Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality : review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States : main findings.
Date: 2015-01-05
Institutions: European Institute for Gender Equality
Subjects: EU Member State, anti-discriminatory measure, decision-making, equal treatment, gender equality, position of women, report

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the 
advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform 
for Action in the EU Member States

Main 
ﬁ ndings

This publication was developed by the team of experts of the European Institute for Gender Equality 
(EIGE): Sara Aguirre, Dr Ioana Borza, Ilze Burkevica, Dr Anne Laure Humbert, Barbara Limanowska, 
Indrė Mackevičiūtė, Merle Paats and Dr Jolanta Reingardė. A particular thank you goes to other 
colleagues at EIGE for the editing, publishing and administrative support.

The data collection and initial analysis was part of a study commissioned by EIGE and carried out by 
a consortium of the Institute on Gender Equality and Women’s History (Atria) and KARAT Coalition. 
The project was coordinated by Ilze Burkevica and Ioana Borza (EIGE) together with Lin McDevitt-
Pugh (project manager) and Corine van Egten (senior researcher).

Neither the European Institute for Gender Equality nor any person acting on its behalf can be held 
responsible for the use made of the information contained in this report.

EEuropurope De Direirecct is a ser

t is a servicvice te to help y

tto yo your questions ab

our questions about the E

o help you find a
ou find answnswers ers 
n Union.
out the Europuropeaean Union.

eephone number (*): 
FFrreephone number (*): 
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) 
he inforormation g
(*) TThe inf
phone boxxes or hot
phone bo

mation givives is fr
es or hotels ma

els may char

y charge yge you).ou).

es is freeee, as ar

, as are most calls (though some operat

e most calls (though some operatorsors, , 

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu).

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014

ISBN 978-92-9218-363-9
doi:10.2839/18076

© European Institute for Gender Equality, 2014
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Luxembourg

Printed on elemental chlorine-free bleached PaPer (ECF)

Effectiveness of institutional 
mechanisms for the 
advancement of gender 
equality
Review of the implementation 
of the Beijing Platform for Action 
in the EU Member States

Main findings

The  European  Institute  for  Gender  Equality  is  an  autonomous  body 
of  the  European  Union,  established  to  contribute  to  and  strengthen 
the  promotion  of  gender  equality,  including  gender  mainstreaming 
in all European Union policies and the resulting national policies, and 
the fight against discrimination based on sex, and to raise EU citizens’ 
awareness of gender equality. Further information can be found online 
(http://eige.europa.eu). 

EIGE

Foreword

Foreword

Nearly 20 years ago, the Fourth World Confer-
ence  on  Women  held  in  Beijing  (1995)  raised 
the global problem of gender inequality, which 
resulted in an international commitment by al-
most all United Nations (UN) member states to 
initiate a radical agenda for change. The Euro-
pean Union (EU) and its Member States com-
mitted  themselves  from  the  very  beginning 
to  deliver  on  the  strategic  objectives  of  the 
Beijing  Platform  for  Action  (BPfA).  One  of  the 
major areas of concern of the BPfA, called ‘in-
stitutional  mechanisms  for  the  advancement 
of  women’,  is  crucial  for  the  advancement  of 
gender equality in all other areas addressed by 
the platform for action.

This  publication  compares  and  presents  the 
progress  of  Member  States  in  the  area  of  in-
stitutional  mechanisms  and  gender  main-
streaming since 2006, when the first report on 
institutional  mechanisms  was  developed  by 
the  Finnish  Presidency  of  the  Council  of  the 
EU.  The  main  findings  show  that  by  2012,  all 
Member  States  had  established  governmen-
tal  bodies  for  gender  equality  and  bodies  for 
the  promotion  of  equal  treatment  on  various 
grounds.  Notwithstanding  positive  trends  in 

institutional settings over the last decade, the 
bodies  responsible  for  gender  equality  are 
often  marginalised  in  national  governmental 
structures; split into different policy areas; ham-
pered  by  complex  and  expanding  mandates; 
lacking  adequate  staff,  training,  data  and  suf-
ficient  resources;  and  experience  insufficient 
support from political leadership.

On behalf of the institute and its team, I would 
like  to  thank  all  institutions  and  experts  who 
contributed  to  this  study,  and  especially  the 
Lithuanian  government,  the  European  Com-
mission  Directorate-General  for  Justice,  the 
High-Level  Group  on  Gender  Mainstreaming, 
EIGE’s Working Group on Beijing Indicators and 
EIGE’s staff. We hope that the findings and rec-
ommendations of this study will give impetus 
for  broader  debates  on  the  challenges  facing 
institutional  mechanisms  and  gender  main-
streaming in the EU today and will contribute 
to making gender equality a reality in the Euro-
pean Union.

Virginija Langbakk,
Director
The European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE)

Foreword

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

3

Country abbreviations

Abbreviations

EIGE

BE

BG

CZ

DK

DE

EE

IE

EL

ES

FR

HR

IT

CY

LV

LT

LU

HU

MT

NL

AT

PL

PT

RO

SI

SK

FI

SE

UK

Belgium

Bulgaria

Czech Republic

Denmark

Germany

Estonia

Ireland

Greece

Spain

France

Croatia

Italy

Cyprus

Latvia

Lithuania

Luxembourg

Hungary

Malta

Netherlands

Austria

Poland

Portugal

Romania

Slovenia

Slovakia

Finland

Sweden

United Kingdom

EU-28

28 EU Member States

BPfA

Beijing Declaration and Platform 
for Action

CEDAW Committee on the Elimination of 

ENEGE

GAPGE

EU
FEMM

EC
Ecosoc

CoE
CSO
EIGE

Discrimination against Women and
the Convention on the Elimination 
of All Forms of Discrimination 
Against Women
Council of Europe
Civil society organisation
European Institute for Gender 
Equality
European Commission
United Nations Economic and 
Social Council
European Network of Experts on 
Gender Equality
European Union
The European Parliament’s 
Committee of Women’s Rights and 
Gender Equality
Governmental action plan for 
gender equality
Gender budgeting
Gender impact assessment
Gender mainstreaming
High-Level Group on Gender 
Mainstreaming
Monitoring and evaluation
Non-governmental organisation
UN Office of the Special Advisor 
on Gender Issues and the 
Advancement of Women
Quality in Gender+ Equality Policies
Research Network on Gender 
Politics and the State
Universal Declaration of Human 
Rights
United Nations
United Nations Economic 
Commission for Europe
UNIFEM United Nations Development Fund 

M&E
NGO
OSAGI

GB
GIA
GM
HLG

QUING
RNGS

UN
UNECE

UDHR

for Women

4

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Contents

Contents

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................6

Definitions of core concepts .......................................................................................................8

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators .................................11

Indicator 1: Status of governmental responsibility in promoting gender equality .......................11

Indicator 2a: Personnel resources of the governmental gender equality body ...............................15

Indicator 2b: Personnel resources of the designated body or bodies for the 
promotion of equal treatment of women and men.........................................................................................16

Indicator 3: Gender mainstreaming .............................................................................................................................17

Indicator 4: Production and dissemination of statistics disaggregated by sex ................................ 29

Conclusions..................................................................................................................................32

Recommendations .....................................................................................................................34

Endnotes ......................................................................................................................................35

Contents

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

5

Introduction

EIGE

Introduction
Introduction

The  Beijing  Platform  for  Action  (BPfA)  pro-
motes  and  protects  the  human  rights  of 
women  and  girls,  reaffirming  these  rights  as 
an inalienable, integral and indivisible part of 
universal human rights (1). Area H of the BPfA 
called  ‘Institutional  mechanisms  for  the  ad-
vancement of women’ defines three strategic 
objectives  with  the  aim  to  support  govern-
ments  in  their  work  of  promoting  and  sup-
porting gender equality.

H1. Create or strengthen national machineries 
and other governmental bodies

H2.  Integrate  gender  perspectives  in  legisla-
tion, public policies, programmes and projects

H3.  Generate  and  disseminate  gender-
disaggregated  data  and  information  for  plan-
ning and evaluation

In the context of the 10-year review of the BPfA, 
EU  ministers  responsible  for  gender  equal-
ity  adopted  a  common  declaration  reaffirm-
ing strong support for and commitment to the 
full implementation of the BPfA in the EU. That 
same  year  the  European  Council  invited  the 
Member States and the European Commission 
to strengthen institutional mechanisms for pro-
moting gender equality and to create a frame-
work for assessing its implementation. In 2006, 
the  Finnish  Presidency  presented  a  report  on 
the  status  of  the  institutional  mechanisms  for 
gender  equality  in  the  25  EU  Member  States 
and proposed three indicators to monitor the 
implementation  of  the  first  two  strategic  ob-
jectives in this area (2):

1 the status of governmental responsibility in 

promoting gender equality;

2a personnel  resources  of  the  governmental 

gender equality body;

2b personnel  resources  of  the  designated 
body or bodies for the promotion of equal 
treatment of women and men;

3 gender mainstreaming.

Those  indicators  were  again  reviewed  in  the 
Beijing+15,  the  third  EU-wide  appraisal  of  the 
BPfA,  carried  out  by  the  Swedish  Presidency 
in 2009 (3). The report emphasised the need to 
enhance the status of the governmental gen-
der  equality  bodies  in  order  to  bring  gender 
equality to the forefront (4).

In its strategy for equality between women and 
men 2010–15, the Commission highlighted the 
need  to  take  gender  equality  into  account  in 
all its policies and committed to implementing 
gender mainstreaming (GM) as an integral part 
of policymaking.

Building on this background, in 2013, the Lithu-
anian Presidency chose to review the develop-
ment  of  institutional  mechanisms  for  the  ad-
vancement of gender equality in the Member 
States and propose a new indicator in this area. 
The indicator on production and dissemination 
of  statistics  disaggregated  by  sex  was  intro-
duced in the Council conclusions adopted on 
9 December 2013 (5).

The current publication summarises the main 
findings  of  EIGE’s  report  on  Effectiveness of in-
stitutional  mechanisms  for  the  advancement  of 
gender equality — Review of the implementation 
of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Mem-
ber  States  (6).  It  presents  an  overview  of  the 
progress by using the indicators proposed by 
the  Finnish  Presidency  and  introduces  a  new 

6

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Introduction

indicator  on  gender  statistics.  The  analysis  is 
based on the data provided by the governmen-
tal representatives to the self-reporting survey 
in 2012, which are compared to the results of a 
survey carried out by the Finnish government 
in  2005.  The  survey  data  are  complemented 
by semi-structured interviews, carried out with 
women’s NGOs in all Member States in 2012.

The publication also provides a more elaborate 
presentation  of  two  gender  mainstreaming 
tools — gender impact assessment and com-
petence development for gender mainstream-
ing — deriving from EIGE’s studies on the in-
stitutional capacity for gender mainstreaming 
in the EU (2013) and gender training in the EU 
(2012–13).

