Costing Violence against Women and Girls

in Asia and the Pacific: A Snapshot

Bolivia, 2013

Costing Efforts in Asia-Pacific: Diverse Initiatives

• Locations: India, Cambodia, Viet Nam, Indonesia, Timor-Leste, Pacific Island countries (Marshall Islands, Cook Islands and Palau)– Other countries in planning phase: Nepal, Bangladesh,

Bhutan…

• Key actors: UN agencies (UNiTE Campaign in particular), and CSOs

• Partnerships: Ministries of Finance, Women’s Ministries, CSOs and UN/IDA

• Catalysts: Persistent challenges with implementation; recent passage of VAW laws or NAPs; – Only 5/39 countries have NAPVAWs (Unite Campaign)

Costing Case Study One: Viet Nam • Impact costing methodology• 1,053 women in 7 provinces

and cities• As initial starting point for the

cost estimation, in the Vietnam study we focused on economic costs

• Household level– Direct out of pocket

expenses for accessing services – time, transport, fees, materials

– Cost of children missing school

– Loss of earnings – missed days of paid work,

– Loss of housework - days (time) unable to do housework

• Community level– Cost of service provision

• National Level– Aggregate opportunity cost– Productivity Loss

Costing Case Study One: Viet Nam

Results

• VAW/G survivors earn ~35% less than those not abused

• Direct costs of VAW/G = ~28% of monthly income

• Total direct/indirect costs = ~1.4% of 2010 GDP

• Total productivity losses + potential opportunity costs = ~3% of GDP

Lessons Learnt

• Household level costing of monetary costs feasible, despite the challenges

• Need further development of methodologies to value non-monetary costs

• Cost of service provision more difficult

• Women do remember – if start with most recent and go back in time

• Establishing monetary costs would provide useful database

Costing Case Study Two: India

• Mix of methodologies• Law enacted in 2005

(PWDVA) but with no budget provisions

• Women’s rights groups across the country lapped up costing work

• Leveraging right to information act to get costs

Gathering Information on Budgets for PWDVA

Three questions asked:1. What is the budgetary allocation for the

implementation of the PWDVA? 2. What was the basis were the bases for budgetary

allocation for the implementation of the Domestic Violence Act? Please provide copies of the meeting minutes.

3. Please provide me the copies of the budget and expenditure incurred for the 2008-2009 for implementation of the DV Act.

Interestingly NO response to the second question.

The costs we compute

• Unit of Protection Officer at the Block level (Recurring and Non Recurring Expenses)

• Coordinator at the Provincial Level

• Service providers• Training and Capacity

Building• Awareness Generation• Monitoring and

Evaluation

Impact of costs computed

• Media highlighted the absence of any provision and ad hoc provisions by majority of Provincial Govts.

• Provinces writing to the Federal Govt.to allocate resources

• Out of the 33 States & UTs, 13 already had State Plan scheme for implementation of DV Act. Rest 20 did not have dedicated resources.

• A scheme drafted to allocate resources for the PWDVA (Token allocation in Budget 2012-13 of 20 crore, next year went up to upto 67.5 crore).

• But money not getting spent!

India Costing: Lessons Learned

Costing Case Study Three: Pacific Island Countries

COOK ISLANDS• Assess cost of implementing

draft Family Law Bill• Produced two budgeting

options

MARSHALL ISLANDS• Assess cost of implementing

Domestic Violence Prevention & Protection Act

• Produced costs per ministry for 3 fiscal years (FY 2013-FY 2015)

(done by UNDP Pacific Centre)

Methodology

1. Identification of cost-generating elements in the law; translating them into activities, services, resources.

2. Mapping of services, infrastructure, resources that already exist

3. Identification of gaps and quantification of costs to implement legislation (3-year period); including no-cost items

4. Put into context of impact of GBV on national economy (approximate conclusion);

Cook Islands: • “The costing exercise put

an end to the dreaming, guessing, and estimating” • Brought Ministries

together to address implementation jointly • Police successfully used

it to receive additional resources in domestic violence unit• Justice Ministry used it as

basis to make case for separate family court• Internal Affairs Ministry

used it for budgeting of a child & family unit.

Marshall Islands - Ministry of Internal Affairs:• Used costing exercise for budget

appropriation procedure• Did not receive all the funding; but

secured 30’000 in first year, out of 52’000 envisaged under the costing

• Have taken creative approach to include some costs in other activities where budget exists (child protection)

• Have looked at sharing costs with NGO and other Ministries for activities

• Have shared costing exercise with donors and development partners and continue to use costing exercise to lobby them for assistance. Process ongoing.

Pacific Island Costing: Lessons Learned

So what have we learned?Methodogies: What worked?

• Impact costing• Measures the socio-economic impact of VAW/G and

main agents bearing its costs• Unit costing

• Calculates individual cost for particular goods or services

• Gender-responsive budgeting (GRB) • Examines government budgets and funding sources

No one-size-fits all methodology, mix and fluidity of methodologies common. Equally important were the “quick and dirty” exercises.

So what have we learned? Some challenges:

• Structural differences- Help seeking behaviour of women- Centrality of the household as a unit of production

• How to address the “quality of services” question

• Data related challenges:- Quality of survey data- Differential analysis- Use and appropriateness of proxy variables- Full cost, average cost and marginal cost- Total burden on the system: incidence vs.

prevalence • Lack of transparency in budget documents

So what have we learned?Some Insights…

• Don’t wait for the perfect methodology! Weigh limitations against importance of building evidence and potential advocacy benefits.

• Results not always surprising, but important to document.• Significant out-of-pocket costs for survivors and other

actors in EVAW• Primary role of NGOs in EVAW• Lack of budget transparency• Gaps and overlaps in funding, lack of coordination

• Need to continue piloting and fine-tuning methodologies, building evidence-base

• All of these approaches can provide a “piece of the puzzle” and contribute towards our collective goal of EVAW

• Getting money allocated not good enough, money needs to be spent too!

Thank you