This chapter explores international development finance for gender equality by development actors beyond the DAC, including multilateral organisations and development banks, non-DAC countries, and the private sector. It proposes the OECD-DAC gender equality policy marker as a system for global reporting of development finance for gender equality, but reporting against it needs to be improved for a more comprehensive overview.
Development Finance for Gender Equality 2024
Abstract
Development Assistance Committee (DAC) members are the main source of development finance for gender equality for which information is available (see Chapters 2 and 3). However, other development actors also provide development funding to advance gender equality, representing an enormous potential to ensure sufficient financial support in this area.
This chapter presents and discusses development finance with gender equality objectives from development actors beyond the DAC, based on data reported to the OECD. It argues that a common global system for reporting development finance for gender equality would increase transparency and enable a more complete picture of how much global development finance is effectively available for gender equality, and could strengthen collective accountability. The OECD-DAC gender equality policy marker is well placed to do that, but reporting against the DAC marker needs to be improved by actors beyond the DAC.
Little is known about the gender equality focus of multilateral outflows
The multilateral system is a significant and growing player in development co-operation. Between 2012 and 2020, development outflows from the World Bank Group and other multilateral development banks rose substantially (OECD, 2024[1]). Multilateral organisations and banks also play a major role in supporting gender equality and women’s empowerment in partner countries. For example, the World Bank Group’s commitment to gender equality in its programmes has become broader and more ambitious over the past decade (Kucey et al., 2023[2]). It recently finalised its Gender Strategy for the period 2024-2030, which sets to end gender-based violence and elevate human capital, expand and enable economic opportunities, and engage women as leaders (World Bank Group, 2024[3]).
Some multilateral organisations and banks report their development outflows to the OECD. These are largely the funds that they have received as core funding from DAC members and other donor countries. Some (30) also screen and report the extent to which these outflows include gender equality objectives, using the DAC gender equality policy marker. However, several others do not screen their outflows against the gender equality policy marker when they report, and current levels of reporting are insufficient to provide a reliable and complete picture of multilateral outflows for gender equality.
It is positive that there are efforts underway, such as the United Nations (UN) system’s gender equality marker which is meant to track finance for gender equality from UN system entities and to facilitate their reporting to the OECD (Box 4.1). There is currently, however, no single or streamlined system used by multilateral organisations and banks to track and make publicly available information on their financial outflows with gender equality objectives. This means that there is no way of exploring and comparing to what extent they use the core funding that they receive from DAC members for the purpose of advancing gender equality. For example, the World Bank has a Gender Tag system to track the number of operations that include interventions and results designed to address and measure gender gaps. However, it does not allow for estimating financial commitments related to gender equality.1 DAC members are committed to encouraging multilateral organisations and other actors to report financing using the DAC gender equality policy marker or a system common to, or comparable to, the DAC gender equality policy marker (OECD, 2024[4]).
Looking at the data reported to the OECD, multilateral organisations and banks committed USD 181 billion in total development outflows on average per year in 2021-22. However, the vast majority of these outflows, USD 137.9 billion, were not screened against the gender equality policy marker (Figure 4.1). This means that the gender equality focus of these USD 137.9 billion is unknown, representing a missed opportunity for transparency and for understanding the global landscape of multilateral development outflows for gender equality.
Of the USD 43.1 billion of multilateral outflows that were screened and reported against the DAC gender equality policy marker, USD 36.6 billion had gender equality objectives, either as a principal (USD 7.8 billion) or as a significant objective (USD 28.8 billion) on average per year in 2021-22.
Source: OECD (2024[5]), OECD Data Explorer, Creditor Reporting System (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9.
Multilateral outflows are broken down in the same way as for DAC members: some qualify as “concessional” – equivalent to official development assistance (ODA) in nature – others do not. From the USD 181 billion of development outflows reported to the OECD, concessional flows represented USD 62 billion on average per year in 2021-22. Only USD 9.4 billion of these were screened against the gender equality policy marker and, of the flows screened, USD 7.8 billion included gender equality objectives on average per year.