Introduction

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

7

Definitions of core concepts

EIGE

Definitions of core concepts
Definitions of core concepts

Institutional mechanisms for gender 
equality

Gender equality is a fundamental value of the 
EU.  It  aims  to  ensure  equal  opportunities
and equal treatment for women and men and 
to combat any form of discrimination on the 
grounds of sex (7). The EU has adopted a two-
pronged  approach  to  gender  equality,  com-
bining positive action in support of the under-
represented  sex  (so-called  specific  measures) 
with gender mainstreaming, understood as the 
mobilisation  of  all  general  policies  and  meas-
ures  specifically  for  the  purpose  of  achieving 
gender  equality  (8).  EU  Member  States  have 
taken  the  commitment  to  promote  gender 
equality  and  mainstream  gender  in  various 
policy areas.

The  BPfA  refers  to  institutional  mechanisms 
as  a  national  structure  for  the  advance-
ment  of  women,  defined  as  a  central  policy-
coordinating  unit 
inside  the  government 
whose  main  task  is  to  support  government-
wide mainstreaming of a gender equality per-
spective in all policy areas. EIGE’s report adopts 
the approach of the EU institutions and policies, 
and uses the term ‘institutional mechanisms for 
gender equality’ as the currently existing gov-
ernmental bodies have a broader mandate that 
goes  beyond  ‘the  advancement  of  women’ 
and  extends  to  gender  equality  and  gender 
mainstreaming  in  other  policy  areas.  More-
over, besides the governmental gender equal-
ity bodies in the Member States, the analysis of 
institutional mechanisms also includes the des-
ignated  body  or  bodies  for  the  promotion  of 
equal treatment of women and men in the EU 
Member States.

Directive  2002/73/EC  on  the  implementation 
of the principle of equal treatment for men and 
women  establishes  that  ‘Member  States  shall 
designate  and  make  the  necessary  arrange-
ments for a body or bodies for the promotion, 
analysis, monitoring and support of equal treat-
ment of all persons without discrimination on 
the grounds of sex’ (9). Directive 2006/54/EC on 
the  implementation  of  the  principle  of  equal 
opportunities and equal treatment of men and 
women in matters  of  employment and occu-
pation (recast) (10) provides recommendations 
for  the  mandates  and  provisions  of  the  body 
for the promotion of equal treatment between 
women and men as regards:

•

•

of 

level 

location  of  the  body:  these  bodies 
form  part  of  agencies  with 
may 
responsibility  at  national 
for 
the  defence  of  human  rights  or  the 
rights’;
safeguard 
external  support  to  their  activities: 
‘at  the  appropriate  level  exchanging 
with 
available 
bodies 
corresponding 
European 
such 
(11).
Institute 

information 
European 
future 
for  Gender  Equality’ 

individuals’ 

any 

as 

In 2009, the Council of the European Union (12) 
acknowledged  the  following  conditions  as 
necessary for an effective functioning of insti-
tutional mechanisms for gender equality:

•

•

clearly  defined  mandates  and  powers 
to  develop  and 
implement  gender 
equality policies at the highest possible 
level  in  the  government,  falling  under 
the responsibility of a cabinet minister;
institutional  mechanisms  or  processes 
that 
appropriate, 
decentralised planning, implementation 

facilitate, 

as 

8

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

•

•

grassroots 

community 
the 

and monitoring with a view to involving 
organisations 
non-governmental 
organisations 
and 
from 
upwards;
sufficient resources in terms of budget 
and professional capacity;
the opportunity to influence the 
development of all government 
policies.

Among the external factors which might impact 
the effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for 
advancement of gender equality are: the degree 
to which women’s organisations are involved in 
policy development and evaluation; the extent 
to  which  international  agreements  and  leg-
islation  from  both  the  UN  and  the  EU  have  an 
influence within the countries; the general eco-
nomic and political climate in the country;  the 
decentralisation of the gender equality mandate 
to regional and local governmental institutions; 
the  tendency  to  merge  gender  equality  issues 
with  other  forms  of  inequalities;  and  the  shift 
from a political and administrative to a legalistic 
approach to gender equality. EIGE’s studies, fo-
cused on some of these aspects and their find-
ings, are presented below.

Gender mainstreaming

Gender mainstreaming was established as one 
of the key elements for gender equality in the 
BPfA. It states that ‘[i]n addressing the issue of 
mechanisms  for  promoting  the  advancement 
of  women,  Governments  and  other  actors 
should promote an active and visible policy of 
mainstreaming a gender perspective in all poli-
cies and programmes so that, before decisions 
are taken, an analysis is made of the effects on 
women and men, respectively.’ (13)

The  Treaty  of  Amsterdam  (1997)  formalised 
the gender mainstreaming concept at the EU 
level by explicitly emphasising the elimination 
of  inequalities  and  the  promotion  of  equality 

Definitions of core concepts

between  women  and  men  among  the  tasks 
and  objectives  of  the  Community  (Articles  2 
and 3).

Since  1996,  the  European  Commission  has 
emphasised that the concept of gender main-
streaming  ‘involves  not  restricting  efforts  to 
promote  equality  to  the  implementation  of 
specific measures to help women, but mobilis-
ing  all  general  policies  and  measures  specifi-
cally for the purpose to achieving equality by 
actively and openly taking into account at the 
planning stage their possible effects on the re-
spective situation of men and women (gender 
perspective).  This  means  systematically  exam-
ining measures and policies and taking into ac-
count such possible effects when defining and 
implementing them’ (14). The documents of the 
European  Commission  and  of  the  European 
Parliament  acknowledge  that  gender  main-
streaming should not be regarded as a replace-
ment for direct equal opportunities policy but 
an addition to it. This has been developed into 
and  presented  as  what  currently  is  known  as 
the dual approach to gender equality, which is 
based  on  gender  mainstreaming,  i.e.  the  pro-
motion  of  gender  equality  in  all  policy  areas 
and activities, and on specific measures (15).

The BPfA identified several conditions for the ef-
fective implementation of gender mainstream-
ing, namely, political commitment; appropriate 
interministerial coordination structure; involve-
ment of civil society; gender awareness training 
and advisory services for governmental bodies; 
legal reform in different areas; sufficient budget 
resources and professional capacity; and appli-
cation of gender mainstreaming tools.

EIGE’s  report  on  Effectiveness  of  institutional 
mechanisms  for  the  advancement  of  gender 
equality — Review of the implementation of the 
Beijing  Platform  for  Action  in  the  EU  Member 
States (16) elaborates on the following methods 
and tools of gender mainstreaming developed 
by the EU Member States.

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

9

Definitions of core concepts

EIGE

• Gender impact assessment

(GIA) can be defined as ‘an ex ante 
evaluation, analysis or assessment of 
a law or programme that makes it 
possible to identify in a preventive 
way the likelihood of a given decision, 
law or programme to have negative 
consequences for the state of equality 
between women and men. GIA can 
include a cost–benefit analysis’ (17).
• Gender equality training and 

competence development includes
any educational tool that supports 
policymakers and implementers to 
be more aware of gender equality 
issues, build their gender competence 
and enable them to integrate gender 
considerations across the policies 
and programmes for which they are 
responsible (18).

• Gender budgeting generally 

refers to 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.’ (19)
Evaluation is a part of the programme 
cycle approach. It contributes to 
evidence-based policymaking and 
helps to inform European citizens 
about public money spending. 
It has thus a double purpose of 
accountability and learning.

•

Statistics disaggregated by sex

In line with the strategic objectives of the BPfA, 
the  Council  of  the  European  Union  (2009)  (20) 
calls  on  the  Member  States  and  the  Commis-
sion ‘to support national and EU statistical offic-
es and encourage cooperation and efficiency, 
also  using  the  capacity  of  the  European  Insti-
tute for Gender Equality, with a view to further 
improving the collection, compilation, analysis, 
dissemination  of  timely,  reliable  and  compar-
able data disaggregated by sex and age, there-
by shedding light on problems and issues relat-
ed to women and men and the promotion of 
gender equality; and with this goal in mind to 
take steps to ensure that statistics, data and in-
formation on the relevant indicators relating to 
the Beijing Platform for Action are made readily 
available and regularly updated’.

Gender  statistics  are  important  for  at  least 
three  reasons.  Firstly,  they  raise  public  aware-
ness on the plight and prevailing conditions of 
women  and  men.  They  provide  policymakers 
with sufficient baseline information to institute 
favourable changes to existing policies affect-
ing  women  and  men  differently.  Finally,  they 
provide  an  unbiased  source  of  information  to 
monitor the actual and real effects of govern-
ment’s policies and programmes on the lives of 
women and men (21).

The  existence  of  gender  statistics  and  indica-
tors as well as sex-disaggregated statistics is a 
fundamental condition for gender mainstream-
ing as they represent vital tools for the estab-
lishment, monitoring and follow-up of political 
goals and targets. This implies that statistics are 
needed  during  the  whole  process  of  policy-
making,  planning,  implementation  and  evalu-
ation of the work to reach gender equality.

10

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

Institutional mechanisms for 
gender equality: EU-wide indicators

Based  on  the  collection  of  primary  and  second-
ary data (22), EIGE’s report on Effectiveness of institu-
tional  mechanisms  for  the  advancement  of  gender 
equality  —  Review  of  the  implementation  of  the 
Beijing Platform for  Action in the EU Member States 
explores 
institutional  mechanisms  for  gender 
equality in the EU Member States, inter alia, gov-
ernmental  gender  equality  bodies;  independent 

bodies  for  the  promotion  of  equal  treatment 
of women and men in accordance with Directive 
2002/73/EC;  the  existence  of  structures  and  use 
of methods and tools for gender mainstreaming; 
the  involvement  of  civil  society  actors  in  gender 
equality  policies;  and  governmental  instruments 
to  promote  the  production  and  dissemination 
of data and statistics disaggregated by sex.

Indicator 1: Status of governmental 
responsibility in promoting gender equality

Indicator  1  is  built  to  assess  the  first  strategic 
objective of area H — to create or strengthen 
national  machineries  and  other  governmental 
bodies — and a set of sub-objectives.

•

•

•

•

The responsibility for promoting 
gender equality policies should be 
vested at the highest possible level 
of government, such as the level of a 
cabinet minister.
The national machinery should be 
located at the highest possible level of 
government. It should have a clearly 
defined mandate, adequate resources, 
the ability to influence policy, to 
formulate and review legislation and to 
provide staff training.
The government should establish 
procedures to allow the machinery to gather 
information on government-wide policy 
issues at an early stage and use it in the 
policy development and review process.
The government should report on the 
progress on efforts taken, on a regular basis, 
to legislative bodies, and promote the active 
involvement of the broad and diverse range 

of institutional actors in the public, private 
and voluntary sectors in the work for equality 
between women and men.

Indicator 1 is a sum variable with a maximum 
value  of  10  which  includes  the  following 
aspects:

•

•

•

•

•

the highest levels of responsibility 
for promoting gender equality at the 
governmental level (0–2 points);
the existence and permanence of a 
governmental gender equality body at 
national/federal level (0–2 points);
the position of the governmental 
gender equality body within the 
governmental structure (0–2 points);
the functions of the governmental 
gender equality body at national/
federal level (0–2 points);
the accountability of the government for the 
promotion of gender equality (the existence 
of a governmental action plan on gender 
equality (GAPGE) and reporting to the 
legislative bodies such as the parliament on 
the progress of gender equality) (0–2 points).

