초록 ▼

Ⅵ. 결론: 정책방안
○ 지난 10년간 성인지예산제도가 도입되어 상기와 같이 크고 작은 긍정적,부정적 효과를 얻을 수 있었음. 이러한 노력들은 당장 우리사회의 성차별을 없앨 수 있는 것은 아니지만 향후 10년, 20년 후의 더 나은성평등한 사회를 만들기 위해 반드시 필요하다고 하겠음
- 본문의 < 표 Ⅵ-1 >은 성인지예산제도 운영 전 과정에 따른 정책과제를 제시한 것임. 그러나 해당 정책과제는 사회적 공감대나 오랜 공론화과정이 필요하기 때문에 일괄 개선하기는 어려우며, 그렇게 된다고 할지라도 이해관계자들의 요구를 모두

Ⅵ. 결론: 정책방안
○ 지난 10년간 성인지예산제도가 도입되어 상기와 같이 크고 작은 긍정적,부정적 효과를 얻을 수 있었음. 이러한 노력들은 당장 우리사회의 성차별을 없앨 수 있는 것은 아니지만 향후 10년, 20년 후의 더 나은성평등한 사회를 만들기 위해 반드시 필요하다고 하겠음
- 본문의 < 표 Ⅵ-1 >은 성인지예산제도 운영 전 과정에 따른 정책과제를 제시한 것임. 그러나 해당 정책과제는 사회적 공감대나 오랜 공론화과정이 필요하기 때문에 일괄 개선하기는 어려우며, 그렇게 된다고 할지라도 이해관계자들의 요구를 모두 만족시키기는 어려움. 형식적 제도와 현실적 운영 사이의 간극을 줄이고 많은 이해관계자들의 요구에부합하기 위해서는 ‘성평등의 본질’과 ‘공정성’에 대해 주목하여 제도를재구성하는 것이 필요함. 이에 본 연구의 결과에 따른 중요도 및 현실화 정도를 고려하여 정책과제를 다음과 같이 제시하였음
○ 핵심 국가정책의 성평등 효과분석 실시 및 국가재정운용계획에 성인 지적 재정운용방향이 포함될 수 있도록 제도화
- 국가재정운용계획상 재정운용의 방향과 성평등 현황을 점검하고, 해당 사업 관련 사회･구조적인 성 불평등 현황과 정책수요자의 요구 분석을 충실히 시행하는 것. 그러므로 성평등 이슈에 대한 정책적 합의를 이끌어 내기 위해 핵심 국가정책에 대해 성평등 효과분석을 실시하는 것이 필요하며, 국가재정운용계획에 성인지적 재정운용방향이 포함될수 있도록 이를 제도화하는 것이 필요
○ 현 법정서류인 성인지예산서, 성인지결산서의 질적 수준 제고
- 성인지예산서 작성 양식 변경: 성별수혜분석결과 항목을 삭제하고,「성별영향평가법」에 따른 성별영향평가서를 첨부
※ 선행조건: 「성별영향평가법」에 따른 평가, 분석의 질 제고, 예산편성 전에 미 완료시 네가티브 인센티브 제공
- 또는 성과계획서에 성평등 목표를 추가하고, 관련 있는 사업만 별도 취합하여 성인지예산서로 제출
○ 조직적 기반 보강
- 기획재정부 성인지예산안 심사･평가위원회 설치 운영
- 여성가족부 성인지예산제도 지원운영과(가칭) 신설
- 한국여성정책연구원 성인지예산센터 기능 확대･강화
- 디브레인과 연계된 별도의 성인지예･결산 정보시스템 구축･운영
○ 성인지적 예산편성 강화 및 환류 과정 보강･개선
- 사업의 성평등 목표 유형화 및 합리적 목표 설정
- 예산수혜분석･평가 방법론 체계화
- 감사원의 성인지결산 분석 기능 강화
- 성인지예산 사업에 대해 성과 평가 후 「성별영향평가법」에 따른 특정성별영향평가 실시
○ 법적 기반 보강
- 「국가재정법」 제7조(국가재정운용계획의 수립 등)의 개정으로 국가재정 운용계획상 재정운용의 방향에 성인지예산제도 관련 내용을 수록
○ 국회의 성인지예･결산 심의 관련 역량 강화 및 영향력 확대방안 마련
- 국회 예산결산특별위원회 내 성인지예･결산 전담팀 운영, 별도의 검토 보고서 생성
- 국회예산정책처 성인지예･결산 분석보고서 보강