Non-concessional outflows by multilateral organisations reported to the OECD amounted to a total of USD 119 billion on average per year in 2021-22. Of this, only USD 33.6 billion were screened against the gender marker. Of the multilateral non-concessional outflows screened, USD 28.7 billion included gender equality objectives.
The 2023 Data Standards for United Nations (UN) System-Wide reporting of financial data introduced a common UN methodology and format for tracking the contribution of UN activities to gender equality and the empowerment of women. It defines the way UN financial information (budget and expenditures) must be reported at activity level against a gender equality marker (UN GEM). The standard is a performance indicator in the United Nations System-Wide Action Plan on Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women and is also meant to ensure that UN entities report to the OECD in a similar manner on their support to achieving gender equality.
The UN gender equality marker was approved on 1 January 2023 with a transition period until 31 December 2025, making it mandatory for UN organisations as of 1 January 2026. It applies to 69 UN system entities.
Source: United Nations Sustainable Development Group (2023[6]), Data Standards for United Nations System-Wide Reporting of Financial Data, https://unsdg.un.org/sites/default/files/2023-07/Data%20Standards%20for%20UN%20System%20Wide%20reporting%20of%20financial%20data_2023_Final_0.pdf.
Several multilateral organisations are using the DAC gender equality policy marker
Thirty multilateral organisations and banks reported at least some of their finance against the DAC gender equality policy marker when reporting their development outflows to the OECD in 2021-22 (Figure 4.2). The largest multilateral donors of funding with gender equality objectives on average per year in 2021-22 as reported to the OECD were the Asian Development Bank (ADB) with USD 18.3 billion, the Inter-American Development Bank with USD 8.9 billion, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development with USD 4.1 billion. Almost all (99%) outflows from the ADB and 81% of those from the Inter-American Development Bank include gender equality objectives, indicating that gender equality is a clear policy priority for these banks (Box 4.2).
Other multilateral organisations and banks, including the largest providers of multilateral development outflows, did not screen their funding against the gender equality policy marker when reporting their outflows to the OECD. If multilateral organisations and banks integrated gender equality into their finance and used the DAC gender equality policy marker or a similar common tracking system to report on it, a better picture could be drawn of the global state of finance for gender equality.
Note: UNICEF: United Nations Children’s Fund; UNDP: United Nations Development Programme.
Source: OECD (2024[5]), OECD Data Explorer, Creditor Reporting System (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9.
Promoting gender equality and women’s empowerment is an operational priority of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), which is underpinned by an institutional architecture to ensure that commitments translate into investments in gender equality. As part of the ADB’s Strategy 2030’s Operational Plan for Priority 2: Accelerating Progress in Gender Equality 2019-2024, the ADB committed to a target of 55% of the ADB’s sovereign and non-sovereign operations mainstreaming gender.1 Over 2021-2023, this target was significantly overachieved: 88% (3-year average) of the ADB’s operations were gender mainstreamed.2 The ADB also maintains a corporate target of 80% for the share of completed operations delivering the intended gender equality results.
The ADB pursues a two-pronged investment approach to gender equality: gender mainstreaming across all sectors and gender-focused projects. Gender mainstreaming across all sectors entails integrating ambitious gender performance indicators which are grounded in gender analysis for each project and cover a range of areas such as job creation, women’s leadership and voice, and resilience, among others. The majority of the ADB’s investments to date have applied this gender mainstreaming approach, which allows the ADB to leverage a sector-specific loan to integrate gender equality targets. Technical assistance grants are often combined with the loan to enhance gender results, promote innovation and strengthen knowledge. Gender-focused investments, which also include technical assistance programmes, provide dedicated support on areas such as gender-based violence (GBV), gender-responsive fiscal policy reform and women’s entrepreneurship.
