This chapter provides an overview of the extent to which international development finance contributes to advancing gender equality objectives, as well as recommendations for the members of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and other development partners.
Development Finance for Gender Equality 2024
Abstract
Progress on Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 5 on gender equality is off track. Six years before the 2030 deadline for the SDGs, no indicator under SDG 5 has been fully achieved (UN Women, 2024[1]). Global challenges and tensions, including a pushback against whole-of-society inclusion and gender equality, as well as an alarming increase of poverty and inequalities in low- and middle-income countries, have contributed to stalling progress in many places: nearly 40% of countries stagnated or even declined on gender equality between 2019 and 2022 (EM2023, 2024[2]). In that context, development co-operation represents an essential line of support. The OECD data presented and analysed in this report allows members of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and the wider community of development partners to assess their efforts and monitor them over time.
Bilateral official development assistance (ODA) from DAC members represents a major part of global development finance. Thanks to their complete reporting to the OECD, it is also the most well-known source of financing with gender equality objectives. Indeed, gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls have been among the first cross-cutting policy areas actively tracked by the OECD in development finance statistics. The DAC gender equality policy marker was introduced as part of the OECD Creditor Reporting System in 1997 to allow development partners to examine and report whether their finance is dedicated to gender equality as the principal objective (score 2), integrates gender equality as one significant policy objective among others (score 1), or does not include gender equality as a policy objective (score 0). Nearly all bilateral official development assistance (ODA) is screened by the 32 DAC members every year against the marker (See Annex A).
Beyond ODA, DAC members are also increasingly screening their other official flows (OOFs) using the DAC gender equality marker, although to a lower extent than ODA. Even if they do not meet ODA criteria, OOFs represent important official resources for advancing gender equality (see Annex A for the full definition of OOF).
In addition to DAC members, an increasing number of development actors, including multilateral organisations and banks, non-DAC donor countries and private philanthropy, also use the DAC marker to report at least some of their development finance with gender equality objectives.
In 2023, the United Nations (UN) system adopted its own gender equality marker, which can be translated into the DAC marker system. Its use will be mandatory for UN organisations as of 2026 and, as financial information becomes available, this will increase the transparency of global outflows for gender equality and allow for greater accountability overall.
Finally, some non-DAC countries report their bilateral, triangular or South-South co-operation to the OECD while others report to the total official support for sustainable development (TOSSD) indicating if they are aligned to SDG 5 (Annex A).
Based on the above, this report aims to capture and analyse all development flows for which data is available, that either qualify as ODA or other types of development flows, and that are allocable, meaning that the development partner can define the policy intention of its contribution (Table 1.1). The report does not analyse cross-border flows such as remittances and much of private commercial investments.
The big picture
Based on OECD data and the reporting by various development actors, it is possible to estimate that USD 108.4 billion of international development finance included gender equality objectives on average per year in 2021-22 (Table 1.2and Figure 1.1). An additional USD 108 billion in development finance was reported by various actors as lacking gender equality objectives. A striking USD 163.3 billion was reported to the OECD but not assessed against the gender equality policy marker nor the SDGs, which prevents the painting of an exhaustive picture.
USD billion
Note: Resources reported to Total official support for sustainable development (TOSSD) are assessed against the SDGs and not against the gender equality marker.
Source: OECD (2024[3]), OECD Data Explorer, Creditor Reporting System (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9 and TOSSD (2024[4]), Data Visualisation Tool, https://tossd.online.
DAC members’ development finance for gender equality
The volume of bilateral ODA with gender equality objectives has increased over time, along with the overall increase in ODA. In 2021-22, DAC members included gender equality objectives in USD 60.4 billion of their ODA on average per year. However, the share of aid with gender equality objectives has dropped for the first time after a decade on the rise, from 45% of total aid in 2019-20 to 42% in 2021-22. This drop happened in several sectors, and for 20 of the 32 DAC members.
The integration of gender equality is particularly low in ODA to contexts exposed to fragility and conflict, showing that DAC responses to recent global crises have paid little attention to gender equality. For example, only 32% of ODA to Afghanistan, 29% to Yemen and 11% to Ukraine integrated gender equality objectives in 2021-22.
There is no evidence of a correlation between the extent to which ODA integrates gender equality and levels of gender inequality, meaning that ODA with gender equality objectives is not necessarily going to the countries where inequality is more pronounced.