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

11

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

EIGE

States which adopted national action plans for 
gender equality and established regular report-
ing  on  gender  equality  to  the  legislative  bod-
ies. However, the survey results do not allow an 
assessment of the quality of implementation of 
those action plans.

At the same time, the percentage of Member 
States which were in compliance with the BPfA 
objective of placing the responsibility for pro-
moting gender equality at the highest possible 
level in the government declined from 88 % in 
2005 to 79 % in 2012 (23).

General overview

Overall,  most  Member  States  (BE,  DE,  EE,  ES, 
IT, CY, LT, HU, MT, NL, AT, PL, SI, SK, FI, UK) had 
made  progress  in  the  status  of  governmental 
responsibility  in  2012  compared  with  2005. 
Eight Member States (ES, IT, CY, LT, LU, AT, SE, 
UK) had reached the highest score of 10 points. 
In two Member States (DK, IE), a minor setback 
in the institutional structures can be seen, while 
in seven countries the indicator score remained 
at the level of 2005 (CZ, EL, FR, LV, LU, PT, SE). 
Comparisons for BG, HR and RO were not made 
as  these  countries  were  not  included  in  the 
Finnish Presidency report in 2006.

Most of the progress is a result of improved ac-
countability for gender equality policies, mani-
fested  by  the  increased  number  of  Member 

Figure 1: Status of governmental responsibility in promoting gender equality 
(Indicator 1, maximum 10 points), 2005 and 2012

8.36

1.88

1.96

1.40

1.88

1.24

Highest
responsibility

Existence of
body

Level of
location 

Functions 

Accountability

8.79

1.75

2.00

1.43

1.86

1.75

2005 
(25 Member States)

2012 
(28 Member States)

NB:  BG, HR and RO were not included in the Finnish Presidency survey and therefore data for 2005 are not available.

Source: Data collected during the 2006 Finnish Presidency and in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

12

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

Location of the governmental 
gender equality bodies

In  2012,  all  Member  States  had  a  perma-
nent  governmental  gender  equality  body 
with  a  broad  mandate  to  implement  gender 
mainstreaming,  draft  laws  and  review  poli-
cies.  There  has  been  a  small  increase  (from 
52 to 57 % between 2005 and 2012) in the per-
centage  of  Member  States  that  had  an  entire 
ministry  as  the  governmental  gender  equal-
ity  body  or  body  located  at  the  highest  level 
within the ministry. This led to a small drop in 

Member States that placed the governmental 
gender equality body at the intermediate level 
from 36 to 32 % (Figure 2).

Functions of the governmental 
gender equality bodies

The  analysis  took  into  consideration  the  fol-
lowing functions of the governmental gender 
equality body: policy formulation; law drafting 
or initiation and legislation review; promotion of 
the  implementation  of  government  decisions; 

Figure 2: Location of the governmental gender equality body by ministerial level, 
2005 (25 Member States) and 2012 (28 Member States)

Independent body 
outside the 
ministerial 
structure: BE,MT,SI

2005

Entry ministry: 
EL, IT, LU

12 %

12 %

Independent body 
outside the ministerial 
structure: BE, HR, MT

2012

Entry ministry: LU

11 %

3 %

36 %

40 %

At the intermediate level 
in a ministry: BG, CZ, IE, 
FR, LV, HU, NL, RO, FI

32 %

54 %

At the intermediate 
level in a ministry: 
CZ, IE, LV, LT, HU, NL, 
SK, FI, UK

At the higest level in a 
ministry: DK, DE, EE, ES, FR, 
CY, AT, PL, PT, SE

At the higest level in a ministry: 
DK, DE, EE, ES, IT, CY, LT, AT, PL, 
PT, SI, SK, SE, UK

NB: BG, HR and RO were not included in the Finnish Presidency survey and therefore data for 2005 are not available.

Data are presented in percentages in order to make the comparison possible between 2005 and 2012 where the number 
of Member States was different.

Source: Data collected during the 2006 Finnish Presidency and in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

coordination  and/or  development  of  gender 
mainstreaming  processes  and  methodologies; 
policy  analysis,  monitoring  and  assessment  of 
reforms;  research  and  development;  EU  and 
international  affairs;  and  information,  publish-
ing  and  training.  Since  2005  a  slight  increase 
has  been  observed  in  the  scope  and  number 
of  tasks  dealt  with  by  the  governmental  gen-
der  equality  bodies.  The  coordination  and/or 
development  of  gender  mainstreaming  pro-
cesses  and  methodologies  was  performed  in 

all Member States; in some Member States, the 
mandates of the governmental gender equality 
bodies were expanded to include policy analy-
sis, monitoring and assessment of reforms; law 
drafting (initiating law) and/or reviewing legis-
lation;  policy  formulation  for  the  government; 
information,  publishing  and  training;  research 
and  development;  and  promotion  of  the  im-
plementation of government decisions.

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

13

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

EIGE

Gender equality action plans 
and the system of reporting to 
legislative bodies

In  2005,  only  15  Member  States  had  national 
action  plans  for  gender  equality.  In  2012,  this 
number increased to 23 from 60 to 86 %. There 
was  also  an  increase  in  accountability  of  the 
government  for  the  promotion  of  gender 
equality, measured by the existence of the regu-
lar  system  of  reporting  to  legislative  bod-
ies — from 64 % in 2005 to 93 % in 2012. By 
2012, more than two thirds of Member States 
reported  the  existence  of  both 
(79  %) 

— national action plan and system of report-
ing — compared to 44 % in 2005 (Figure 3).

However,  the  existence  of  a  national  action 
plan  is  not  a  sufficient  measure  of  progress. 
It  remains  important  to  assess  the  quality 
and  outcomes  of  its  implementation.  There 
is ample evidence showing that, due to various 
reasons, the implementation of national plans 
in some countries faces serious setbacks (24).

Figure 3: Percentage of Member States that had a GAPGE and a system of reporting, 
2005 (25 Member States) and 2012 (28 Member States)

2005

2012

s
e
t
a
t
S
r
e
b
m
e
M

f
o
e
g
a
t
n
e
c
r
e
P

100

80

60

40

20

0

National/federal action plan on
gender equality

System of reporting to legislative
bodies on the progress of
gender equality eﬀorts

Both: NAP and system of
reporting

None: neither NAP nor
system of reporting

NB: Data are not available for BG, HR, MT and RO: BG, HR and RO were not included in the Finnish Presidency survey and 
therefore data for 2005 are not available.

Source: Data collected during the 2006 Finnish Presidency and in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

Involvement of civil society

In  2012,  almost  all  Member  States  reported  the 
involvement  of  civil  society,  including  women’s 
NGOs, social partners and other civil society organ-
isations, in promoting gender equality at national/
federal level, in most of the cases with the dissemi-
nation of information and awareness-raising.

The impact of the involvement of women’s NGOs 
in  policy  development,  as  indicated  by  their 
leaders,  varied  greatly  among  Member  States, 
depending on funding availability for NGOs and 
the  level  of  commitment  of  the  government  to 

institutionalise the regular involvement of wom-
en’s NGOs. However, the majority of them think 
that civil society involvement in and consultation 
by the government on gender equality policies is 
limited, ad hoc or even non-existent. EIGE’s study 
on  institutional  capacity  and  effective  methods, 
tools and good practices for mainstreaming gen-
der  equality  (2013)  shows  that  whereas  stake-
holder participation in the gender equality/gen-
der mainstreaming policies has been integrated 
or institutionalised in a majority of Member States, 
it still fails to be fully embedded at every stage of 
the  policy  cycle  in  12  Member  States,  where  it 
rarely or only occasionally informs policymaking.

14

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

Indicator 2a: Personnel resources of the 
governmental gender equality body

A  government  commitment  to  promoting 
gender equality can also be measured in terms 
of  resources  allocated  to  the  governmental 
gender equality body (25).

Indicator 2a indicates the ratio of the personnel 
resources available for the governmental gen-
der equality body (26) to the size of the Mem-
ber State in terms of population. The number 
of  employees  is  given  in  person  years,  mean-
ing full-time, year-round employment exclud-
ing  all  project  personnel  that  do  not  receive 
funding  from  the  state  budget.  The  indicator 
is  calculated  from  the  ratio  of  employees  per 
population (million) in each Member State and 
describes the deviation from the median.

Regarding  changes  in  personnel  allocated  to 
governmental  gender  equality  bodies  since 
2005,  human  resources  for  gender  equality 

decreased  in  more  than  half  of  the  Member 
States (Figure 4).

Making  comparisons  between  personnel  re-
sources is a difficult task. The workload of the 
governmental equality body does not increase 
or decrease in direct proportion to the popula-
tion size. It is therefore sometimes more mean-
ingful  to  examine  changes  over  time  rather 
than  the  numbers  themselves.  Secondly,  for 
federal states the governmental gender equal-
ity  bodies  at  the  regional  level  have  been  in-
cluded  in  2012  indicator  scores.  However,  it  is 
likely  that  some  Member  States  that  do  not 
function under a federal system also have gen-
der equality bodies at the regional level, mak-
ing it difficult to provide an accurate compara-
tive perspective between Member States.

Figure 4: Difference in human resources of governmental gender equality bodies, 
2005 and 2012 by Member State, employees per population (1 000 000)

10

5

0

–5

LU SE EL CY PL FR SI

IE HU LV NL CZ DK IT

FI

SK LT AT BE UK PT ES EE DE BG HR MT RO

NB: Data are not available for BG, HR, MT and RO: BG, HR and RO were not included in the Finnish Presidency survey and 
therefore data for 2005 are not available.

Source: Data collected during the 2006 Finnish Presidency and in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

15

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

EIGE

Indicator 2b: Personnel resources of the 
designated body or bodies for the promotion  
of equal treatment of women and men

indicator 

This 
represents  a  government’s 
commitment  to  promoting  gender  equality 
in  terms  of  resource  allocation  for  the  protec-
tion  and  promotion  of  equal  treatment  in  ac-
cordance with Directive 2002/73/EC.

Indicator  2b  indicates  the  ratio  of  personnel 
resources available to the designated body for 
the  promotion  of  equal  treatment  of  women 
and  men  to  the  population  size  of  the  Mem-
ber  State.  The  number  of  employees  is  given 
in person-years, meaning full-time, year-round 
employment,  excluding  all  project  personnel 
who  do  not  receive  funding  from  the  state 
budget.  In  case  of  independent  bodies  in 
charge of promoting equal treatment on sev-
eral grounds, one of which is sex, an estimate 
of  the  number  of  employees  solely  in  charge 
of combating discrimination on grounds of sex 
was requested. The indicator is calculated from 
the ratio of employees per population (million) 
in each Member State and describes the devi-
ation from the median.