The Asian Development Fund’s (ADF) Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 5 thematic window has been an important innovation for ADB investments. Representing 20% of the thematic window (under the current ADF 14 cycle, this equates to approximately USD 190 million), grants are only available for the ADB’s most vulnerable economies to promote social norm approaches to address complex areas of gender equality in line with SDG 5, such as GBV, sexual and reproductive health and rights, unpaid care, and domestic work.
In Palau, for example, an ADF grant is supporting a multidisciplinary GBV prevention and a social norm change programme, which includes a strong intersectional lens targeting women with disabilities and older women. It will train frontline workers, develop new tools and guidance, and work closely with community-based women’s organisations on GBV case management, including referral pathways (ADB, 2021[7]). In Pakistan, the Women’s Inclusive Finance Development Program aims to strengthen the enabling policy environment for women’s entrepreneurship, including through implementation support to the Banking on Equality Law, financial literacy programmes for women, digital technologies and platforms, and facilitating access to finance for up to 2 million women through lending to financial institution partners (ADB, 2023[8]).
1. The ADB’s system for project gender categorisation at-entry is guided by the 2021 Guidelines for Gender Mainstreaming Categories of ADB Projects, which involves a four-tier project gender mainstreaming categorisation system, which is applied to all projects.
2. On account of this overperformance, the ADB is deepening the organisation’s commitment to gender equality through a more robust and focused approach and methodology, which represents an important evolution in its gender mainstreaming track record. The new methodology will be applicable from 1 January 2025 to all new ADB operations and will see revised corporate targets and baselines.
Multilateral organisations and banks integrate gender equality objectives into a variety of sectors
Looking at the total outflows from multilateral organisations’ and banks’ core resources that were reported to the OECD and examined against the DAC gender equality policy marker, it is possible to identify the main sectoral focus of those with gender equality objectives: USD 6.4 billion were committed to “other economic infrastructure and services”, which includes support for transport policy, planning and administration, public transport services, road construction, rail transport, information services, media, and information and communication technology (Figure 4.3). An additional USD 4.7 billion were committed to “government and civil society”, and USD 4.4 billion to “business, banking and financial services”.
However, significant amounts of funding reported to the OECD in these sectors were not examined against the DAC marker. For example, it is striking that in the “business, banking and financial services” sector alone, USD 20 billion reported to the OECD were not screened against the DAC marker, meaning that the gender equality focus is unknown. Support in this area can be essential for women’s economic empowerment.
Source: OECD (2024[5]), OECD Data Explorer, Creditor Reporting System (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9.
Non-DAC countries are offering valuable support for gender equality through bilateral, triangular or South‑South co-operation. Some of these countries report their development finance to the OECD while others instead report to the total official support for sustainable development (TOSSD).
Few non-DAC donor countries apply the DAC gender equality policy marker
Seventeen non-DAC countries reported a total of USD 9.4 billion of ODA to the OECD on average in 2021‑22, though only four of them used the DAC gender equality policy marker to screen and report more than half of their funding: Latvia, Liechtenstein, Monaco and Qatar (Figure 4.4). These four countries reported USD 12.5 million of aid with gender equality objectives. The largest volumes of ODA with gender equality objectives were provided by these countries to Ghana and Tajikistan, with over USD 1 million on average per year, followed by Yemen, Madagascar, Burkina Faso, and the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Of the total of USD 9.4 billion of aid provided by non-DAC countries, Saudi Arabia, Türkiye and the United Arab Emirates together committed USD 8.4 billion, much of which was provided to the Syrian Arab Republic. These countries, however, did not screen their aid against the gender equality policy marker when reporting to the OECD. The extent to which their development co-operation contributes to advancing gender equality remains unanswered.
Note: The volume for “Türkiye” goes beyond the axis scale, so the bar is broken, and the value is show in the data label.
Source: OECD (2024[5]), OECD Data Explorer, Creditor Reporting System (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9.
A growing number of South-South co-operation providers report to total official support for sustainable development, with high potential to expand reporting on gender equality
TOSSD is a statistical framework agreed upon by a large, diverse group of countries and organisations. It aims to ensure a coherent, comparable, unified system to track SDG-related investments. TOSSD informs development planning and SDG monitoring and helps identify priorities to finance sustainable development.
