The UN Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) has prepared the following video on the public budgeting process. While this video addresses the national level budget process, it is still a useful guide for subnational processes as well. Please watch it now, and then work through the questions in bold set out below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NSyV4Bksu4

The "budget cycle" described in the video will be essentially the same for national and local levels. However, the "key stakeholders" identified in this video at the national level will be different at the local government level. Can you create your own diagram of the key stakeholders in your local government's budget process?

One of the significant differences between the national budget process and a local budget process will be the greater opportunities for participation in local processes. The video alludes to this, but we will explore it more in the next module when we discuss participatory budgeting.

Having watched this video, where in the local budget cycle might the human rights economy enter into the process?

The answer: at every stage! Certainly, human rights can drive the strategic budgeting and budget formulation at the outset, but it should also play a role in budget approval and execution, and in the standards for monitoring, reporting, and evaluation at the end of the cycle. In other words, once the human rights economy is factored into the budget strategies and priorities, human rights considerations then continue as key components throughout the process.

Here is an example of the positive potential for human rights budgeting. The United Nations conducted a human rights evaluation of Kenya's 2021-2022 budget, using human rights standards to assess the budget's effectiveness in addressing social protections. Please review this evaluation now.

In the midst of the COVID recovery, Kenya -- like many nations worldwide -- suffered setbacks in terms of meeting its core human rights obligations. The human rights analysis demonstrates these impacts in stark, measurable terms. According to the report:

"The human rights-based budget analysis shows that the country has underinvested in social sectors. The total share of investments in social protection, health, education, and WASH has averaged 10.67% and 2.98% of the GDP for the period 2018 to 2021. Also, the country has underinvested in governance, justice, and law and order. The total share for governance, justice, and law and order has averaged 7.41% of the total budget and 2.07% of GDP for the period 2018 to 2021."

By identifying deficiencies and impacts in the areas of social protection, health, education, WASH, and governance, justice, and law and order, this analysis sets benchmarks that can be part of the budgeting strategy as Kenya's budget cycle begins again. Note, however, that meeting human rights standards will require changes in Kenya's current fiscal policies and budget priorities. Among other things, the report suggests adoption of more progressive taxation measures and reallocation of resources from defense spending to essential social spending. Adopting these policy shifts will have positive implications for human rights as the budget is implemented through the budget cycle. And the human rights analysis plainly demonstrates the human consequences of failing to adopt new fiscal policies. This is a concrete example of what the human rights-based economy can mean for public budgeting.