evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Bangladesh's Gender Budget Report — Ministry of Finance Gender-Responsive Budgeting

Bangladesh · Dhaka · See the Bangladesh profile · See the Dhaka profile

Evidence: Descriptive / self-reported Top 55% 63/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Since FY2009-10, Bangladesh's Ministry of Finance has tracked gender-tagged budget allocations, now across 40+ ministries and roughly a third of the national budget, though its own reviewers find allocations are tracked but rarely reprioritised by outcome.

34.4 %
Gender-relevant share of national budget (FY2024)
16 of 62
Ministries providing full budget breakdown (2025)

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
Ministry of Finance (Finance Division) / Ministry of Women and Children Affairs
Period
2009–present
Keywords
public finance, budget policy, gender equality, government

Context

Bangladesh's Ministry of Finance has published an annual Gender Budget Report since FY2009-10, coordinated with the Ministry of Women and Children Affairs; coverage expanded from 4 ministries to over 40 by FY2023, integrated into the iBAS++ digital budgeting system.

Results

Gender-relevant allocation rose from about 24.7% of the budget in FY2010 to 34.4% by FY2024, dipping to 33.01% (4.18% of GDP) in FY2026. Only 16 of 62 ministries currently provide the fully detailed breakdown.

Conclusions

The Centre for Policy Dialogue's 2025 assessment finds this is Gender Finance Tracking, not Gender Impact Assessment: allocations cannot be reprioritised based on outcomes, there are no dedicated Gender Budget Cells, and 'low influence on actual budget decisions' persists.

Implementation
Indicative cost
Low (< €50k)
Time to results
Long (> 3 years)
Staffing & skills
Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Women and Children Affairs, line-ministry gender focal points

Conditions for success

  • Dedicated Gender Budget Cells in each ministry
  • Sex-disaggregated outcome database
  • Link between tracked allocations and reprioritisation

Common failure modes

  • Tracking without ability to reprioritise based on outcomes
  • Uneven reporting quality across ministries

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Similar practices you may find useful