Eleven South-South co-operation providers that did not report their development finance to the OECD in 2021-22 instead reported a total of USD 165.5 million cross-border flows to TOSSD (Table 4.1). TOSSD is designed to monitor cross-border resources to partner countries, regional and global expenditures in support of international public goods, and mobilised private finance. It captures funding for the SDGs and support for gender equality as defined by SDG 5.
Seven of these providers extended cross-border flows that supported the achievement of SDG 5 solely or with SDG 5 as one among other goals in 2021 and 2022: Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Indonesia, Mexico and Peru, adding up to approximately USD 1 million on average per year in 2021-22. These flows were reported to TOSSD only and are additional to those reported to the OECD against the gender equality policy marker. In addition, Uruguay reported non‑monetised support for SDG 5.2 This leaves significant scope for better aligning South-South and triangular co-operation with SDG 5, drawing on existing good practice such as the examples outlined in Box 4.3.
USD thousand (2022 constant prices)
Notes: SDG: Sustainable Development Goal.
1.These providers reported a combination of monetized and non-monetised support to TOSSD. The TOSSD Standard, following the UN initial agreement on the measurement of South-South co-operation (SSC) allows SSC providers to report non-monetised activities, that could take the form of technical co-operation, training, and in-kind donations.
2.This data point was reported in one of the two years (either 2021 or 2022). No data was provided for the other year.
Source: TOSSD (2024[11]), TOSSD Data Visualisation Tool, https://tossd.online.
Triangular co-operation is designed to build inclusive and impactful partnerships, which leverages different stakeholders and their expertise to support sustainable development (OECD/IsDB, 2023[12]). It can be applied to any development programming, including work to advance gender equality.
Building the evidence base to end gender-based violence in El Salvador
This project aims to develop a knowledge management system to enable the design, implementation and evaluation of evidence-based public policies for reducing gender-based violence – and in particular its extreme manifestation as femicide – in El Salvador.
Nationally, the project aligns forces between the El Salvadoran Ministry of Justice and Public Security, the Institute for the Development of Women, and the El Salvador Agency for International Cooperation.
Internationally, the project triangulates co-operation between the technical co-operation offices of the Spanish Agency for International Cooperation in El Salvador and Peru, and the Peruvian Agency for International Cooperation.
The goal is for the knowledge management system to be built, approved and operational by the institutions involved – including setting up a specialised unit against gender-based violence, particularly femicide, implemented by the Ministry of Justice and Public Security – to reduce gender-based violence.
Promoting family planning with religious leaders in East Asia and Africa
This programme, led by Indonesia, aims to share Indonesia’s national experiences and knowledge in implementing and advocating for family planning programmes. The programme is training-oriented, sharing best practices and experiences with local Muslim leaders and faith-based organisations to promote family planning, illustrating its compatibility with Islamic principles.
With learning and advocacy at its core, the programme is facilitated as a triangular co-operation activity in collaboration with the United Nations Population Fund, local Muslim leaders and other participants from more than 20 countries in Asia and Africa – including Afghanistan, Algeria, India, Nepal, Nigeria and Sudan, among others.
The programme, or slightly different iterations of it, has run for more than ten years, and population and family planning programmes are one of the government of Indonesia’s priority programmes through the National Family Planning Coordinating Board.
The programme is considered highly successful, primarily because it has gained commitment and support from high-standing religious leaders in the country, who hold large-scale influence and respect in local communities (UNFPA, 2021[13]).