(출처 : 연구요약 23p)

Abstract ▼

The Gender Budgeting System of Korea is a fiscal scheme that is designed to consider gender equality issues when injecting funds for government policies and evaluating performance, by factoring in gender equality perspective in all processes of the government’s fiscal activities. Since the fiscal ye

The Gender Budgeting System of Korea is a fiscal scheme that is designed to consider gender equality issues when injecting funds for government policies and evaluating performance, by factoring in gender equality perspective in all processes of the government’s fiscal activities. Since the fiscal year of 2010, the National FinanceAct of Korea has mandated the submission of the gender budget statement as an attachment of the budget proposal to the National Assembly. The decade-old gender budgeting system has been widely credited to positive outcomes, including the establishment of legal and policy ground for promoting gender equality, the adjustment of budget allocation for programs that do not equally benefit both genders, the securing of funds for vital national agenda, among others. In the meantime, some have raised the need of modifying the system’s implementation strategy as gender inequality has not been significantly reduced nationwide over the years. Against this backdrop, the purpose of this research is to analyze the features of Korea’s gender budgeting system, which has been in place for the last 10 years, and develop an assessment model that takes major issues into account. Then, the study assesses the implementation of the budgetary system and comes up with policy improvement plans by investigating and examining those who are involved. In addition, the study intends to contribute to effectively incorporating gender equality perspective into all government budgeting phases, including budget compilation, executionand evaluation, through conducting shorter-term surveys dependingon the government’s budget settlement steps.

The research specifically sheds light on the following. First, the study looks into the purpose and features of the gender budgeting system. To be specific, exploration was made on the characteristics of the Korean scheme, comparing with that of other countries, thediscussion and activities related to gender budgeting in international organizations over the past 10 years, other countries’ genderbudget statements, and trends of the system for the period from the fiscal year 2010 to 2019. The study also investigates guidelines for preparing gender budget statements; detailed instructions of the guidelines; forms of and contents in the statement; numbers of programs and allocated budget amounts by department. Adding to this, it studies topics of investigation in the National Assembly gender budget and settlement review, gender budget related activities of civil society organizations, the gender budgeting settlementreview by the Board of Audit and Inspection of Korea, the impacton gender equality based on gender budgeting, and others. Regardingthe meaning of the numbers of programs and amount of allocatedbudget for programs by department, there are two interpretations.
One is that those numbers represent direct spending for the purpose of gender equality, which can be explained as a measurement of a department’s commitment to achieving gender equality. The other is that they exhibit the analysis scope of gender budgeting impact on gender equality. Therefore, if there is an increase in suchnumbers, it means that departments have a willingness to adjustthe difference in benefits among programs through the expansion of the analysis scope of the budgeting’s impact on gender equality,in hopes of mitigating such differences by managing performance goals and others and altering budget and policy processes.

Second, the study establishes an assessment model for evaluating the scheme and operation of the Gender Budgeting System and uncovers major accomplishments and issues on the basis of thismodel. Based on previous research, it lays out an evaluation modelthat consists of five-categories and 12-assessment indicators.
Questionnaires were developed for each category and assessment,which were administered to renowned experts in the fields of the gender budgeting and fiscal management. The question sheet includes questions that not only ask for the evaluation of each assessment indicator but also for the appraisal of relative importance of each category and indicator. To assess relative importance, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is employed. Assessment reveals that for a further advancement of the gender budgeting system, the organizational foundation is more vital than the legal one; however, what is most critical is applying a gender equality perspective to different fiscalmanagement levels.