DAC members are increasingly using multilateral organisations as a channel for bilateral ODA with gender equality objectives, while civil society organisations (CSOs) are used less and less. CSOs based in partner countries generally receive a marginal share of the ODA channelled through CSOs.
In 2021-22, USD 3.5 billion of OOFs integrated gender equality objectives, mostly to the banking and financial services sector.
Gender equality objectives remain unevenly integrated across sectors in bilateral ODA by DAC members:
While bilateral humanitarian aid grew over the past decade, its gender equality focus shrunk to 17%. Similarly, the share of aid with gender equality objectives to contexts exposed to extreme fragility seems to decrease as the volume of aid increases. This illustrates important and concerning challenges with maintaining commitments to gender equality while responding to urgent crises and humanitarian situations.
In the energy sector, the focus on gender equality has increased over the past years in the areas of energy generation from renewable sources, energy policy and energy distribution, alongside an increase in aid volumes going to these areas. This reflects the DAC’s recognition of the importance of addressing the objectives of gender equality and clean energy simultaneously. At the same time, only 30% of ODA to the broader energy sector had gender equality objectives, one of the lowest sectoral shares.
Despite DAC members’ recognition of the importance of women’s rights organisations and feminist movements, ODA to enhance their effectiveness, influence and sustainability remains low, at around USD 0.5 billion. This represents less than 1% of ODA for gender equality.
Funding with the policy objective of supporting reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) has increased: USD 14.7 billion of aid had RMNCH objectives on average per year in 2021-22, up from USD 11.9 billion on average in 2019-20. The additional funds with RMNCH objectives were largely committed in the area of COVID-19 control, while support in the areas of reproductive health care and family planning declined from 2019-20 to 2021-22.
Compounding inequalities that intersect with gender position the women who face them as the most disadvantaged in their society across the globe. It remains challenging, however, to track funding at the intersection of gender and other inequalities. Only 22 DAC members examine either some or all aid against the DAC policy marker for the inclusion and empowerment of persons with disabilities, meaning that the disability focus of most bilateral aid is unknown.
Development finance for gender equality by actors other than DAC members
Of the USD 181 billion in total development outflows reported to the OECD by multilateral organisations and banks, both ODA and OOFs, the bulk (USD 137.9 billion) was not screened against the DAC gender equality policy marker. Out of the USD 43.1 billion of multilateral outflows that were, USD 36.6 billion had gender equality objectives, allocated mainly to the sectors of economic infrastructure and services, government and civil society, and business and banking.
As for countries that are not members of the DAC, some, but far from all, report their ODA with gender equality objectives to the OECD. Data show that a mere USD 12.5 million of the USD 9.4 billion of their ODA included gender equality objectives. Instead of reporting to the OECD, an increasing number of South-South bilateral providers report their cross-border resources to TOSSD, indicating whether they are aligned with SDG 5 (Annex A). These providers reported USD 1 million of cross-border flows on average per year in 2021-22 as aligned with SDG 5, out of a total of USD 165.5 million on average per year. These flows were reported to TOSSD only and are additional to those reported to the OECD against the gender equality policy marker.
DAC members and multilateral actors increasingly report the private finance that they help mobilise with their official development finance. Of the USD 9.3 billion of private finance mobilised by DAC members and screened against the policy marker, USD 4.6 billion included gender equality objectives.
Private philanthropies included gender equality objectives in USD 3.4 billion of the total USD 12.3 billion they spent on development, nearly half of which was concentrated in the health, population policy and reproductive health, and agriculture and rural development sectors.
Volumes per type of international development finance that include and do not include gender equality objectives, and are not screened against the gender equality policy marker or SDG 5, USD billion, 2021‑22 averages
Note: Includes: Includes gender equality objectives or align to SDG 5; Does not include: Does not include gender equality objectives nor align to SDG 5; Is not screened: Is not screened against the gender equality policy marker nor the SDGs; DAC: Development Assistance Committee; ODA: official development assistance; OOF: other official flows; TOSSD: Total official support for sustainable development; CRS: Creditor Reporting System. Private finance mobilised by DAC is for 2022 only.
Source: OECD (2024[3]), OECD Data Explorer, Creditor Reporting System (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9 and TOSSD (2024[4]), Data Visualisation Tool, https://tossd.online.