Source: TOSSD (2024[11]), TOSSD Data Visualisation Tool, https://tossd.online; AECID (2022[14]), Cooperación triangular entre Perú, El Salvador y España para institucionalizar un sistema de gestión del conocimiento para la generación de evidencia en materia de violencia feminicida en El Salvador, con base a la experiencia de Perú y España – Fase II, https://aecid.sv/cooperacion-triangular-entre-peru-el-salvador-y-espana-para-institucionalizar-un-sistema-de-gestion-del-conocimiento-para-la-generacion-de-evidencia-en-materia-de-violencia-feminicida-en-el-salva; APCI (2023[15]), Cooperación de España y Perú impulsan la lucha que El Salvador realiza contra la violencia hacia las mujeres, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/apci/noticias/871350-cooperacion-de-espana-y-peru-impulsan-la-lucha-que-el-salvador-realiza-contra-la-violencia-hacia-las-mujeres.
Private cross-border finance offers an important opportunity for investments in gender equality. Gender lens investing is an approach to investing that takes into consideration gender-based factors across the investment process to advance gender equality and better inform investment decisions (GIIN, 2024[16]).
OECD data include private finance mobilised from the private sector by public interventions (OECD, 2023[17]). DAC members and multilateral actors report the private finance they help mobilise through their public development finance using a range of leveraging mechanisms, such as syndicated loans, shares in investment vehicles, direct investment in companies and guarantees. To some extent, they also report the gender equality focus of these interventions. In addition, private philanthropies report their cross-border concessional finance with gender equality objectives to the OECD.
Beyond the OECD, initiatives such as the 2X Challenge monitors investments with a gender lens based on a set of agreed criteria. Since its launch in 2018, the 2X Challenge has raised several billions of “gender lens investments” (Box 4.4). Some of the finance captured by 2X corresponds to private finance mobilised, non-concessional development finance or other official flows using the OECD framework and is also reported to the OECD as such (see also Chapters 2 and 3). The 2X criteria have been widely adopted by investors, financial intermediaries and companies as well as other stakeholders to assess and monitor gender lens investments, and are largely seen as the standard for assessing and structuring private investments that provide women with leadership opportunities, quality employment, finance, enterprise support, and products and services that enhance economic participation and access. While the 2X criteria do not correspond to the DAC gender equality policy marker scores, efforts are ongoing to map the 2X criteria to the DAC marker scores to support transparency and facilitate and increase reporting for development actors using both tracking systems, such as bilateral development finance institutions.
The 2X Challenge, launched at the G7 Summit in Canada in 2018, is a collective effort to mobilise private sector investments that provide women in partner country markets with improved access to leadership opportunities, quality employment, finance, enterprise support, and products and services that enhance economic participation and access. Since its creation, the initiative has raised USD 33.6 billion of what is considered “gender lens investments”.
The 2X Challenge includes development finance institutions from Development Assistance Committee (DAC) members, multilateral finance institutions and private sector investors. Although 2X has its own approach to defining “gender lens investing”, its members have committed to also align their reporting to the OECD-DAC gender equality policy marker. Efforts to map the 2X criteria to the OECD-DAC gender equality policy marker are ongoing and will promote further transparency and accountability in financing for gender equality.
The G7 Leaders’ Summit 2024 in Italy welcomed a new commitment by development and multilateral finance institutions to invest at least USD 20 billion from 2024 to 2027 to advance women’s empowerment. They also called upon other public and private actors to join the 2X Challenge.
Source: 2X Challenge (2024[18]), “Invest in women. Invest in the world”, https://www.2xchallenge.org; 2X Challenge (2024[19]), “History”, https://www.2xchallenge.org/history.
Gender components can be strengthened for finance mobilised from the private sector by DAC members
Over the last 5 years, 25 of the 32 DAC members have reported to the OECD about their private finance mobilised. In 2022, 21 DAC members reported a total of USD 13.8 billion of private finance mobilised, but only 67% of this was screened against the DAC gender equality policy marker (Figure 4.5).3 Of the USD 9.3 billion screened, USD 4.6 billion (49%) included gender equality objectives, either as a significant or a principal objective. The United States mobilised by far the largest volumes of private finance with gender equality objectives in 2022, corresponding to half of the total (USD 2.3 billion). The United Kingdom followed, mobilising USD 1.2 billion of private finance with gender equality objectives in 2022.