Third, in order to propose multi-dimensional improvement plans after a decade of the gender budgeting system, the study investigates those involved in executing the system, including experts and officials from the administrative and the legislative branch, and then performs analysis on the outcomes. For those working in the executive branch, it examines civil servant’s awareness andevaluation of gender budgeting and settlement (sample comparison between those with such experience and those without), changes in the awareness and evaluation after preparing gender budget statements and balance sheets (among those with such experience),and ways of developing the system and navigating future directions.
For those serving in the legislative branch, that is, aides of standing committee members and civil servants from the National Assembly Budget Office and National Assembly Research Service, the study explores their awareness of the support for deliberation of gender budgeting and settlement and its evaluation, changes in the awareness and evaluation after participating in the examination of gender budget statements and balance sheets (among those with such experience), and ways of improving the system and figuring out future directions. For experts from related fields and womenactivists from Gender Budgeting Network and other civic groups, this research sheds light on how to bring the system to a higher level and decide on future directions. The investigation tells that it is necessary to practically elevate the quality of the budgeting system by building a performance management system, enhancing capability, and reflecting on actual conditions of Korea.

In response to the results, the study proposes the following improvement steps. First, more structured legal grounds. Details related to the gender budgeting system should be included in the government’s fiscal management plan and have legally applicable provisions. If that were done, guidelines for publishing gender budget statements would be shaped in accordance with the directionof national fiscal management and gender equality conditions,among others. By doing so, issues with target programs could betackled to some extent. Second, stronger organizational foundations.
It deems necessary to set up a gender budget examination and evaluation committee within the Ministry of Economy and Finance or the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family. In addition, Korea Women’s Development Institute should be specified in the National Finance Act and accordingly be provided with proper organizational,functional and budgetary support. Furthermore, a gender budgeting and settlement information system should be constructed and operated in connection with dBrain, the Korean government’s digital budget system. Third, more proactive feedback to budget compilation and allocation. To this end, the quality of evaluation and analysis conducted in accordance with the Gender Impact Assessment Act should be improved, and negative incentive shouldbe imposed to if the gender impact assessment is not completedbefore budget compilation. At the same time, the direction of fiscal operation within the national fiscal management plan andthe state of gender equality should be monitored, and analysis of the socio-structural gender inequality and demands from policy targets should be thoroughly conducted. On top of that, for better feedback on the scheme, based on the assessment outcomes reflected in the gender balance sheet, program groups that have performed poorly in terms of gender equality goals (performanceindicators) should conduct a special gender impact assessment in accordance with the Gender Impact Assessment Act. It is also necessary to choose a group of programs that is prioritized to accomplish national gender equality targets and strengthen gender equality impact analysis.

Fourth, improving the forms of gender budget statements and gender fund operation plans, which are legal documents. For genderimpact analysis to be meaningfully conducted and those in charge in different departments to efficiently perform their tasks, benefit analysis by gender should be removed; rather, the gender impact analysis prepared under the Gender Impact Analysis Act should be attached. Another option is to include gender equality goals in the performance plan form, and only related programs should be gathered separately then submitted. Yet another is that, the impactanalysis report on gender equality of target programs in the applicable fiscal year should be submitted with the gender balancesheet.

Lastly, better National Assembly functions on budget deliberation and confirmation. The investigation on details of gender budgeting and settlement process shows that while the National AssemblyBudget and Accounting Committee made various suggestions aboutgender budgeting in the early days, it now rarely discusses it. Inaddition, the Gender Equality and Family Committee was pointedout as a player which takes a central role in operating the budgetingscheme. Under these situations, the function of the Budget and Accounting Committee confirming gender budgeting would be reinforced if a designated gender budgeting and settlement team isin place within the committee and produces a separate review report on gender budget statements and balance sheets.