Regular financial reporting against robust standards, such as the OECD Creditor Reporting System and the DAC gender equality policy marker, helps track collective efforts, facilitates the sharing of good practices and encourages the mobilisation of additional finance. Wider reporting by all development actors would allow a more complete understanding of such efforts, fostering transparency and collective accountability, and creating a positive race for more aid to advance gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls through development co-operation. Although the above measures potentially underestimate the actual volume of global development finance that includes gender equality objectives –since a great deal, especially from multilateral actors, is not reported to the OECD – the fact that large volumes explicitly do not include them shows that there is a lot of room for improvement.
In addition to encouraging an increase in quantity of development finance for gender equality, better monitoring can also help ensure, qualitatively, that every dollar spent on development has a positive impact. Whether intended or not, every development co-operation intervention will have an impact on gender equality, and it can be harmful to work within systems that perpetuate existing discriminatory gender stereotypes and norms. At a minimum, a do-no-harm approach is required to ensure that interventions do not reinforce such inequalities. Gender equality thus needs to be considered throughout policy frameworks, in design and planning, programming, and financing, implementing, monitoring and evaluation, and in development partners’ own internal structures and systems. The 2024 DAC Recommendation on Gender Equality and the Empowerment of All Women and Girls in Development Co-operation and Humanitarian Assistance (OECD/LEGAL/5022) (OECD, 2024[5]) and the 2022 Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women and Girls: DAC Guidance for Development Partners (OECD, 2022[6]) set out a comprehensive standard and provide good practice guidance for how to do this.
Recommendations to DAC members
Reverse the declining trend in the share of ODA with gender equality objectives.
Maintain a focus on gender equality in all interventions, including in contexts exposed to fragility and conflict, and in countries where inequality is high.
Continue supporting CSOs based in partner countries directly, which hold critical contextual expertise.
Increase the focus on gender equality across all sectors where it is low, including humanitarian aid, and in emergency situations and contexts exposed to extreme fragility. Successes in improving gender equality integration in ODA to the peace and security sector may serve as avenues for learning.
At a minimum, avoid that any development interventions perpetuate inequalities or have unintended harmful consequences on gender equality.
Increase support for women’s empowerment in the energy sector, learning from those members with high shares of aid integrating gender equality.
Increase support for women’s rights organisations and feminist movements, which are rooted in communities and bring critical contextual expertise, learning from the experience of the few DAC members which stand out as consistent, strong supporters.
Ensure sustained levels of funding for reproductive health.
Furter strengthen statistical reporting on funding for RMNCH.
Strengthen their own capacity to use the DAC gender equality policy marker and statistical reporting, in order to ensure robust data.
Improve the reporting of OOFs to support a more comprehensive picture of how different forms of finance are responsive to gender inequalities and discrimination.
For those who do not do it yet, examine aid against the DAC policy marker for the inclusion and empowerment of persons with disabilities, to allow for a more complete picture of funding flows and more in-depth analysis of support at the intersection of gender equality and disability.
Recommendations to the wider community of development partners
DAC members and multilateral actors could further enhance their reporting of private finance mobilised with a gender equality focus of these mobilised flows.
Multilateral organisations and development banks could helpfully use a common framework for monitoring their development outflows for gender equality. Those that already report their development finance to the OECD could screen their flows against the DAC gender equality policy marker, following the example of banks that already do so.
While some non-DAC members report their ODA with gender equality objectives to the OECD, more non-DAC and South-South co-operation providers could screen and report the gender equality focus of their development finance.
Private philanthropies could further strengthen their focus on gender equality. More foundations could report their development funding with gender equality objectives.
References
[2] EM2023 (2024), A gender equal future in crisis? Findings from the 2024 SDG Gender Index, Seattle: Equal Measures 2030, https://equalmeasures2030.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/EM2030_2024_SDG_Gender_Index_EN_digital.pdf.
[3] OECD (2024), DAC Creditor Reporting System Statistics, http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9 (accessed on August 2024).
[5] OECD (2024), DAC Recommendation on Gender Equality and the Empowerment of All Women and Girls in Development Co-operation and Humanitarian Assistance, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-5022.
[6] OECD (2022), Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women and Girls: DAC Guidance for Development Partners, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/0bddfa8f-en.
[4] TOSSD (2024), TOSSD Data Visualisation Tool, https://tossd.online (accessed on September 2024).
[1] UN Women (2024), Progress on the Sustainable Development Goals: The Gender Snapshot 2024, UN Women Office Publishing, https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2024/09/progress-on-the-sustainable-development-goals-the-gender-snapshot-2024.