responsible for issues related to gender equality and women’s empowerment. For example, the United Kingdom reported that having the most senior minister responsible for gender equality in two of the four main COVID-19 Cabinet Committees helped to ensure consistency across these issues.

The first wave of the pandemic also highlighted the pivotal role played by central gender equality institutions10, which are public bodies primarily responsible for supporting the government’s agenda to advance society-wide gender equality goals and women’s empowerment (OECD, 2019[21]). In countries where they exist, these institutions often helped push gender perspectives and the needs of women and girls to the forefront of decision making in the pandemic, including by leveraging stakeholder relations, policy analysis tools and internal expertise. In Spain, for example, the Instituto de la Mujer has published data and analysis on the potential impacts of the pandemic on women to help policy makers across various sectors account for gender equality in COVID-19 responses (Government of Spain, 2020[29]). In Egypt, the National Council for Women published a policy paper, “Egypt’s Rapid Response to Women’s Situation During COVID-19 Outbreak”, for the guidance of the Cabinet. In the United Kingdom, placing the Government Equalities Office in the Cabinet Office has facilitated the sharing of key equality-related information with central decision-making bodies, while also encouraging government departments to seek out the Office’s expertise. Yet, many countries reported the limited resources of gender equality institutions as among the biggest impediments to effectively taking into account the needs of men and women during the pandemic and in recovery measures.11

In addition, the pandemic has shown how a coherent, government-wide approach is needed to address gender gaps, which were exacerbated during the pandemic. For example, the Government of Iceland has reported that sharing responsibility for gender equality between the Prime Minister’s Office and the Ministry of Finance, an institutional arrangement that predates the pandemic, has helped ensure that gender equality is considered at two different levels of the decision-making process during the pandemic. In Switzerland, the government established a national task force on domestic violence consisting of various federal offices and regional government authorities. Led by the Federal Office for Gender Equality, this inter-agency task force has monitored and assessed the situation of domestic violence during the pandemic, and has subsequently guided and co-ordinated national and sub-national government decision making in this policy area.

Furthermore, the pandemic has demonstrated that women leaders can offer decisive and inclusive solutions to difficult problems countries are confronted with (Taub, 2020[30]) (Garikipat, 2020[31]). Several respondents to the OECD survey highlighted that women’s leadership at the ministerial level was pivotal in ensuring rapid recognition of women’s different needs during the pandemic. These findings echo the previous OECD work showing that women’s participation in decision-making can lead to more inclusive policies and service delivery (e.g. through drawing attention to issues such as gender-based violence, family-friendly policies and responsiveness to citizen needs) (OECD, 2015[32]). Yet, women appear to have been significantly underrepresented in decision-making structures set up to respond to the pandemic12 (CARE, 2020[33]). Such gender imbalances are also reflected across the government more broadly, particularly in ministerships and senior civil service positions that play key roles in the design and delivery of pandemic-related policies (OECD, 2019[34]) (OECD, 2019[21]).

 Monitoring and evaluating pandemic responses from a gender perspective

A number of countries have recognised the importance of monitoring and evaluating the impacts of pandemic responses, including on women and girls. On the one hand, this includes monitoring and evaluating13 the impacts of an emergency situation on gender equality. During the pandemic, for example, the Norwegian Directorate for Children and Family Affairs was commissioned to map equality consequences of the pandemic on the basis of gender, as well as on other grounds for discrimination, and to report regularly on this. In Ireland, the Department of Justice and Equality has been working to incorporate gender and intersectional perspectives into research on the impact of the pandemic, particularly with regard to vulnerable groups such as the Roma population. In France, the Inter-Ministerial Mission for the Protection of Women Against Violence and the Fight Against Trafficking in Human Beings published a report assessing the impact of the pandemic on domestic violence and identifying measures that should be triggered in the event of a new lockdown (MIPROF, 2020[35]).

On the other hand, measures adopted through accelerated procedures in response to the pandemic may benefit from a review of their impact on gender equality. In Canada, for example, the government has used its Gender Results Framework to examine the impacts of COVID-19 on women and other groups. This has helped the government to map response measures to specific impacts of the pandemic as they are implemented and new data become available. The Swedish government has appointed a committee of inquiry to evaluate the measures taken by the government, administrative authorities and municipalities to limit both the spread and effects of COVID-19, and the committee will report on the measures’ consequences on gender equality. Actions such as these may help strengthen the premise for taking into account gender considerations in the design of forthcoming recovery policies.