In  2012,  only  five  countries  (BE,  ES,  HR,  PT,  FI) 
had  independent  bodies  working  solely  to 
promote equal treatment of women and men 

(11 countries in 2005). The majority of Member 
States (BG, CZ, DK, DE, EE, IE, EL, FR, CY, LV, LT, 
LU, HU, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, RO, SI, SK, SE, UK) had 
an  independent  body  combating  discrimina-
tion  on  several  grounds,  one  of  which  is  sex. 
These  numbers  capture  the  increasing  trend 
in the Member States to merge the bodies ex-
clusively dedicated to the promotion of equal 
treatment of women and men with those ad-
dressing various grounds of discrimination (27). 
As an outcome, the human resources solely in 
charge of combating discrimination based on 
sex are less visible in the independent equality 
bodies (Figure 5).

The  number  of  employees  per  population 
of the independent body or bodies has grown 
since  2005  in  five  Member  States  (DK,  EL,  LV, 
PT,  FI)  and  decreased  in  three  Member  States 
(CY, CZ, UK). Part of this growth can be attrib-
uted to the broadening of the mandate of al-
ready  existing  bodies  from  the  sole  ground 
of  sex  to  multiple  grounds.  For  19  Member 
States, the comparison between 2005 and 2012 
was not possible due to the lack of availability 
of information on the number of personnel.

16

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

Figure 5: Human resources of gender equality bodies in 2005 (25 Member States) and 
2012 (28 Member States), employees per population (1 000 000)

Increased

Decreased

Data are not 
available

18 %

11 %

71 %

36 %

50 %

14 %

Governmental gender 
equality body

Independent body 
(employees on 
gounds of sex)

NB:  BG, HR and RO were not included in the Finnish Presidency survey and therefore data for 2005 are not available.

Data are presented in percentages in order to make the comparison possible between 2005 and 2012 where the number 
of Member States was diff erent.

Source: Data collected during the Finnish Presidency 2006 and in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

Indicator 3: Gender mainstreaming

Indicator 3 is based on the second strategic ob-
jective  of  area  H  on  institutional  mechanisms, 
‘Integrate  gender  perspectives  in  legislation, 
public programmes and projects’, and a set of 
sub-objectives:

•

•

•

seek to ensure that before policy 
decisions are taken, an analysis of 
their impact on women and men, 
respectively, is carried out;
regularly review national policies, 
programmes and projects, as well 
as their implementation, evaluating 
the impact of employment and 
income policies in order to guarantee 
that women are direct benefi ciaries 
of development and that their full 

contribution to development, both 
remunerated and unremunerated, is 
considered in economic policy and 
planning;
promote national strategies and aims 
on equality between women and 
men in order to eliminate obstacles 
to the exercise of women’s rights and 
eradicate all forms of discrimination 
against women;

• work with members of legislative 

bodies, as appropriate, to promote a 
gender perspective in all legislation 
and policies;
give all ministries the mandate to 
review policies and programmes 
from a gender perspective and in 

•

Eff ectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

17

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

EIGE

3: commitment to and use of the methods and 
tools  for  gender  mainstreaming  (maximum 
10 points):

3.1. commitment to using gender mainstream-
ing  methods  and  tools  (legal  obligation  to 
undertake  gender  impact  assessment  and/or 
gender budgeting);

3.2.  use  of  gender  mainstreaming  methods 
and tools (gender impact assessment; gender 
budgeting;  gender  training;  and  monitoring 
and evaluation);

3.3.  availability  of  reports  from  evaluation 
studies.

The  indicator  on  gender  mainstreaming  is  a 
sum  indicator  with  a  maximum  value  of  16. 
None of the Member States have reached the 
maximum score on this indicator for 2012, but 
five Member States (ES, FR, AT, FI, SE) received 
12  or  more  points.  However,  as  many  as  half 
of  the  Member  States  (BG,  IE,  EL,  LV,  LU,  HU, 
MT, NL, PT, RO, SI, SK) received less than eight 
points in 2012.

the light of the Beijing Platform for 
Action; locate the responsibility for 
the implementation of that mandate 
at the highest possible level; establish 
and/or strengthen an interministerial 
coordination structure to carry out this 
mandate, to monitor progress and to 
network with relevant machineries.

According  to  the  BPfA,  the  implementation  of 
gender  mainstreaming  requires:  commitment 
of  the  government;  structure  of  governmen-
tal  bodies  and  officials  responsible  for  gender 
mainstreaming;  consultation  with  gender  ex-
perts both within the government and with civil 
society;  knowledge  (training  and  awareness-
raising)  on  how  to  implement  gender  main-
streaming; and the use of methods and tools.

In the 2006 Finnish Presidency report, some of 
these  issues  were  already  addressed  by  Indi-
cator 3. EIGE’s report on Effectiveness of institu-
tional mechanisms for the advancement of gen-
der equality — Review of the implementation of 
the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member 
States proposes improvements to this indicator 
by taking into consideration more tools of gen-
der mainstreaming and proposing a restructur-
ing of Indicator 3 as follows:

1: status of the government’s commitment to 
gender mainstreaming (maximum 2 points);

2:  existence  of  structures  for  gender  main-
streaming (maximum 4 points):

2.1. structures of gender mainstreaming (con-
tact  persons  or  focal  points  responsible  for 
gender mainstreaming in ministries and/or an 
interministerial coordination structure for gen-
der mainstreaming);

2.2. consultations with the governmental gen-
der equality body on new policies and policy 
evaluations;

18

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

Government commitment to 
gender mainstreaming

In most of the Member States the government’s 
commitment  to  gender  mainstreaming  is  a 
legal obligation or a de facto binding decision 
of the government. Altogether, compared with 
2005,  there  has  been  an  increase  in  the  pro-
portion  of  Member  States  which  established 
a  legal  obligation  to  gender  mainstreaming. 

While there was progress in proportions over-
all, there was no general tendency in the level 
or  strength  of  commitment  to  implement 
gender mainstreaming at Member State level. 
The status of the commitment to gender main-
streaming between 2005 and 2012 improved in 
seven Member States (BE, CZ, ES, IT, AT, PT, UK), 
decreased in six (IE, EL, FR, LV, HU, NL) and in 12 
Member States it did not change (Figure 6).

Figure 6: Types of commitments to gender mainstreaming in the EU Member States, 
2005 (25 Member States) and 2012 (28 Member States)

2005

16 %

Other: BE, PL, PT, SK

Recommendation: 
IT, CY, NL

12 %

Legal obligation: DK, DE, 
EE, FR, LV, LT, HU, SI, FI

Other: BG, EL, LV, 
NL, PL, SK

21%

2012

Legal obligation: 
BE, CZ, DK, DE, EE, 
ES, HR, LT, AT, RO, 
SI, FI, UK

36 %

14 %

Recommendation: 
IE, FR, CY, PT

47 %

36 %

18 %

De facto binding decision: CZ, IE, 
EL, ES, LU, MT, AT, SE, IK

De facto binding decision: IT, LU, HU, MT, SE

NB:  BG, HR and RO were not included in the Finnish Presidency survey and therefore data for 2005 are not available.

Data are presented in percentages in order to make the comparison possible between 2005 and 2012 where the number 
of Member States was different.

Source: Data collected during the Finnish Presidency 2006 and in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

However,  the  existence  of  a  legal  obligation 
or  recommendation  on  gender  mainstream-
ing  does  not  guarantee  in  itself  the  success-
ful  implementation  of  the  strategy  in  prac-
tice. As pointed out by the Joint Employment 
Report  2007/08  of  the  Council  of  the  Euro-
pean  Union,  ‘most  Member  States  are  still  far 
from  adopting  a  full  gender-mainstreaming 
approach  to  employment  policies,  notably 
through systematic gender impact assessment 
of policy measures.’ (28)

Structures for gender 
mainstreaming

In 2012, almost all Member States had an inter-
ministerial  structure  to 
implement  gender 
mainstreaming  in  the  government,  such  as 
a  gender  mainstreaming  coordination  struc-
ture  in  other  ministries  (16  Member  States),  a 
network  of  contact  persons  for  gender  main-
streaming (23) or both (14) (Figure 7). Between 
2005  and  2012,  the  proportion  of  countries 
that  did  not  have  any  of  these  structures  de-
creased from 20 to 11 %.

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

19

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

EIGE

Figure 7: Types of gender mainstreaming structures in the 28 EU Member States, 2012

Interdepartmental coordination

Contact persons

Yes

No

BE

BG

CZ

DK

DE

EE

IE

EL

ES

FR

HR

IT

CY

LV

LT

LU

HU MT

NL

AT

PL

PT

RO

SI

SK

FI

SE

UK

Source: Data collected in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

Consultations with the 
governmental body for gender 
equality

According  to  the  BPfA,  the  role  of  the  gov-
ernmental  gender  equality  body  is  important 
since  it  has  the  responsibility  of  ‘providing 
training  and  advisory  assistance  to  govern-
ment agencies in order to integrate a gender 
perspective in their policies and programmes’. 
The data show that in only five Member States 
(FR,  MT,  PL,  PT,  SE)  the  governmental  gender 
equality body was consulted on nearly all new 
policies other than on gender equality. In the 
other  22  Member  States  (BG,  CZ,  DK,  DE,  EE, 
IE, EL, ES, HR, IT, CY, LV, LT, LU, HU, NL, AT, RO, 

SI, SK, FI, UK), the body was consulted only on 
some new policies.

The  governmental  gender  equality  body  was 
consulted  with  for  (nearly)  all  policy  evalu-
ations  in  seven  Member  States  and  for  some 
policy  evaluations  in  19  Member  States  (Fig-
ure  8).  The  involvement  of  the  governmental 
gender equality body led to an adjustment of 
policy in the majority of cases (50–75 %) in 10 
Member States (DE, EL, ES, FR, IT, AT, PL, SI, SE, 
UK) and in 13 Member States (BG, CZ, DK, EE, 
IE, HR, CY, LT, HU, NL, RO, SK, FI) only in some 
cases (25–50 %).

Figure 8: Consultation of the governmental gender equality body for new policy plans 
and/or evaluation of policies (in policy fields other than gender equality) in 28 EU 
Member States, 2012

Consulted for new policy plans

Consulted for evaluations of policies

With (almost)
all policies

With some
policies

Never

BE

BG CZ DK DE

EE

IE

EL

ES

FR HR

IT

CY

LV

LT

LU HU MT NL

AT

PL

PT

RO

SI

SK

FI

SE

UK

Source: Data collected in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

20

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

Commitment to and use of the 
methods and tools for gender 
mainstreaming

By  2012,  thirteen  Member  States  had  estab-
lished  a  legal  obligation  to  undertake  gender 

impact  assessments  in  drafting  laws  and/or 
policies. Only eight Member States had a legal 
obligation  to  implement  gender  budgeting 
or  gender  impact  assessments  of  ministerial 
budgets (Figure 9).

