What changed

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

P10_TA(2025)0287

on the 2024 budget – assessing the implementation of the gender mainstreaming methodology in the EU budget

(2025/2033(INI))

Committee on Budgetary Control

PE775.770

European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2025 on the 2024 budget – assessing the implementation of the gender mainstreaming methodology in the EU budget (2025/2033(INI))

The European Parliament,

I. whereas the family is the fundamental unit of society and plays a critical role in fostering the well-being, stability and development of individuals, communities and nations; whereas it is essential, therefore, that EU horizontal policies actively promote and support it;

✦ Formal Replaces decimal points with commas in percentages and euro amounts.

J. whereas gender budgeting is a prerequisite for achieving gender equality, and gender equality is in itself a condition for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, including within the EU, where the EIGE has shown through a robust econometric model applied to the specific context of the EU that improving gender equality would result in a series of macroeconomic benefits in several areas, such as education, labour market activity and wages; whereas the EIGE has also shown that gender equality generally has a strong positive impact on GDP per capita, and that improving gender equality would lead to an increase in the EU’s GDP per capita of at least 6.16,1 % and up to 9.69,6 % by 2050, which amounts to EUR 1.951,95 trillion and EUR 3.153,15 trillion respectively;

K. whereas the EIGE has reported that there has been a concerning decline in Member States’ efforts to implement gender mainstreaming since 2021, a trend that should not be mirrored at EU level;

2. Notes that, under the current methodology, the Commission assigns different scores to programmes based on an assessment of their contribution to gender equality at the most granular level of intervention possible, giving a score of:

✦ Formal Changes formatting of list item from 'a)-' to '(a)'.

a)(a) 2 to interventions of which the principal objective is to improve gender equality;

✦ Formal Changes formatting of list item from 'b)-' to '(b)'.

b)(b) 1 to interventions that have gender equality as an important and deliberate objective but not as the main reason for the intervention;

✦ Formal Changes formatting of list item from 'c)-' to '(c)'.

c)(c) 0 to non-targeted interventions, in other words, interventions that are expected to have no significant bearing on gender equality;

✦ Formal Changes formatting of list item from 'd)-' to '(d)'.

d)(d) 0* to interventions with a likely but as yet unclear positive impact on gender equality;

3. Notes that the methodology is based on the gender equality policy marker developed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which is a qualitative statistical tool used to monitor and record development activities that target gender equality as a policy objective and is applied by the Commission to all EU budget spending programmes under shared, direct and indirect management;

✦ Adds a sentence underlining that the Commission's methodology should avoid unintended consequences, such as discouraging investments in strategic but single-gender-dominated sectors, including defence.

4. Stresses that the Commission’s methodology differs from the gender equality policy marker developed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development as it does not include a score that would allow for tracking the potentially negative effects of EU spending on gender mainstreaming objectives and introduces the category of 0* for interventions with a likely but as yet unclear positive impact on gender equality; underlines that the Commission’s methodology should in any case avoid leading to unintended consequences, such as discouraging or refusing investments in sectors that are strategic yet traditionally dominated by a single gender, including the defence sector;

On the implementation of the methodology developed by the Commission

11. Further understands that, due to the limited availability of data and capacity for reporting during the first financial years to which this methodology was applied, there is little added value in comparing numbers from one financial year to another based on the yearly results or in drawing insights from such comparisons;

✦ Formal Replaces decimal points with commas in euro amounts.

12. Notes that the Commission considers that interventions with an attributed score of 2 or 1 can be considered as promoting gender equality and that considering this, interventions worth EUR 37.9937,99 billion promoted gender equality in 2024, whereas that figure stood at EUR 10.7610,76 billion in 2021, EUR 37.8337,83 billion in 2022 and EUR 47.9947,99 billion in 2023;

13. Notes that the decrease in absolute value between 2023 and 2024 of interventions considered to promote gender equality is a direct result of the decrease in the total amount of commitments between those two financial years, largely explained by the phase-out of commitments under the Recovery and Resilience Facility;

✦ Formal Replaces decimal point with comma in euro amount.

14. Notes that in addition to the results provided for each financial year, in the 2024 Annual Management and Performance Report for the EU Budget the Commission published a reassessment of all the previous results based on more recent and comprehensive assessments of its programmes, which resulted in aggregate trends indicating that for interventions over the period 2021 to 2024, 2 % were given a score of 2, 10 % were given a score of 1, 83 % were given a score of 0 and 5 % were given a score of 0*; further notes that, according to the Commission’s reassessment, in total, in the financial years 2021-2024, 12 % of EU budget expenditure contributed to the promotion of gender (with scores of 1 and 2), amounting to EUR 158.4158,4 billion;

15. Stresses that not all EU budget programmes perform equally in terms of the integration of gender as a horizontal priority, with some programmes performing much better due to their policy design, such as programmes under Heading 6 ‘Neighbourhood and the World’ where gender has been established as a cross-cutting priority with clear targets and criteria, and specific programmes under other headings, such as Horizon Europe, which, thanks to its requirement to implement gender budgeting, not only fosters gender equality but also positively impacts the practices of the Member States through cross-contamination during the implementation stage at national level;

17. Notes that the methodology’s scope is limited, as it does not adequately capture secondary or indirect effects of programmes on gender equality, potential negative impacts or the intersectional dimensions necessary for a comprehensive assessment of policy impacts;

✦ Replaces regret about negative impacts not being taken into account with a note that they are insufficiently considered, especially in sectors like competitiveness and defence, and calls for measures to improve gender equality without adversely affecting investments.