(출처 : Abstract 470p)

목차 Contents

• 표지 ... 1
• 발간사 ... 4
• 연구요약 ... 6
• 목차 ... 26
• 표목차 ... 29
• 그림목차 ... 35
• Ⅰ. 서 론 ... 36
• 1. 연구 필요성 및 목적 ... 38
• 2. 연구 내용 및 방법 ... 43
• 가. 주요 연구 내용 ... 43
• 나. 연구방법 ... 49
• Ⅱ. 성인지예산제도의 도입 취지와 제도의 특징 ... 52
• 1. 성인지예산제도의 도입 취지와 제도의 특징 ... 54
• 가. 성인지예산제도 도입의 배경 및 중요성 ... 54
• 나. 성인지예산제도에 대한 여러가지 정의 ... 57
• 2. 국제기구에서의 성인지예산 관련 논의와 활동 ... 60
• 가. 유엔여성기구(UN WOMEN)13) 및 유엔 관련 기구 ... 60
• 나. 경제협력개발기구(OECD) ... 69
• 다. 국제통화기금(IMF) ... 82
• 3. 주요국의 성인지예산서 사례 ... 92
• 가. 프랑스 ... 92
• 나. 스웨덴 ... 103
• 다. 오스트리아 ... 114
• Ⅲ. 2010회계연도-2019회계연도 성인지예산제도의 시행경과와 특징 ... 130
• 1. 성인지예산서 작성 지침, 작성 세부지침 ... 132
• 가. 예산안편성 및 기금운용계획안 작성지침 중 성인지예산서 작성 지침 ... 132
• 나. 성인지예산서 작성 세부지침 ... 141
• 2. 성인지예산서 작성양식 ... 143
• 3. 성인지예산서 개요 및 주요 내용의 변화 ... 148
• 4. 부처별 사업 수 및 예산 ... 154
• 5. 국회 성인지예산안/결산 심사과정에서 나타난 심사 내용 ... 163
• 가. 성인지예산 ... 163
• 나. 성인지결산 ... 173
• 6. 시민사회에서의 성인지예산 관련 활동 ... 184
• 7. 감사원의 성인지결산 검사 ... 188
• 8. 성인지예･결산서 상의 성평등 효과 분석 ... 194
• 가. 성과목표 달성현황 ... 195
• 나. 성평등 개선 효과 사업(Ⅰ) ... 196
• 다. 성평등 개선 효과 사업(Ⅱ) ... 201
• Ⅳ. 성인지예산제도 설계와 운영행태에 대한 평가 ... 210
• 1. 평가모형 ... 212
• 가. 선행연구에 입각한 평가모형 탐색 ... 212
• 나. 본 연구의 평가모형 ... 219
• 다. 평가 방법 ... 239
• 2. 평가결과 ... 243
• 가. 평가영역 및 평가지표의 상대적 중요도 ... 243
• 나. 평가지표별 평균 득점 ... 245
• 다. 평가지표의 상대적 중요도를 고려한 평가영역별 득점 ... 247
• 라. 평가영역의 상대적 중요도를 고려한 총 득점 ... 252
• Ⅴ. 성인지예산제도 평가 및 발전 방안에 대한 조사 분석 ... 262
• 1. 조사 설계 ... 264
• 가. 조사대상 및 방법 ... 264
• 나. 표본설계 및 추출 ... 265
• 다. 조사내용 ... 267
• 2. 조사 결과 분석 ... 273
• 가. 행정부 ... 273
• 나. 입법부 ... 305
• 다. 전문가 ... 345
• 라. 행정부, 입법부, 전문가 ... 369
• Ⅵ. 결론 및 정책과제 ... 374
• 1. 결론 및 정책과제 ... 376
• 참고문헌 ... 390
• 부록 ... 410
• 부록3. 2019년 성인지예･결산 연구사업 운영 ... 418
• 부록4. 성인지예산제도에 대한 조사 및 발전 방안 조사 설문지 ... 432
• 부록4-1. 성인지예산제도에 대한 조사 및 발전 방안 조사 설문지 (행정부) ... 432
• 부록4-2. 성인지예산제도에 대한 조사 및 발전 방안 조사 설문지 (입법부) ... 448
• 부록4-3. 성인지예산제도에 대한 조사 및 발전 방안 조사 설문지 (전문가) ... 457
• 부록4-4. 성인지예산제도에 대한 조사 및 발전 방안 조사 초점집단 면접조사 가이드라인 (전문가) ... 466
• Abstract ... 470
• 끝페이지 ... 476