 Integrating gender equality into recovery strategies

As an important step towards a gender-inclusive recovery, some countries have started reflecting on gender equality issues in the planning phase of recovery strategies. In the United Kingdom, for example, different approaches have been taken in different regions, while also ensuring that statutory duties, which required all public authorities (not just the central government) to assess whether social distancing provisions were consistent with the Equality Act 201014, are upheld. The Government of Scotland has initiated equality impact assessments on the recovery measures proposed in Scotland’s “Route Map Through and Out of the Crisis” (Government Office for Science - UK, 2020[37]). As part of this assessment process, it has developed a strategic overview of the measures needed to exit from the lockdown, identifying key actions under each phase outlined in the Route Map, and identifying the potential impacts on different vulnerable groups along with mitigating actions to reduce negative impacts or reinforce positive ones. Similarly, the Welsh Government’s recovery framework, “Leading Wales Out of the Coronavirus Pandemic: A Framework for Recovery”, lays down criteria that must be met before easing restrictions (Welsh Government, 2020[38]). These evaluation criteria also include the impact on social and psychological well-being metrics, including based on sex. Overall, reflecting on the needs of and impacts on both men and women at the onset of recovery planning would be important to ensuring that no one is left behind during the recovery process. Therefore, as more countries plan for recovery, they could consider taking their own approaches to incorporating gender equality considerations into their strategies.

 Using government tools to support gender equality outcomes

As previously discussed, gender norms and stereotypes can be embedded in the baseline of government policies. The same is true for government tools, such as regulations, budgets and public procurement. Therefore, if these tools are applied without consideration of the different impacts they may have on men and women, they may negatively affect gender equality during the recovery process. For example, if the pandemic’s impacts on women’s employment and businesses are not considered in designing and implementing regulations and budgets, financial aid and welfare benefits may not be sufficiently directed to women-dominated sectors and businesses, which, in turn, could worsen economic gender gaps. On the other hand, since budgets, regulations and procurement are critical instruments in the hands of governments to act and influence behaviours, they could become important tools for the advancement of gender equality in the recovery phase, particularly if they are used to target structural inequalities that the pandemic has exacerbated. When applied through a gender lens, for example, these tools can promote women’s economic empowerment by encouraging full participation in the labour market, addressing occupational discrimination, and supporting female entrepreneurship and access to finance.

Regulations, in particular, are a key instrument of governments for influencing behaviours and bringing about changes in society. As such, regulatory decisions will play a vital role in the immediate-, medium- and long-term responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, which has made the need for trusted, evidence-based, internationally co-ordinated and well-enforced regulation more pronounced (OECD, 2020[39]). As the pandemic may require countries to continue to adapt regulations or introduce new ones, there is an opportunity to strengthen the integration of a gender lens in the regulatory policy cycle. In part, this could be pursued through a gender analysis of regulatory impact assessments (RIAs) at the design and review stages (OECD, 2019[21]), which at least 30 OECD countries have reported doing, to some extent, prior to the pandemic (OECD, 2019[21]). In Canada, for example, the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, the central regulatory oversight body, has required that regulatory submissions continue to apply the same RIA elements during the pandemic, including gender-based analysis. Moreover, countries could consider applying an intergenerational lens to assess the impact of laws on different age groups, especially young men and women and future generations.

Given the central role that budgets play in determining how resources are allocated to deliver policy outcomes, they are a powerful tool for supporting the implementation of cross-cutting priorities such as gender equality (OECD, 2020[40]). As such, gender budgeting, which 17 OECD countries practice to some extent (OECD, 2019[21]), could help facilitate informed decision making and mobilise public policy and resources towards transformative investments that help achieve gender equality goals and ensure that recovery efforts lead to a more equitable society (see Box 2).

In countries where there is a strong culture of gender impact assessment, gender budgeting might be used to acquire information on how policy measures contribute to gender equality goals, to be provided alongside proposals for fiscal recovery packages (OECD, 2020[40]). This presents an opportunity for countries to apply it to recovery-related economic stimulus packages and budgets. Alternatively, where a spending review is used to prioritise recovery measures, the central budget authority might have gender equality as an explicit criterion in the spending review process. Or, where performance frameworks drive the design of fiscal recovery measures, performance targets accompanying budget measures could be aligned with national objectives, including gender objectives. Box 3 describes gender budgeting in crisis response as adopted by Canada and Iceland.

Public procurement is another tool that governments could use to advance gender equality during the recovery phase of the pandemic. Public procurement accounts for approximately 12% of gross domestic product in OECD countries (OECD, 2019[34]), which gives governments some ability to ensure that women receive information and are able to compete for bids in a similar way to men. In particular, this could be achieved by levelling the playing field for women-owned or women-dominated businesses as part of recovery policies through reaching out to such businesses to inform them of procurement opportunities, and providing training to increase these businesses’ ability to compete. Prior to the pandemic, some countries had already started using procurement in a more strategic manner to advance gender equality outcomes. For example, Switzerland requires equality in the pay of men and women in all companies as a condition for awarding government contracts (OECD, 2019[21]). Depending on the actual systems and practices used by individual governments, these examples could offer lessons for countries who are interested in testing similar approaches to public procurement as part of the recovery process (OECD, 2020[42]). There is also scope for countries to carry out post-implementation reviews of emergency procurement contracts to understand their actual impacts on women’s economic empowerment and gender equality, and use the information generated for future planning, including for emergency preparedness.