Figure 9: Legal obligations to use methods of gender mainstreaming — gender impact 
assessment and gender budgeting — in the 28 EU Member States, 2012

Legal obligation for gender impact assessments

Legal obligation for gender butgeting

Yes

No

BE

BG

CZ

DK

DE

EE

IE

EL

ES

FR

HR

IT

CY

LV

LT

LU

HU MT

NL

AT

PL

PT

RO

SI

SK

FI

SE

UK

Source: Data collected in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

However,  the  link  between  the  legal  obliga-
tion  to  use  specific  gender  mainstreaming 
methods and tools and their actual use is not 
straightforward. In several Member States with 
an established legal obligation, the use of gen-
der  mainstreaming  methods  and  tools  was 
practically  an  unknown  concept  or  still  at  its 
initial stage. However, in several other Member 
States,  gender  mainstreaming  methods  and 
tools  were  used  in  most  or  several  ministries 
without a legal obligation.

Gender impact assessment (GIA)

In  2012,  nearly  half  of  the  Member  States 
adopted legal or policy provisions for the im-
plementation of GIA along with guidelines and 
other  support  materials.  However,  only  two 
Member  States  (ES,  SE)  used  GIA  widely  for 
drafting  various  kinds  of  policy  programmes 
and  another  five  (CZ,  DK,  DE,  FR,  FI)  used  it 
sometimes (Figure 10).

Figure 10: Number of Member States using gender impact assessments, 2012

Wildely used in most ministries

Used by some ministries

Still at its initial stage

Practically an unknow concept

Use of gender impact assessemnt in 
law drafting

Use of gender impact assessment in 
the drafting of various kinds of policy 
programmes, action plans, projects

Use of gender impact assessemnt in 
law drafting

0

4

8

12

16

20

24

28

Number of Member States

Source: Data collected in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

21

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

EIGE

Only four Member States (ES, FR, PL, SE) report-
ed that the application of GIA in drafting laws in 
the majority of cases brought an adjustment to 
make the final outcomes more gender equal. In 

the other Member States, GIA made an impact 
only  in  some  cases,  and  in  other  cases  there 
was even no adjustment at all.

Institutional capacity for gender 
mainstreaming in the EU Member 
States

EIGE’s complementary study on ‘Institutional 
capacity for gender mainstreaming in the 28 
Member States of the European Union’ (2013) 
revealed that the practice of GIA seems to be 
deployed mainly in relation to the prepara-
tion of legislation. In many countries the im-
plementation  of  GIA  appears  rather  formal-
istic  and  resembles  a  ‘tick-the-box’  exercise 
that does not entail real analysis.

The  study  involves  deeper  analysis  of  the 
implementation of GIA in the selected coun-
tries and regions. The following criteria were 
applied.

••

••

The GIA method that is deployed 
The GIA method that is deployed 
should correspond to the definition 
should correspond to the definition 
for GIA that was used in the context 
for GIA that was used in the context 
of the study (2929).).
of the study (
Available information on the 
Available information on the 
implementation of GIA should 
implementation of GIA should 
indicate that the GIA is underpinned 
indicate that the GIA is underpinned 
by a substantial analysis (as opposed 
by a substantial analysis (as opposed 
to treating GIA as a ‘tick-the-box’ 
to treating GIA as a ‘tick-the-box’ 
exercise).
exercise).
There should be some history and/
There should be some history and/
or volume of GIA implementation in 
or volume of GIA implementation in 
the country, indicating some degree 
the country, indicating some degree 
of institutionalisation of the method.
of institutionalisation of the method.
There should be evidence of current 
There should be evidence of current 
or recent implementation of GIA.
or recent implementation of GIA.
Guidelines or other support materials 
•• Guidelines or other support materials 
exist for the implementation of GIA.
exist for the implementation of GIA.

••

••

The  research  indicates  that  the  following 
countries  and  regions  correspond  to  the 
abovementioned  criteria:  DE  (Land  level: 
Lower Saxony), ES (regional level: Catalonia), 
AT, FI and SE. Although the initial data map-
ping  did  not  suggest  that  the  history  and/

or  volume  of  GIA  implementation  in  DK 
are  of  significance,  DK  has  been  included 
in  the  analysis  because  of  recent  emphasis 
on  GIA  in  a  reframed  approach  to  gender 
mainstreaming.

Overall,  the  study  revealed  that  little  infor-
mation is publicly available or accessible on 
the  implementation  of  GIA  in  the  analysed 
countries  and  regions.  Where  available,  in-
formation  indicates  an  ongoing  process  of 
institutionalisation,  with  strong  variations 
across  policy  areas  and  which  does  not  ac-
count  for  a  systematic  use  of  GIA  as  an  in-
tegrated part of law and policymaking. The 
two cases with the highest proven record of 
GIA implementation are SE, where GIAs have 
not  been  regulated  and  are  being  carried 
out with different methodologies, and Cata-
lonia, where GIA is fully legislated and where 
a centralised model applies. Therefore, it can 
be concluded that the paths of institutionali-
sation of GIA do not seem to be indicative for 
its degree of implementation.

GIA case studies were selected on the basis 
of the following criteria:

•• GIAs that were not about gender 
GIAs that were not about gender 
equality policy-specific measures;
equality policy-specific measures;
•• GIAs that were particularly influential 
GIAs that were particularly influential 
(or at least had some impact on 
(or at least had some impact on 
policy);
policy);
GIAs that were well done from a 
•• GIAs that were well done from a 
technical point of view.
technical point of view.

The  reports  of  these  cases,  as  well  as  the 
guidelines that steered these GIAs, were col-
lected  and  analysed.  Where  available,  aca-
demic and grey literature about the deploy-
ment of GIA in the country/region was also 
integrated in the analysis.

22

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

 Selected cases of gender impact assessment per country/region
Table 1: Selected cases of gender impact assessment per country/region

Country/
region

GIA case 

Year

Type of 
document

Policy area(s)

AT

AT

Law for federal employees 
representation

Amendments to the federal law 
for universities and institutions of 
higher education of 2002

2013

Act

Public service reform

2013

Amendments

Education

Catalonia

Plan for cooperation for develop-
ment 2003–06

2003

Policy plan

Catalonia 

Law 2/2004 for the improvement 
of districts, urban areas and towns 
requiring special attention

2004

Act

International coopera-
tion and development 
policies

Urban and territorial 
policies

DK

DK

FI

FI

DE

SE

SE

Law 162, 18 April 2012 (law on a  
2 year experimental scheme on job 
prizing to long-term unemployed 
social security recipients)

Law 134, 25 February 2010 (law on 
the construction of a new railway 
section Copenhagen–Ringsted)

2012

Act

Employment

2010

Act

Transport

The act on enhancing integration 
(30.12.2010/1386)

2010

Act

Migration, integration 
policies

Migration 2020 strategy

2013

Policy strategy Migration

Law on equal opportunities for 
disabled people (2007)

2007

Act

Disability, 
anti-discrimination

The right to participate. Recently 
arrived women and family member 
immigrants in the labour market

2012

Policy strategy Migration, integration, 

employment

Equally sick listed — a gender per-
spective on the sick leave process

2010

Policy 
assessment

Health insurance, 
social benefits

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

23

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

EIGE

Selected  cases  cover  a  period  of  approxi-
mately  10  years  of  GIA 
implementation 
across  the  EU  (2003-13)  and  a  dozen  policy 
areas, including anti-discrimination, disability, 
health, employment, integration and migra-
tion, higher education and research, interna-
tional cooperation, public transportation, so-
cial security and urban and territorial policies. 

The analysis shows that GIA, as a key instru-
ment  for  effective  gender  mainstreaming, 
is neither systematically legislated nor regu-
lated. Yet, the existence of a legal framework 
—  or  the  absence  thereof  —  does  not  ac-
count for its degree of institutionalisation, or 
the thoroughness of its implementation.

In  terms  of  scope,  depth,  procedures,  ser-
vices in charge, quality checks or evaluations, 
GIAs  are  framed  differently  in  the  analysed 
countries  and  regions,  thus  illustrating  the 
existence of different models. Such diversity 
is partly mirrored in the existence of different 
definitions of what is actually meant by GIA.

The task to carry out GIA is usually ascribed to 
different  institutions,  following  distinct  pro-
cedures  in  different  countries  and  regions. 
Depending on the institutional settings, dif-
ferent types of actors are contributing to the 
processes  of  GIA.  Countries  differ  according 
to the degree of autonomy of civil servants 
in this task, the assistance provided by gov-
ernmental  gender  equality  bodies  and  the 
potential  intervention  of  ‘external’  actors 
such  as  gender  or  legal  experts.  The  scope 
of legislative or policy documents subjected 
to GIA varies significantly across selected re-
gions and countries.

Quality assurance is important to ensure that 
GIA  adequately  addresses  all  relevant  gen-
dered  aspects  of  the  documents,  mobilises 
sufficient  gender  and  technical  expertise 
and  provides  recommendations  which  are 

consistent  with  the  domestic  policy  frame-
work  on  gender  equality.  In  several  of  the 
sample cases, gender equality units are con-
sulted  along  the  process  by  the  ministries 
or  departments  in  charge  of  GIA,  providing 
civil  servants  with  relevant  instruments  and 
expertise.

In most of the countries and regions, GIA is 
performed  at  quite  an  advanced  stage  of 
the policy cycle. In other terms, a great part 
of the law-making process has already taken 
place  when  drafted  measures  are  assessed 
from a gender perspective, thus limiting the 
options  to  substantively  reshape  projected 
norms or policies. When significant changes 
are  requested,  in  particular  by  the  govern-
mental gender equality body involved in the 
process,  they  may  therefore  entail  political 
decisions.

In  summary,  very  different  models  are  in 
place  for  the  implementation  of  GIA,  and 
the underlying conceptions of what actually 
constitutes  GIA  differ.  Emphasis  can  be  on 
the  analysis  of  the  present  situation,  rather 
than  on  an  assessment  of  potential  effects 
of a future legislative or policy measure. GIA 
might  be  perceived  and  performed  as  a 
separate  exercise  or  as  an  integral  part  of  a 
preparatory  process  for  legislative  or  policy 
measures.

There  is  relatively  low  attention  paid  to 
the  more  transformative  dimension  of  GIA 
through  the  design  of  innovative  recom-
mendations or alternative measures that go 
beyond  the  mere  anticipation  of  potential 
gendered  effects.  The  diagnoses  of  gender 
inequality  in  a  specific  policy  area,  rather 
than  prognoses  in  the  form  of  alternative 
scenarios  contributing  to  greater  gender 
equality, usually receive the greatest deal of 
attention.

24

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

Gender training

In  nearly  all  Member  States,  initiatives  were 
undertaken in the past 3 years to raise aware-
ness on gender equality among ministries and 
other  bodies  of  public  administration.  How-
ever, regular gender equality training was not 

very common. Only five Member States report-
ed  that  their  governmental  employees  were 
trained on a regular basis. Gender training on 
an ad hoc basis was obviously more prevalent, 
particularly  for  employees  of  other  ministries/
departments (Figure 11).

