This thesis analyses framing of Gender Mainstreaming(GM) in Korea, taking as a conceptional framework four framing components of GM: Political Opportunities, Policy Actors, Policy Contents, Gender-Mainstreaming Learning.
The study of Gender Impact Assessment(GIA) and Gender Responsive Budget(GRB) offers significant opportunity for exploring how gender has been mainstreamed in Korea government. So I studied GIA and GRB as two cases to examine framing of GM in Korea, observing GIA practice of local government “A” in 2008, interviewing 37 people (related GIA or GRB including local government “A”, “B”) in 2011 or 2012, and analysing the 2008 GIA final reports and the 2011 Gender Budgeting.
I found the framing of GM had ‘institutionalised approach’ as a peculiarity in Korea. Especially in the institutions South Korea focused on how governments to adjust for GM more than what issues to change for GM. In terms of Political Opportunities GM agenda entered government mainstream and has been institutionalised. But government officials for GIA practice tried to select as target policies businesses whose the objects divided into women and men, except for a specified businesses related female only. Also government officials in GRB institution created Gender Budgeting on detailed business units, keeping step with mainstream budget system(Program budget system). Thus structural issues related gender inequality can be questions hard to solve in both the institutions. In the result, I can say the framing of GM in Korea respects the conventional report preparation, not substantial GM. So far, I propose the framing of GM in Korea as a huge Gender-Mainstreaming Learning, because government officials have mainly created GIA report and Gender Budgeting in many years.
This Thesis has a theoretical implication in materializing concept of GM, conceptualizing GM not as a strategy but as a process. And the framing components of GM also has meaning analytically to policy research related GM, so they can contribute theoretically. In government policy area, I emphasize the need for structural effort for GM. Particularly governments had better consider the roles and mutual strategy of framing components of GM as the structural effort for GM.