 Strengthening data availability and infrastructure to capture the needs and conditions of diverse groups of men and women

As discussed above, where countries were able to mainstream gender considerations into their emergency and recovery responses, they often relied heavily on existing data and analysis. As such, the ability of governments to implement policies that promote gender equality, in many cases, is dependent on the availability of sex- or gender-disaggregated statistics. In view of this, countries, in the short term, may identify and document sex- or gender-disaggregated data and information gaps that the pandemic has exposed, preparing the ground to undertake more accurate assessments on the investments needed to ensure sufficient data availability across the sectors. Governments may also begin to consider whether there are ways to leverage existing partnerships and relationships with external stakeholders to identify new and innovative sources for data collection in the future, especially in responding to future crises.

In addition, the pandemic has highlighted the need to strengthen multi-level government and cross-government co-ordination, as part of data infrastructure and governance, in the collection and sharing of relevant and cross-sectoral timely data (OECD, 2019[43]). Lack of co-ordination was reported as one of the biggest challenges by leading government agencies in the use of data as part of crisis response.15 In the medium term, governments could aim to further prioritise and strengthen the capacity of statistical agencies, gender equality institutions, sectoral ministries and other government agencies to collect, share and use sex- or gender-disaggregated data (OECD, 2019[21]), especially data on the pandemic across all policy areas.

While the potential of big data and open data in the areas of health and public information has been explored, they still have an untapped potential to expose gaps and provide insights on systemic societal issues such as gender equality. For example, in Sweden, where sex-disaggregated data is commonly used, analysis of sex-disaggregated data on transport patterns helped shape a more, gender-inclusive snow-clearing policy (OECD, 2019[44]). The OECD Open, Useful and Re-usable data (OURdata) Index: 2019 calls upon member countries to invest in good data governance, architecture and infrastructure in order to collect and release more sex- and/or gender-disaggregated data in open data formats. This ensures that the quality of data throughout the entire data value cycle is gender-inclusive. Countries may also develop new ways of collecting, storing and analysing data, to enhance their capacity to generate gender-inclusive policy responses. However, there are also several challenges related to data governance that need to be addressed before the full potential of open data and big data can be harnessed, including biases in data collection and analysis, privacy concerns, data timelines, accessibility, granularity, and interoperability and legacy challenges associated with data management systems and technologies (OECD, 2019[45]) (OECD, 2019[43]). Furthermore, the digital gender divide can affect the generation of big data that can be used to promote gender equality.

Enabling data systems to collect multi-level disaggregated data that accounts for the intersecting identity factors of women and girls may also strengthen sound decision-making with regards to crisis responses and recovery planning. These intersecting factors may include, among others, age, race, disability, ethnicity, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, educational background and geographical location. As demonstrated during the pandemic, intersecting identity factors may create additional barriers for women and girls in accessing public services, and these barriers are aggravated in emergency situations. For example, older women – given their higher life expectancy and greater likelihood of experiencing health problems – often make up the majority of residents in long- term care facilities (OECD, 2017[15]), which are at high risk of being affected by the virus. Some countries across the OECD are starting to systematically apply a gender lens to decision making that can capture intersecting identity factors. For example, the United Kingdom works to make data standardly available by sex, ethnicity and disability. The United Kingdom Office of National Statistics offered some recent analysis regarding the mortality rates from COVID-19, which disaggregated data by specific ethnicities and by sex (Booth and Barr, 2020[46]). Similarly, the Government of Canada has committed to collecting and publishing data from an intersectional identify lens in order to account for the diversity of its population in policy analysis and planning. As part of this commitment, Statistics Canada has developed the Gender, Diversity and Inclusion Hub. The Hub tracks, in part, the Government’s progress on the Gender Results Framework indicators, many of which are available by intersecting identity factors. The Hub has also a section focused specially on COVID-19 where relevant data on gender and other identify factors can be found (Statistics Canada, 2020[47]). In this regard, having sex- and age-disaggregated data may be useful in order to track inequalities and inform decision-making on the impact of the pandemic across different generations of women and men (see Box 4).

 Making integrity systems more gender inclusive

Evidence from past recessions points to a higher rate of integrity violations such as occupational fraud, embezzlement and bribery in the aftermath of economic downturns (OECD, 2020[48]). Some populations may be at higher risk from such violations, as well as from more indirect impacts of corruption, and women may experience corruption differently than men (Sierra and Boehm, 2015[49]). While much more evidence is needed to understand the full impact of corruption on gender equality, in the current pandemic, corruption may affect women’s access to basic goods and services, and the design and distribution of subsidies and benefits (Transparency International, 2020[50]).

Corruption and bribery in the design, delivery and implementation of economic stimulus packages, subsidies, social welfare services, official development assistance and export credits may also exacerbate existing social inequalities and barriers faced by women from diverse backgrounds as well as intersecting challenges. However, few countries appear to be considering the potential differential impact on women and men in their public integrity systems. Given the potential for greater deployment of some of these tools as part of the economic recovery from COVID-19, more work is needed to understand the relationships between these policy measures, corruption, and women’s empowerment.