Figure 11: Number of Member States providing gender equality training, 2012

Gender equality training on a regular basis

Gender equality training on an adhoc basis

All governmental employees

Employees at the highest
political level

3

Employees of the governmental
body for gender equality

Some of the employees of other 
ministries/departments

None of the relevant
governmental employees

4

4

0

5

5

5

9

9
9

12

12

8

12

16

20

24

28

Number of Member States

Source: Data collected in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

The European Commission’s evaluation on the 
use  of  employment  Social  Funds  to  support 
gender equality in the Member States conclud-
ed that staff training on gender equality issues 

was  unevenly  spread  across  Member  States, 
‘although  it  should  be  considered  as  an  irre-
placeable  component  of  any  mainstreaming 
strategy’. (30)

Competence development for 
gender mainstreaming — Gender 
training

Another study by EIGE on ‘Mapping gender 
training  in  the  European  Union  and  Cro-
atia’  (2013)  reaffirms  that  sufficient  gender 
equality  competence  of  staff  at  all  levels  of 
public administration is a prerequisite for the 
successful implementation of gender main-
streaming. Gender equality competence de-
velopment is understood to include a wide 

range of different educational tools and pro-
cesses,  such  as  face-to-face  training  events; 
gender equality training; staff induction; on-
line modules; guidance materials and com-
pendia  of  resources;  consultancy  arrange-
ments; networks for sharing expertise; etc.

Gender  training  is  the  most  widespread, 
often the only, form of gender competence 
development  across  the  EU  and  thus  the 
two  concepts  —  gender  equality  compe-
tence development and gender training — 
are often used interchangeably.

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

25

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

EIGE

In EIGE’s study on gender training in the Euro-
pean  Union,  gender  training  was  defined 
as  an  educational  tool  and  a  process  that 
supports policymakers in their efforts to in-
tegrate  gender  considerations  across  the 
policies  and  programmes  for  which  they 
are responsible. The first phase of the study 
entailed  a  mapping  exercise  for  the  period 
of  2005–11  based  on  the  review  of  primary 
sources, desk research and stakeholder inter-
views. Additionally, during the second phase 
of  the  study  the  researchers  conducted 
in-depth  interviews  with  relevant  actors  in 
promising  competence  development  initia-
tives  in  five  Member  States.  The  aim  of  the 
interviews was to identify the essential pre-
requisites  and  success  factors  for  effective 
gender equality training.

Generally, it is difficult to draw concrete con-
clusions about the scale of gender training in 
the European Union, or to compare its provi-
sion  across  the  different  Member  States.  As 
EIGE’s study suggests, Member States do not 
systematically collect information about the 
number of gender training initiatives or the 
number of beneficiaries of gender training.

Existing  data  from  2012  indicate  that  the 
number  of  gender  training  initiatives  and 
even more the number of staff in public ad-
ministrations who have been trained remains 
rather low in most of the EU Member States. 
Most of the initiatives that were implement-
ed during 2005–12 were largely stand-alone 
and ad hoc projects. This suggests that most 
EU countries failed to institutionalise gender 
training through the development of elabo-
rated mechanisms for a systematic provision 
of  gender  equality  knowledge  and  skills  in 
the public sector on the national, regional or 
local levels. There are examples though (e.g. 
AT, FI, SE) where gender mainstreaming ob-
jectives  were  followed  by  a  rather  intensive 

and  specialised  effort  to  fill  in  the  existing 
knowledge gaps of the relevant staff.

The  study  results  show  that  in  the  period 
from 2005 to 2011, there were limited finan-
cial  resources  or  specific  budget  lines  allo-
cated  to  gender  training  in  most  of  the  EU 
countries.  The  provision  of  gender  training 
strongly  depended  on  the  EU  programmes 
as  the  main  funding  source,  such  as  ‘Pro-
gress’ and/or the European Social Fund.

Another  essential  factor  with  regard  to 
the  provision  of  gender  training  is  its  qual-
ity, which depends on a number of factors. 
Amongst others, these include proper insti-
tutional  set-up,  good  qualifications  of  gen-
der  trainers,  availability  of  practical  training 
tools, adequate needs assessment as well as 
regular monitoring and evaluation.

The existence of a legal and policy commit-
ment to gender equality comes to the fore-
front as a precondition for a proper gender 
competence  development  system.  Study 
results  suggest  that  where  gender  main-
streaming  was  a  legal  requirement,  it  was 
more likely to give an impetus for the provi-
sion of gender training for staff at all levels of 
public administration.

Gender  training  providers,  otherwise  re-
ferred to as gender trainers, have emerged as 
a profession after the recognition of gender 
mainstreaming  as  a  comprehensive  strat-
egy in some of the countries. In practice, the 
qualifications of gender trainers and respec-
tively the quality of gender training can vary 
considerably.  At  national  level,  initiatives  to 
train the trainers have been identified in only 
eight Member States. A number of practical 
resources have been made available for the 
use of gender trainers. Despite the emerging 
market for such professionals, neither EU nor 

26

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

national reference frameworks for the quality 
of  the  services  provided  by  gender  trainers 
exist, although there have been attempts to 
work on such. Reportedly, institutions and or-
ganisations  commissioning  gender  training 
lack guidance through the process of finding 
and selecting high-quality training services.

Another  source  of  concern  with  regard  to 
gender training is its actual response to the 
needs of those who receive it and the poten-
tial to transform the processes and working 
environments  to  be  more  gender  equal-
ity focused. EIGE’s study on gender training 
concluded  that  most  of  the  training  pro-
grammes tend to be generic. While in a few 
Member  States  there  are  examples  of  train-
ing tailored to the specific needs of partici-
pants, the most common form is a general, 
small-scale, short (less than 1 day long), one-
off  training.  In  a  number  of  countries  such 
modules were offered in response to newly 

introduced  policies  or  laws,  or  as  a  part  of 
induction programmes for new employees.

However,  going  beyond  the  introductory 
sessions, tailoring the contents to better re-
spond  to  the  actual  tasks  and  roles  of  the 
participants  and  arranging  regular  compe-
tence  building  appears  to  be  problematic. 
Amongst  the  identified  challenges  are  the 
lack of commitment of policymakers to gen-
der  equality  and  limited  funding  for  more 
in-depth and long-term approaches. A wide 
range  of  tools  and  resources  are  now  avail-
able across the EU, but there seems to be a 
short supply of specialised tailored practical 
training  resources,  relevant  to  specific  pro-
jects  or  policy  areas  as  well  as  competent 
gender  trainers,  especially  in  sectors  where 
the  gender  dimension  is  less  evident.  The 
training sessions organised are rarely obliga-
tory, and the voluntary basis makes it difficult 
to ensure sufficient levels of attendance. 

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

27

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

EIGE

Gender budgeting

In 2012, of the eight Member States (BE, DK, EE, 
ES, FR, IT, AT, FI) that established a legal commit-
ment to gender budgeting, only Spain, France 
and  Austria  reported  that  gender  budgeting 

was widely used by most ministries, while five 
countries (BE, CZ, FI, SE, UK) reported a wide use 
by some ministries. In the majority of countries, 
gender budgeting was either still at the initial 
stage  or  practically  an  unknown  concept  in
public administration (Figure 12).

Figure 12: The use of gender budgeting in the EU Member States, 2005 (25 Member 
States) and 2012 (28 Member States)

2005

2012

36 %

Practically an 
unknown 
concept: EE,EL, 
ES, HU, MT, Nl, 
PL, PT, SK

Used by some ministries: 
CZ, DK, SE

Practically an 
unnow 
concept: DK, DE, 
IE, EL, LV, NL, PL, 
PT, RO, SI, SK

12 %

Widely used in most 
ministries: ES, FR, AT

11%

Used by some 
ministries: BE, 
CZ, FI, SE, UK

43 %

18 %

52 %

Still at its initial stage: BE, 
DE, IE, FR, IT, CY, LV, LT, LU, 
AT, SI, FI, UK

28 %

Still at its initial stage: BG, 
EE, HR, IT, CY, LU, HU, MT

NB:  Data are presented in percentages in order to make the comparison possible between 2005 and 2012 where the 
number of Member States was different.

Source: Data collected during the Finnish Presidency 2006 and in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

Out of the 16 Member States (BE, BG, CZ, EE, ES, 
FR, HR, IT, CY, LU, HU, MT, AT, FI, SE, UK) in which 
gender  budgeting  was  used  to  a  varying  de-
gree, budgets were adjusted in the past 3 years 
in only seven (CZ, ES, FR, AT, FI, SE, UK).

Evaluation and monitoring

In  2012,  12  Member  States  (BG,  DE,  EE,  ES,  FR, 
HR, CY, NL, PL, PT, FI, SE) used gender monitor-
ing as a tool for gender mainstreaming;

15 Member States (CZ, DE, FR, HR, IT, CY, LT, HU, 
MT,  AT,  PL,  PT,  SI,  FI,  SE)  carried  out  gender  ex 
post evaluation; and only eight Member States 
(DE, FR, HR, CY, PL, PT, FI, SE) used both moni-
toring and ex post evaluation as part of gender 
mainstreaming (Figure 13).

28

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

Figure 13: Number of Member States that use monitoring and evaluation as part of 
gender mainstreaming, 2012

s
e
t
a
t
S
r
e
b
m
e
M

f
o
r
e
b
m
u
N

28

24

20

16

12

8

4

0

8

9

12

15

Gender impact assessment (ex ante)

Gender monitoring

Gender (ex post) evaluation

Other evaluation study

Source: Data collected January–April 2013 (EIGE).

Indicator 4: Production and dissemination of 
statistics disaggregated by sex

A  major  precondition  for  effective  gender 
equality policies and legislation is the availabil-
ity  of  timely  and  high-quality  statistics  disag-
gregated by sex. Such statistics help to ensure 
evidence-based decision-making and evaluate 
the extent to which the objectives and targets 
have been met.

indicators  and  stressed  the  need  to  review 
them  in  the  future.  In  several  critical  areas  of 
concern,  the  relevant  indicators  and  statisti-
cal  data  were  not  always  available  at  EU  level 
and sometimes missing even at national level, 
making the monitoring of progress of gender 
equality over time impossible.

Indicator 4 is a new indicator based on strategic 
objective H.3 of the area on institutional mech-
anisms  —  Generate  and  disseminate  gender-
disaggregated  data  and  information  for  plan-
ning and evaluation — and a set of actions to 
be taken by national, regional and international 
statistical services and relevant national and UN 
agencies, in cooperation with research organi-
sations and documentation centres.

In 1998, the Council agreed that the annual as-
sessment  of  the  implementation  of  the  BPfA 
would include a proposal on a set of quantita-
tive and qualitative indicators and benchmarks. 
Since  1999,  sets  of  indicators  have  been  de-
veloped by subsequent presidencies in nearly 
all areas of concern of the BPfA. Each year the 
Council  has  adopted  conclusions  on  these 

The  recently  launched  ‘Gender  equality  in-
dex’  (31)  shows  that  the  domain  of  gender-
based violence against women represents the 
largest  statistical  gaps  in  the  EU  in  measuring 
the progress of gender equality at EU level. Sta-
tistical gaps in this area are important evidence 
in supporting the European Parliament’s reso-
lution on priorities and the outline of a recent 
EU  policy  framework  to  fight  violence  against 
women. The division of time between women 
and  men,  decision-making,  health  behaviours 
and  intersectionality  (which  recognises  that 
women and men are not homogenous groups 
among categories such as family status, sexual 
orientation,  disability  or  migration  status)  are 
yet  other  areas  which  lack  good  quality  data. 
The  lack  of  data  availability  also  seriously  im-
pedes  the  assessment  of  the  implementation 

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

29

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

EIGE

of the Europe 2020 strategy from a gender per-
spective,  in  areas  such  as  research  and  devel-
opment, innovation and technologies, climate 
change and energy.

