Analyzing the Gender Budget of 2024-25

• Government Budgeting.

Context:

• The Union Budget for 2024-25 marks a significant milestone in India's journey toward gender equity, with the Gender Budget (GB) reaching 1% of GDP for the first time.
• This reflects a stronger commitment to women-led development, aligning with the government's broader goal of empowering women through targeted financial allocations.
• However, the journey towards effective gender budgeting is fraught with challenges that require addressing inaccuracies in reporting and ensuring that resources genuinely impact women’s lives.
• Understanding the Increase in Gender Budget: The 2024-25 Budget saw a substantial rise in allocations for women-centric programs, accounting for 6.8% of the total budget expenditure, a notable departure from the historical average of 5%. This surge can be attributed to two key factors:
  • Introduction of Part ‘C’ in the Gender Budget Statement (GBS): This new category includes schemes with less than 30% provisioning for women, like the PM Kisan scheme, which has contributed ₹15,000 crore to the GB.
  • Reclassification in Part A: The entire allocation for the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY) is now reported under Part A, significantly boosting the reported expenditure on women-specific programs. While this inclusion reflects an increase in the GB, questions arise about the accuracy of reporting, given that not all beneficiaries of PMAY are women.
• Challenges of Over-Reporting and Under-Reporting: While the increase in GB is commendable, it also highlights issues of over-reporting and under-reporting that could undermine the efficacy of gender budgeting:
  • Over-Reporting: An example is the PM Employment Generation Programme (PMEGP), where 40% of its allocation is reported as pro-women without a clear rationale. Such over-reporting inflates the GB figures but may not translate into tangible benefits for women.
  • Under-Reporting: Conversely, the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) reflects only 33.6% of its outlay in the GB, despite women constituting over 59% of the workforce. This under-reporting fails to capture the true financial commitment to women under the scheme.
• Path Forward: Addressing Anomalies in Gender Budgeting: To ensure that the GB accurately reflects the government’s commitment to women-led development, several measures must be implemented:
  • Incorporating Explanations in GBS: Every entry in the GBS should be accompanied by a rationale, detailing why a particular allocation is classified as pro-women. This transparency would improve the accuracy of reporting and facilitate more effective gender audits.
  • Scientific and Systematic Reporting: There is a need for a more scientific approach to gender budgeting that ensures allocations are directly linked to women’s needs. This would involve re-evaluating current classifications and ensuring that programs truly benefit women.
  • Focus on Outcomes: The ultimate goal of gender budgeting should not be merely to increase the quantum of allocations but to ensure that these funds are effectively utilized to close gender gaps in all sectors. This requires a shift from output-focused to outcome-focused budgeting.