Mexico City, (EFE) .- The network for a feminist fiscal policy (RPFF) in Mexico warned Monday that 52% of the resources assigned to close the gaps between women and men in the country are destined for social programs to grant pensions to adults, in which a gender perspective is lacking.
When presenting two investigations carried out by 17 non -governmental organizations that make up the network, specialists indicated deficiencies in Annex 13, a classification within the Federation Expenditure Budget (PEF) that concentrates the resources aimed at promoting gender equality.
According to the ‘Diagnosis of the budget for substantive equality in Mexico from the approach of a feminist fiscal policy’, in 2025 508,727.4 million pesos were assigned to Annex 13, of which 52% “is concentrated in pension programs that were not designed with a gender perspective”.
The report highlights that more than 252,000 million pesos (49.6%) correspond to the Pension for the Welfare of older adults, and more than 14,000 million (2.9%) to the Women’s Welfare pension, for women from 60 to 64 years.
Alejandra Macías, from the Center for Economic and Budget Research, explained that to measure the gender perspective in the programs, the simplified index of substantive equality (ISAIS) was created, based on six attributes sensitive to gender: multidimensionality, opportunity, orientation to results, inclusion, sustainability and transparency.
Lee: The ISSSTE pays a retirement of 309 thousand pesos per month that contrasts with 937 pensions that do not exceed a minimum wage
Lack of gender perspective
Thus, Macías said, a 29% compliance was detected in the 104 programs that integrate the annex, highlighting that “the programs with more budget tend to have less alignment with equality.”
“The program with more budget, in fact has 4.8 times more budget, has a score of 23%, which is the pension for the well -being of older adults,” he said.
He also pointed out that 37 programs were identified with a score less than 20%, such as ‘operation and maintenance of electric generators’ and ‘regulation and hydrocarbon permit’, which considered that “from the name it is difficult to be aligned with the gender perspective”.
The diagnosis also indicates challenges in results orientation, since only 12% includes strategic indicators of gender equality, as well as in transparency, since only 31% report data disaggregated by sex.
On the other hand, the research “Systematization of the founding experience of Annex 13” emphasizes challenges to almost 20 years of the creation of this budgetary section, as a scarce transversalization of the gender perspective and volatility in the assigned resources.
Angelica Nadurille, president of Collective City and Gender, said that for this research interviews with key figures were conducted in the creation of the annex in 2008.
Among them, he recapitulated that the activist Lucía Pérez Fragoso considered a mistake to affirm that the budget has grown in Annex 13 “because it seems that there is money, but that it is really labeled in programs that are welfare, which are for women, but that the inequality gaps do not decrease.”
Little text and great information in our X (formerly Twitter), follow us!