DAC members can do more to increase the share of private finance mobilised screened against the marker and strengthen their gender components. They can also incentivise and strengthen the mandates governing their development finance institutions and multilateral development banks to consider gender-related issues in investment strategies.
Source: OECD (2024[5]), OECD Data Explorer, Creditor Reporting System (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9 and http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/q.
Private philanthropies can further increase their focus on gender equality
Over 40 private foundations report their development flows to the OECD using the DAC gender equality policy marker. This represents a valuable source of finance, even though more foundations could report on their financial flows. Foundations are key drivers of innovative development finance for gender equality, with unique opportunities to play a catalytic role in de-risking investments and attracting increased funds (2024[20]).
Of a total of USD 12.3 billion that qualify as allocable development flows provided by foundations on average per year over 2021-22, USD 11.9 billion were screened against the gender equality policy marker. Of the USD 11.9 billion, 28% included gender equality objectives, corresponding to USD 3.4 billion (Figure 4.6). This represents an increase over time of both the volume and share of ODA flows by foundations with gender equality objectives, up from 19% in 2017-18 and 23% in 2019-20. In addition, the share of funding with gender equality as the principal objective, 9%, is significantly higher than that of DAC members, at 4%. At the same time, the total share of funding with gender equality objectives remains low compared to that provided by DAC members.
Two-year averages
Source: OECD (2024[5]), OECD Data Explorer, Creditor Reporting System (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9.
Data shared by many of the largest private philanthropic foundations include information on the DAC gender equality policy marker, such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Mastercard Foundation, the Susan T. Buffet Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Ford Foundation. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation remains the largest donor of flows with gender equality objectives by far, followed by the Mastercard Foundation.
Note: The volume for “Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation” goes beyond the axis scale, so the bar is broken, and the value is shown in the data label.
Source: OECD (2024[5]), OECD Data Explorer, Creditor Reporting System (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9.
Sectoral focus by foundations
Of the USD 3.4 billion of philanthropic funding with gender equality objectives, nearly half was concentrated in the health (USD 860 million on average per year in 2021-22) and population policy/reproductive health (USD 730 million per year) sectors. At the same time, health remains a sector with large volumes committed by private foundations lacking gender equality objectives.
The third-largest sector of funding with gender equality objectives was agriculture and rural development (USD 630 million), followed by government and civil society (USD 406 million). As part of the funding for government and civil society, private foundations provided USD 223 million on average per year to the effectiveness, influence and sustainability of women’s rights organisations and feminist movements, with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation by far the largest philanthropic donor in this area (see also Chapter 3).
Source: OECD (2024[5]), OECD Data Explorer, Creditor Reporting System (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9.
Delivery channels used by private foundations
Most of the funding for gender equality provided by private foundations was channelled through civil society organisations based at the international level, in donor countries and in partner countries. A very limited part of funding with gender equality objectives was channelled through public sector institutions.
Note: CSO: civil society organisation; PPP; public-private partnership. There is only USD 4 million for Other, so it is not visible in the figure.
Source: OECD (2024[5]), OECD Data Explorer, Creditor Reporting System (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9.
For further analysis of the financial flows with gender equality objectives reported to the OECD CRS by private foundations, see OECD (2024[20]).
References
[19] 2X Challenge (2024), History, web page, https://www.2xchallenge.org/history (accessed on July 2024).
[18] 2X Challenge (2024), Invest in women. Invest in the world, https://www.2xchallenge.org (accessed on July 2024).
[8] ADB (2023), Proposed Programmatic Approach, Policy-Based Loan for Subprogram 1, Financial Intermediation Loan, and Grant to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan: Women Inclusive Finance Sector Development Program, Asian Development Bank, Manila.
[7] ADB (2021), Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors: Proposed Grant and Administration of Grants to the Republic of Palau: COVID-19 Response for Affected Poor and Vulnerable Groups Project, Asian Development Bank, Manila.