It  is  therefore  important  that  the  producers 
and users of statistics in each country regularly 
review  the  adequacy  of  the  official  statistical 
system and its coverage of gender issues and  
ensure  the  regular  production  of  statistical 
publications  on  gender  that  presents  and  in-
terprets topical data on women and men in a 
form suitable for a wide range of non-technical 
users (32).

This indicator is designed to measure govern-
mental  commitment  to  the  production  and 
dissemination  of  statistics  disaggregated  by 
sex and to identify the methods in use for the 
dissemination of such statistics. The proposed 
indicator  on  area  H3  of  the  BPfA  includes  the 
following aspects:

•

•

government commitment to 
production of statistics disaggregated 
by sex (maximum 2 points);
government commitment to 
the dissemination of statistics 
disaggregated by sex (maximum 2 
points);

• methods in use for the dissemination 
of gender statistics (the existence 
of publications and/or dedicated 
websites) (maximum 2 points).

Four  Member  States  (BG,  ES,  HR,  HU)  have 
reached the maximum score (6 points) on this 
indicator, while IE and LU obtained the lowest 
scores.

A  comparison  of  the  aspects  included  in  this 
indicator  shows  that  Member  States  use  dif-
ferent  methods  for  the  dissemination  of  gen-
der  statistics  even  if  there  is  no  national  legal 
obligation to collect and publish the statistics 
disaggregated by sex (Figure 14).

Figure 14: Performance of the 28 EU Member States in the collection and 
dissemination of gender statistics, 2012

1.39

0.96

1.54

)
2
–
0
(
e
r
o
c
S

2

0

Status of commitment to
production of statistics
disaggregated by sex

Status of commitment to
dissemination of statistics
disaggregated by sex

Methods in use for
dissemination of gender
statistics

Source: Data collected in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

30

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Institutional mechanisms for gender equality: EU-wide indicators

In  2012,  the  requirement  regarding  the  pro-
duction  and  dissemination  of  statistics  disag-
gregated by sex was met to a great extent by 
16 Member States (BE, BG, CZ, DE, IE, EL, ES, HR, 
CY,  LV,  HU,  MT,  PL,  RO,  SI,  UK).  Eight  Member 
States (EE, FR, LT, NL, AT, PT, SK, SE) fulfilled it to 
a moderate extent and Italy, Luxembourg and 
Finland to some extent. The overall situation in 

2005 and in 2012 shows some progress in the 
Member States in providing gender statistics: in 
2012, 57 % of Member States declared they met 
the requirement for the collection and dissemi-
nation of sex-disaggregated data ‘to a great ex-
tent’ compared with 48 % of Member States in 
2005 (Figure 15).

Figure 15: Percentage of Member States that fulfilled the requirements for collection 
and dissemination of statistics disaggregated by sex, 2005 (25 Member States) and 
2012 (28 Member States)

2005

2012

s
e
t
a
t
S
r
e
b
m
e
M

f
o
e
g
a
t
n
e
c
r
e
P

100

80

60

40

20

0

To a (very) great extent

To a moderate extent

To some extent

NB:  Data for BG, HR and RO were not available for 2005.

Source: Data collected during the Finnish Presidency 2006 and in January–April 2013 (EIGE).

The  majority  of  Member  States  produce  and 
disseminate  publications  on  gender  statistics 
regularly.  Two thirds of Member States have a 
dedicated website for gender statistics (a spe-
cific  website  on  gender  statistics,  a  section  of 

the website of the statistics office or a section 
of another website). However, the commitment 
for  production  and  dissemination  of  statistics 
disaggregated  by  sex  under  the  Beijing  Plat-
form for Action has yet to be fully realised.

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

31

 
 
 
Conclusions

EIGE

Conclusions
Conclusion

In the European Union and its Member States, 
the Beijing Platform for Action, the Convention 
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimina-
tion  Against  Women  (CEDAW),  EU  legislation 
and  national  regulations  on  gender  main-
streaming  together  constitute  the  framework 
for  appropriate  institutional  mechanisms  for 
gender  equality.  The  Beijing  Platform  for  Ac-
tion not only identified the availability of insti-
tutional  mechanisms  for  the  advancement  of 
women as one of its 12 critical areas of concern 
but  also  established  it  as  a  necessary  pre-
condition for the pursuit of gender equal-
ity in all other areas.

Although  recognised  as  a  fundamental  value 
of the EU and as a policy area in its 28 Mem-
ber  States,  the  status  and  profile  of  gen-
der  equality  currently  shows  signs  of  de-
creased  importance  in  the  EU:  there  are 
fewer governments with cabinet ministers re-
sponsible  for  gender  equality  since  2005  and 
more governments with deputy ministers and 
assistant ministers taking this responsibility. No 
improvements can be seen in the hier-archical 
location of the governmental gender equality 
bodies. Despite being highly recommended by 
the Council of the European Union (2009) (33), 
one third of the 28 EU Member States still do 
not  have  the  governmental  gender  equality 
body at the highest possible level in the gov-
ernment,  falling  under  the  responsibility  of  a 
cabinet minister.

Another  trend  is  the  growing  focus,  sup-
ported  by  political  and  financial  resourc-
es,  on  the  judicial  aspects  (the  legalistic 
approach)  of  equal  treatment/gender 
equality,  as  opposed  to  the  development 
and promotion of gender equality in its broad 
sense.  This  means  that  gender  equality  work 
may  be  reduced  to  individual  cases  that  may 

or may not be brought to the courts, tribunals 
or  other  instances  and  runs  the  risk  of  losing 
power  and  strength  in  addressing  structural 
inequalities and discriminations at the societal 
level. To remain a prominent part of the politi-
cal agenda, gender equality needs, on the one 
hand,  powerful  and  sustainable  mechanisms 
which  develop,  implement  and  monitor  the 
promotion of gender equality and, on the oth-
er, institutions which protect the legal rights of 
women and men. 

These  recent  developments  contrib-
ute  to  the  marginalisation  of  gender 
equality as a political goal and  under-
mine gender equality as an important pol-
icy  area  in  itself.  In  many  Member  States, 
gender equality has, as a result, been 
pushed  off  the  political  agenda  or 
submerged within the broader field of 
equal opportunities.

The  number  of  Member  States  that  have 
adopted  governmental  action  plans  for 
gender equality increased since 2005. Re-
porting on the implementation of the plans to 
the legislative authority has also expanded and 
is now established in 26 Member States. How-
ever, the existence of a national action plan is 
not a sufficient measure of progress. It remains 
important to assess the quality and outcomes 
of its implementation.

Government officials reported that social part-
ners and civil society organisations are increas-
ingly involved in the activities and tasks of the 
governmental  gender  equality  body,  in  most 
of the cases for the dissemination of informa-
tion and awareness-raising. The national repre-
sentatives of women’s organisations indicated 
that their involvement in and consultation by 
the government on gender equality policies is 

32

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Conclusions

limited, ad hoc or even non-existent. Whereas 
stakeholder  participation  in  the  gender 
equality/gender  mainstreaming  policies 
has  been  integrated  or  institutionalised 
in a majority of Member States, it still fails 
to be fully embedded at every stage of the 
policy cycle, where it rarely or only occasion-
ally informs policymaking.

A  positive  trend  can  be  observed  in  the  In-
creased  legal  commitment  of  Member 
States  to  gender  mainstreaming  com-
pared  with  2005,  and  established  struc-
tures  (interministerial  coordination  and/
or  focal  points  in  ministries)  responsible 
for  gender  mainstreaming  in  nearly  all 
Member  States.  However,  the  institution-
alisation  of  gender  mainstreaming  tools  and 
methods is insufficient in the majority of coun-
tries  because  of  the  unclear  or  weak  legal  or 
administrative  mandates  to  apply  gender 
mainstreaming in practice. Comparatively few 
Member  States  carry  out  regular  training  and 
capacity-building  on  gender  equality,  mostly 
for the employees of the governmental gender 
equality body. Gender impact assessment is ei-
ther an unknown concept or is still at an initial 
stage of application in the majority of Member 
States. Gender budgeting has become a legal 
obligation in only eight Member States, out of 
which gender budgeting is widely used by the 
ministries in just three Member States.

One of the most noticeable developments be-
tween 2005 and 2012 was the gradual merg-
ing of the independent body for the pro-
motion of equal treatment for women and 
men  with  a  body  or  institution  dealing 
with  several  grounds  of  discrimination. 
As the current report shows, there are only five 
Member States where discrimination based on 

sex  is  addressed  separately.  Whereas  the  im-
portance of acknowledging the heterogeneity 
of women and men in terms of age, class, dis-
ability, ethnicity/race and sexual orientation is 
crucial to the recognition of diverse experienc-
es among women and men, the consequences 
of downplaying gender as a structural dimen-
sion and underlying element of all inequalities 
should not be overlooked. As this is still an on-
going process within the EU, the assessment of 
its positive and less positive aspects remains to 
be made.

The political context specific to each Member 
State, also very fluid and unpredictable, helps 
or hinders the sustainability and effectiveness 
of  institutional  mechanisms  for  the  advance-
ment  of  gender  equality.  Ensuring  govern-
mental  support  for  gender  equality  as  a 
policy  proved  to  be  one  of  the  strongest 
factors for the development and sustain-
ability of the institutional mechanisms.

It is crucial to recognise that institutional mech-
anisms  for  gender  equality,  including  gender 
indispensable  pre-
mainstreaming,  are  an 
condition  for  the  pursuit  of  equality  between 
women  and  men.  Anti-discrimination  meas-
ures  cannot  serve  their  purpose  if  not  ac-
companied  by  mechanisms  responsible  for 
the  development  and  implementation  of  for-
ward-looking  gender  equality  strategies  aim-
ing  at  integrating  gender  into  the  work  of  all 
governmental  institutions.  It  has  become  an 
especially  relevant  issue  in  the  context  of  the 
economic crisis and consequent cuts in public 
budgets, entailing the risk of seriously affecting 
the functioning of gender equality institutions 
and downgrading the status of gender equal-
ity policies.

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

33

Recommendations

EIGE

Recommendations
Recomandations

Institutional structures

Strengthen the institutional structures by:

•

•

•

•

ensuring that there is a governmental body 
responsible for gender equality, located at 
the highest possible level in the government, 
falling under the responsibility of a cabinet 
minister, with adequate responsibility and 
means for action;
ensuring that gender equality remains a policy 
priority, is mainstreamed in other policy areas 
and complements the work of addressing 
cases of discrimination based on sex;
setting clear and measurable strategic 
objectives for gender equality with specific 
targets and timeframes, ensuring that the 
governmental body’s mandate and capacity 
allow it to influence the development of all 
government policies, to formulate and review 
legislation and to coordinate and monitor the 
implementation of government decisions;
establishing or strengthening an advisory 
board on gender equality or another 
permanent entity involving relevant branches 
of government, women’s NGOs and other civil 
society organisations, researchers and social 
partners on a regular basis.