18. Further regretsnotes that the potential negative impacts of programmes on gender equality are notinsufficiently takenconsidered, intoparticularly account,in especiallysectors givensuch theas poorcompetitiveness, contributionsdefence toand preparedness; underlines that promoting gender equality reportedshould fornot programmeslead to restrictions or reductions in sectorsinvestments suchin ascritical competitiveness,sectors; defencecalls andon preparedness;the Commission to propose concrete measures to improve gender equality, while ensuring that investment decisions are not adversely affected;

19. Regrets that the ex post nature of the methodology renders it incapable of structurally influencing the design of policies at an ex ante stage or the collection and allocation of financial resources, which is essential to mainstreaming gender equality properly in EU programmes;

27. Calls on the Commission to conduct systematic ex ante impact assessments that also analyse the specific impacts of EU policies and fiscal policy measures – including tax schemes and State aid programmes – on gender equality, in line with the Better Regulation Guidelines, with the aim of identifying and mitigating gender disparities; stresses that careful consideration should also be given to the social and economic impacts of improved gender equality while taking into account administrative costs to small and medium-sized enterprises;

✦ Replaces a call for no legislative proposals to decrease gender equality with a recall that all EU legislative proposals must comply with primary law, and calls for strengthened ex ante impact assessments to consider and minimise negative effects.

28. CallsRecalls onthat theall CommissionEU tolegislative ensureproposals thatmust nocomply legislativewith proposalsEU shouldprimary belaw, adoptedincluding ifthe principle of gender equality; calls on the Commission to strengthen their ex ante impact assessments demonstrablyin indicateorder thatto theycarefully wouldconsider contributeand tominimise aany decreasepotential innegative effects on gender equality within the EU;EU when preparing legislative proposals;

✦ Drops the requirement for mandatory suspension or clear indicators from the gender equality safeguard mechanism.

29. Urges the Commission to establish a ‘gender equality safeguard mechanism’ as a standard part of the EU’s legislative procedures, which would require the mandatory suspension or revision of any proposal that, through clear indicators or through the analysis of the Court of Auditors, is shown to undermine the EU’s gender equality strategy and objectives;

30. Regrets the imbalance of gender representation among officials and political representatives at both EU and Member State levels, which in turn undermines the principle of gender equality in representation;

✦ Drops the creation of quotas from the feasibility assessment for gender parity measures at management level.

31. Calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility of introducing further gender equality parity measures at management level and of creating quotas to ensure that all genders are sufficiently involved in policymaking through targeted support schemes;

✦ Drops the requirement that the minimum share of the EU budget dedicated to gender equality be legally binding.

32. Calls on the Commission to ensure that a legally binding minimum share of the EU budget is dedicated to gender equality as a principal objective (corresponding to score 2 in the current methodology);

33. Invites the Commission to explore the possibility of setting a quantitative target in the next programming period for a share of the EU budget that contributes to promoting gender equality (corresponding either to a score of 2 or 1 in the current methodology), noting that similar targets have proven useful in advancing the EU’s climate and biodiversity objectives;

41. Recognises the persistent gender disparities in several sectors that are traditionally dominated by a single gender; calls on the Commission to apply gender budgeting to ensure and monitor non-discriminatory conditions to access necessary skills and education programmes for all genders, and to improve gender equality in these specific sectors with the aim of enhancing the competitiveness of the industry; calls for particular attention to women entrepreneurs, especially in small and medium sized enterprises and start-ups, including through specific monitoring within programmes, such as InvestEU and Horizon Europe; calls for stronger monitoring and reporting mechanisms to ensure funds genuinely benefit women and marginalised groups;

°

° °

42. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

The promotion of gender equality is an objective of the Union enshrined in the Treaties. Ensuring the integration of gender equality as a horizontal priority in the EU budget has been a long-time priority for the European Parliament.

Gender budgeting can serve as a key tool for promoting gender equality by focusing on how public resources are collected and spent. For the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), the European Commission has developed, for the first time, a methodology to track EU expenditure related to gender equality at the programme level. The methodology was first applied across all spending programmes for the 2021 financial year, in preparation for the 2023 draft budget. Applying this methodology, the Commission has assessed that the majority of EU spending in 2021-2024 either had no significant impact on gender equality (83%) or its effect could not be assessed (5%). Over the past four years, 12 % of EU budget expenditure has contributed to the promotion of gender equality.

The recast of the Financial Regulation has introduced new requirements related to integrating of gender equality principles in the EU budget. The new Financial Regulation, applicable since 30 September 2024, requires that gender equality should be taken into account in the sector-specific rules through a gender mainstreaming methodology and that, where appropriate, the indicators used for EU spending programmes should be broken down by gender and should be collected in a way allowing for aggregation of such data across all relevant programmes.

The negotiations for the post-2027 MFF present an opportunity to reinforce the integration of gender equality in the EU budget. Drawing on the lessons from the implementation of the gender mainstreaming methodology in the EU budget for the financial years 2021-2024, the aim of this own initiative report is to provide insights and recommendations on how the contribution of the EU budget to gender equality could be better measured and how gender equality principles could be better integrated in the next MFF.

To ensure that the EU fulfils its treaty obligation of promoting gender equality, a fully-fledged and comprehensive gender budgeting methodology should be developed for the post-2027 MFF. This methodology should be integrated throughout the entire budget cycle from planning to evaluation, with clear objectives and using gender-disaggregated data, whenever possible, as required by the 2024 Financial Regulation. The new methodology should account for the secondary effects and any potential negative impacts that the EU budget might have on gender equality. Other, broader societal factors should also be taken into account in the methodology to facilitate an intersectional and gender-sensitive analysis of the impact of the EU budget. Furthermore, to ensure that the EU dedicates an appropriate amount of resources to achieving progress towards gender equality, EU-level spending targets in relation to the promotion of gender equality should be set.