[9] ADB (2019), Strategy 2030: Operational Plan for Priority 2: Accelerating Progress in Gender Equality, 2019-2024, Asian Development Bank, Manila, https://www.adb.org/documents/strategy-2030-op2-gender-equality.
[10] ADB (n.d.), Asian Development Fund (ADF), web page, https://www.adb.org/what-we-do/funds/adf (accessed on July 2024).
[14] AECID (2022), Cooperación triangular entre Perú, El Salvador y España para institucionalizar un sistema de gestión del conocimiento para la generación de evidencia en materia de violencia feminicida en El Salvador, con base a la experiencia de Perú y España – Fase II, Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation, https://aecid.sv/cooperacion-triangular-entre-peru-el-salvador-y-espana-para-institucionalizar-un-sistema-de-gestion-del-conocimiento-para-la-generacion-de-evidencia-en-materia-de-violencia-feminicida-en-el-salva.
[15] APCI (2023), Cooperación de España y Perú impulsan la lucha que El Salvador realiza contra la violencia hacia las mujeres, Peruvian Agency for International Cooperation, https://www.gob.pe/institucion/apci/noticias/871350-cooperacion-de-espana-y-peru-impulsan-la-lucha-que-el-salvador-realiza-contra-la-violencia-hacia-las-mujeres.
[16] GIIN (2024), Gender Lens Investing Initiative, Global Impact Investing Network, https://thegiin.org/gender-lens-investing-initiative (accessed on July 2024).
[2] Kucey, A. et al. (2023), Gender Equality in Development: A Ten-Year Retrospective, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099443106282317296/IDU0784a8fa606e1a043440b2d8048e1636bfdd3.
[4] OECD (2024), DAC Recommendation on Gender Equality and the Empowerment of All Women and Girls in Development Co-operation and Humanitarian Assistance, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-5022.
[20] OECD (2024), “How philanthropic foundations support gender equality and women’s empowerment”, OECD Development Policy Papers, No. 55, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3fbec947-en.
[1] OECD (2024), Multilateral Development Finance 2024, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8f1e2b9b-en.
[5] OECD (2024), OECD Data Explorer (Database), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/a9 (accessed on 28 October 2024).
[17] OECD (2023), “Private finance mobilised by official development finance interventions”, OECD Development Perspectives, No. 29, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c5fb4a6c-en.
[12] OECD/IsDB (2023), Global Perspectives on Triangular Co-operation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/29e2cbc0-en.
[11] TOSSD (2024), TOSSD Data Visualisation Tool, https://tossd.online (accessed on September 2024).
[13] UNFPA (2021), South-South Cooperation as a Mode of Engagement: Innovative Programme Solutions, United Nations Population Fund, https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/UNFPA%20Good%20Practices%20on%20South-South%20Cooperation%202021.pdf.
[6] United Nations Sustainable Development Group (2023), Data Standards for United Nations System-Wide Reporting of Financial Data, United Nations, https://unsdg.un.org/sites/default/files/2023-07/Data%20Standards%20for%20UN%20System%20Wide%20reporting%20of%20financial%20data_2023_Final_0.pdf.
[3] World Bank Group (2024), World Bank Group Gender Strategy 2024-2030: Accelerate Gender Equality to End Poverty on a Livable Planet, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/gender/brief/gender-strategy-update-2024-30-accelerating-equality-and-empowerment-for-all.
← 1. Previously, up to 2018 flows, the World Bank reported International Development Association (IDA) flows to the OECD against the gender equality policy marker.
← 2. According to the TOSSD, South-South co-operation providers can report non-monetised support (e.g. technical co-operation, training, in-kind donations). Therefore, a financial analysis on South-South co-operation is not sufficient to see the whole support those providers are giving. Peru and Uruguay reported five and nine non-monetised South-South co-operation activities in TOSSD, respectively.
← 3. Data for mobilised flows are shown by individual year and not two-year averages because these data are available only in current prices.