Gender mainstreaming

Promote the effective implementation of gen-
der mainstreaming via:

•

•

an interministerial structure and focal points in 
every ministry;
legal obligations for the use of gender 
mainstreaming tools and methods, including 
training for gender mainstreaming, gender 

•
•

•

impact assessment, gender budgeting, 
monitoring and evaluation;
appropriate budgets to have these carried out;
raising awareness on the benefits of gender 
mainstreaming;
strengthening the legal and institutional 
commitment to improving the gender 
competences of civil servants across the 
different sectors.

Sex-disaggregated data

Promote  the  collection  and  dissemination  of 
gender statistics by:

•

•

•

•

•

having legal obligations or binding structural 
agreements with statistics institutions and/
or other organisations on the collection and 
publishing of statistics disaggregated by sex;
producing statistics and establishing new 
indicators where they are lacking in the areas 
such as gender-based violence, attitudes on 
gender roles and intersecting inequalities 
(data disaggregated by sex and also by other 
grounds for discrimination, such as ethnic 
origin, age, etc.);
ensuring that gender statistics represent 
relevant gender issues, by consulting different 
stakeholders’ groups when developing 
indicators;
ensuring that gender statistics are freely 
available to policymakers, researchers, NGOs, 
social partners and all citizens;
considering the establishment of targets 
and indicators in the action plans for gender 
equality to measure progress and evaluate 
developments.

34

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Endnotes

Endnotes
Endnotes

(1) United Nations, Beijing Declaration and 
Platform for Action, adopted at the 
Fourth World Conference on Women, 
27 October 1995 (http://www.refworld.
org/docid/3dde04324.html).

(2)  Council of the European Union, Review 
of the implementation by the Member 
States and the EU institutions of the Beijing 
Platform for Action — Indicators in respect 
of institutional mechanisms, prepared by 
the Finnish Presidency, 2006. 

(3) Council of the European Union, Council 

conclusions on the review of the 
implementation by the Member States and 
the EU institutions of the Beijing Platform 
for Action Beijing+15: The Platform for 
Action and the European Union, Report 
from the Swedish Presidency of the Council 
of the European Union, 2009.

(4) Council of the European Union, Council 

conclusions on the review of the 
implementation by the Member States 
and the EU institutions of the Beijing 
Platform for Action Beijing+15: The 
Platform for Action and the European 
Union, Report from the Swedish 
Presidency of the Council of the European 
Union, 2009.

(5) Council conclusions on the effectiveness of 
institutional mechanisms for the advance-
ment of women and gender equality, Brus-
sels, 9–10 December 2013 (http://www.
consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/
docs/pressdata/en/lsa/139978.pdf).

(6) European Institute for Gender Equality, 

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms 

for the advancement of gender equality 
— Review of the implementation of 
the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU 
Member States, Vilnius, Lithuania, 2014 
(http://eige.europa.eu/sites/default/files/
MH0213481ENC_0.pdf).

(7)  Consolidated versions of the Treaty 
on European Union and the Treaty 
on the Functioning of the European 
Union (2010/c 83/01) (http://eur-lex.
europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?u
ri=uriserv:OJ.C_.2010.083.01.0001.01.
ENG#C_2010083EN.01001301)

(8) European Commission, Incorporating 

equal opportunities for women and men 
into all Community policies and activities, 
COM(96) 67 final of 21 February 1996.

(9) See Article 8a of Directive 2002/73/EC 
of the European Parliament and of the 
Council of 23 September 2002 amending 
Council Directive 76/207/EEC on the 
implementation of the principle of equal 
treatment for men and women as regards 
access to employment, vocational training 
and promotion, and working conditions 
(OJ L 269, 5.10.2002, p. 15). 

(10) Susanne Burri noticed in the analyses 
carried out on the transposition of the 
recast directive in 2011 that ‘Directive 
2006/54/EC on the implementation 
of the principle of equal opportunities 
and equal treatment between men and 
women in matters of employment and 
occupation (recast) consolidates a few 
existing directives on gender equality. 
The objective of the recast directive is 
to combine the main existing provisions 

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

35

Endnotes

EIGE

on gender equality as covered by this 
directive as well as by relevant case-law 
(Recital 1) in a single text. According to the 
Commission, such a text should increase 
clarity and should modernise and simplify 
the provisions of directives linked by their 
subject in order to make Community 
legislation clearer and more effective.  
Gender equality law should in this way be 
more accessible for a broader public.’  
The directives that form part of this 
recasting exercise are Directive 75/117/
EEC on equal pay between men and 
women; Directive 76/207/EEC as 
amended by Directive 2002/73/EC on 
equal treatment for men and women in 
access to employment, vocational training 
and promotion and working conditions; 
Directive 86/378/EEC, as amended by 
Directive 96/97/EC8 on equal treatment 
for men and women in occupational 
social security schemes; and Directive 
97/80/EC on the burden of proof. The 
recasting exercise thus did not include 
the directives on the principle of equal 
treatment between men and women in 
statutory social security (Directive 79/7/
EEC), self-employment (Directive 86/613/
EEC, now repealed by Directive 2010/41/
EU) or access to and supply of goods and 
services (Directive 2004/113/EC). The same 
is true for the directives on pregnancy 
and maternity leave (92/85/EEC) and on 
parental leave (96/34/EEC, now repealed 
by Directive 2010/18/EU), which have a 
different legal basis.

(11) See Article 8a of Directive 2002/73/EC.

(12) Council of the European Union, Council 

conclusions on the review of the 
implementation by the Member States 
and the EU institutions of the Beijing 
Platform for Action Beijing+15: The 
Platform for Action and the European 

Union, Report from the Swedish 
Presidency of the Council of the European 
Union, 2009. 

(13) United Nations, Beijing Declaration and 
Platform for Action, adopted at the 
Fourth World Conference on Women, 
27 October 1995 (http://www.refworld.
org/docid/3dde04324.html).

(14) European Commission, Incorporating 

equal opportunities for women and men 
into all Community policies and activities, 
COM(96) 67 final (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/
LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:1996:0
067:FIN:EN:PDF).

(15) European Commission, Communication to 
the European Parliament, the Council, the 
European Economic and Social Committee 
and the Committee of the Regions, Strategy 
for equality between women and men 
2010–15, COM(2010) 491 final (http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri
=COM:2010:0491:FIN:en:PDF). 

(16) European Institute for Gender Equality, 

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms 
for the advancement of gender equality 
— Review of the implementation of 
the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU 
Member States, Vilnius, Lithuania, 2014 
(http://eige.europa.eu/sites/default/files/
MH0213481ENC_0.pdf).

(17) European Institute for Gender Equality, 

‘Institutional capacity for gender 
mainstreaming in the 28 Member States of 
the European Union’, draft report, 2013.

(18) European Institute for Gender Equality, 

Mapping gender training in the European 
Union and Croatia, Vilnius, Lithuania, 2013.

36

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

EIGE

Endnotes

(19) European Institute for Gender Equality, 

Mapping gender training in the European 
Union and Croatia, Vilnius, Lithuania, 2013.

(20)  Council of the European Union, Council 

conclusions on the review of the 
implementation by the Member States 
and the EU institutions of the Beijing 
Platform for Action Beijing+15: The 
Platform for Action and the European 
Union, Report from the Swedish 
Presidency of the Council of the European 
Union, 2009 (http://register.consilium.
europa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&f=ST%20
15487%202009%20ADD%201).

(21)  European Commission and Eurostat, 
25th CEIES seminar: Gender statistics: 
occupational segregation: extent, causes 
and consequences, 2004, p. 28.

(22)  The methodology of the study is 

described in full in the main report of the 
European Institute for Gender Equality on 
Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms 
for the advancement of gender equality 
— Review of the implementation of 
the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU 
Member States, 2013. 

(23)  Data are presented in percentages in order 
to make the comparison possible between 
2005 and 2012 where the number of 
Member States was different.

(24)  European Institute for Gender Equality, 

Country profiles — Gender equality index, 
2013 (http://eige.europa.eu/apps/gei/
content/Gender-Equality-Index-Country-
Profiles.pdf). 

of institutional mechanisms, prepared by 
the Finnish Presidency, 2006.

(26)  Due to different institutional structures, 

the indicator does not include all 
personnel working on gender equality in 
the government administration. Neither 
does the indicator take into account the 
degree to which certain tasks of gender 
equality bodies are outsourced.

(27)  This trend among EU Member States to 

unify the bodies responsible for addressing 
discrimination might be the result of the 
requirement formulated in Article 20 of 
Directive 2006/54/EC known as the recast 
directive, where Member States are advised 
that the bodies for the promotion, analysis, 
monitoring and support of equal treatment 
of all persons without discrimination on 
grounds of sex ‘may form part of agencies 
with responsibility at national level for the 
defence of human rights or the safeguard 
of individuals’ rights.’

(28)  Council of the European Union, Joint 
Employment Report 2007/08, 2008 
(http://register.consilium.europa.eu/doc/
srv?l=EN&f=ST%207169%202008%20INIT).

(29)  Gender impact assessment was defined 
as an ex ante evaluation, analysis or 
assessment of a law or programme, 
which makes it possible to identify in a 
preventive way the likelihood of a given 
decision, law or programme from having 
negative consequences for the state 
of equality between women and men. 
Gender impact assessment may include a 
cost–benefit analysis.

(25)  Council of the European Union, Review 
of the implementation by the Member 
States and the EU institutions of the Beijing 
Platform for Action — Indicators in respect 

(30) European Commission, Evaluation of the 

European Social Fund’s support to gender 
equality,  2011 (http://ec.europa.eu/social/
BlobServlet?docId=6643&langId=en).

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

37

Endnotes

EIGE

(31) European Institute for Gender Equality, 

(33) Council of the European Union, Council 

Gender equality index, Vilnius, Lithuania, 
2013 (http://eige.europa.eu/content/
activities/gender-equality-index).

(32) United Nations, Beijing Declaration and 

Platform of Action, adopted at the Fourth 
World Conference on Women,  
27 October 1995 (http://www.refworld.
org/docid/3dde04324.html).

conclusions on the review of the 
implementation by the Member States 
and the EU institutions of the Beijing 
Platform for Action Beijing+15: The 
Platform for Action and the European 
Union, Report from the Swedish 
Presidency of the Council of the European 
Union, 2009 (http://register.consilium.
europa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&f=ST%20
15487%202009%20ADD%201).

38

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

European Institute for Gender Equality

Effectiveness of institutional mechanisms for the advancement of gender equality
Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the EU Member States

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014

2014 — 42 pp. — 17.6 × 25 cm

ISBN 978-92-9218-363-9
doi:10.2839/18076

M
H
-
0
2
-
1
3
-
4
8
2
-
E
N
-
C

http://eige.europa.eu