When discussing gender parity, experts estimate that 134 years will be necessary to achieve this, considering the 2024 level of funding and the implementation of development programs. But in January 2025, things changed dramatically when U.S. President Donald Trump announced rollbacks on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The actions that follow, combined with foreign aid cuts, are having an impact on women and girls across the world, particularly in poorer nations. In fact, the reduction in funding for organizations that promote women’s rights and access to essential services, including reproductive health, could have irreversible consequences on the economic opportunities and social security for women around the globe.
As we mark International Women’s Day on March 8th, we take a moment to recognize the achievements of women while acknowledging the persistent barriers to gender equality. We also asked experts about the current situation and future prospects of achieving gender equality.
Key Takeaways:
- Soon after his inauguration as the 47th President of the USA, Donald Trump signed several executive orders overturning diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes in the federal government.
- The Trump administration is also in the process of reviewing and terminating more than 90% of the U.S. Agency for International Development’s foreign aid contracts and US$60 billion in overall U.S. assistance around the world.
- According to experts, promoting exclusion rather than inclusion also has serious consequences for business and society, shrinking the talent pool, making it harder for firms to find the best candidates, and increasing HR costs.
- If U.S. foreign aid programs reduce funding for gender-related initiatives, the consequences could be serious for women’s health, education, and economic independence.
DevelopmentAid: How could Trump’s rollback of DEI policies influence global efforts to achieve gender equality in international development and humanitarian aid?
“Trump’s rollback of DEI policies could weaken gender-responsive international development efforts, particularly in funding and policy influence. Under the Biden administration, the United States contributed US$6.7 billion annually to global women’s empowerment programs, including Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR), GBV prevention, and girls’ education (The World Economic Forum, 2024). A shift away from these commitments could lead to serious funding gaps, particularly for maternal healthcare, gender-based violence response, and women’s economic empowerment initiatives. Historically, restrictive policies like the Global Gag Rule (Mexico City Policy) resulted in a 40% reduction in contraceptive access across 37 developing countries and an increase in maternal deaths by 13% in sub-Saharan Africa (Birchall, 2020). Trump’s proposed executive order states that U.S. agencies “will cease pretending that men can be women and women can be men,” signaling an end to trans-inclusive aid programs (Pengelly, 2025). At the policy level, anti-gender movements have been gaining traction in United Nations spaces, with some U.S.-led coalitions blocking gender-sensitive language in international agreements (Birchall, 2020). If the U.S. aligns with conservative states, it may weaken global SDG 5 (Gender Equality) commitments, affecting women’s rights beyond funding alone.”
“I am contextualizing this to Afghanistan, women’s education, and employment in that Trump’s rollback could weaken international efforts to persuade the Taliban to allow girls’ education and women’s employment. The U.S. funding shortage will likely mean fewer scholarships and women’s economic initiatives. Many women working in the humanitarian sector will face restrictions on their active presence. Additionally, sidelining women’s rights in favor of security concerns could significantly harm global gender equality efforts and have direct consequences for Afghanistan.”
“Over the previous few years, we have witnessed a re-traditionalization of many societies worldwide. This trend created a more hostile and oppressive environment for women’s activists and civil society organizations in developing countries. On the other hand, increased support to populist movements in traditional donor countries has caused a steady decline in the funds allocated for development aid. If the situation has been bleak so far, what can be said about the new reality after January 20, 2025? Although most of us are ‘holding our breath’ while waiting to see where all this leads us, with every passing day the restoration of the previous state of affairs seems less probable. Cuts seem to be deep, both with regards to policy and funding.”
“Trump’s rollback of DEI does more than harm women. The majority of the world’s population is neither white nor male. Promoting exclusion rather than inclusion has serious consequences for business and society, shrinking the talent pool, making it harder for firms to find the best candidates, and increasing HR costs. Companies with a DEI strategy are eight times better than their peers at employee retention which lowers recruitment costs and supports higher productivity. Lack of diversity is a drag on financial performance overall. McKinsey research shows that diverse and inclusive corporations are 35% more likely than their peers to deliver financial performance above their industry median. A Harvard Business School meta-study of 140 research studies found that female Board representation correlates to better financial returns. In the face of Trump’s decisions on DEI and USAID, development organizations need to break down internal silos. Gender equality is important, but one form of diversity is insufficient to boost economic and social performance. Think gender and social inclusion (GESI) not just gender equality. Social diversity (including gender, ethnicity and age) as well as professional diversity (education, formal experience, lived experience) are both important for increasing the perspective, performance and resilience of individuals and organizations.”
DevelopmentAid: What strategies can development organizations adopt to sustain progress on women’s empowerment in an era of increasing resistance to diversity and inclusion initiatives?
“In 2024, hiring women in leadership declined from 37.5% to 36.4%, showing that economic downturns disproportionately affect gender parity (The World Economic Forum, 2024). This is an example of increasing resistance to gender equality. Development organizations must adapt their strategies to protect gender equality progress amid rising resistance to DEI and gender-sensitive policies. One key approach is localizing gender programs — currently, only 1.2% of global gender aid goes directly to women-led organizations, despite these groups leading 73% of gender-focused initiatives in Africa (The World Economic Forum, 2024). Increasing direct funding to grassroots movements can help to sustain progress even if international funding declines. Another strategy is framing gender equality as an economic imperative. Studies show that closing gender gaps in labor markets could increase global GDP by US$12 trillion (The World Economic Forum, 2024). Countries like Sweden (82% female workforce participation) experience higher GDP per capita, reinforcing that gender equality drives economic growth (The World Economic Forum, 2024). At the advocacy level, development organizations must diversify funding sources. The European Union pledged €300 million for gender-focused development programs in 2024, and philanthropic actors (e.g., the Gates Foundation) increased gender-related funding by 35% in response to past U.S. policy shifts (Birchall, 2020). Finally, integrating gender sensitivity into climate action, digital transformation, and infrastructure projects allows organizations to embed gender equity into broader initiatives, making them less vulnerable to direct attacks on DEI.”
“From my point of view, reframing gender equality in locally acceptable terms looks more crucial in the current context. It would be better to stick to values recognized globally, such as economic stability, family well-being, and community resilience. Strengthening local community engagement around family livelihoods and women-led organizations should be at the forefront of implementing such programs.”
“As in any other emergency, the first thing to do is to reach out to the immediate surrounding and search for approaches and funding modalities that fit the local context. The ongoing geopolitical shifts and economic crises are going to affect countries and societies in different ways. Countries that at one point in time were peers might end up at the opposite side of the spectrum, either because of different traditions or because of different geopolitical positioning. Development workers will have to be able to learn more and learn fast as the context will change in this fast-forward mode. At the same time, we will have to be able to support women and girls whose bare existence is under constant threat. It is going to be a tough fight, but it is the one worth fighting!”
DevelopmentAid: With U.S. foreign aid programs under review and with no clear prospect of continuity, what are the potential consequences for women’s health, education, and economic opportunities in developing countries and how can other global actors step in?
“If U.S. foreign aid programs reduce funding for gender-related initiatives, the consequences could be severe for women’s health, education, and economic independence. Past funding cuts under Trump’s Mexico City Policy led to 2 million unintended pregnancies, 70,000 maternal deaths, and a 40% decline in contraceptive access across low-income countries (Birchall, 2020a). If reinstated, similar policies could jeopardize Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) programs in 37 developing nations, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia (Birchall, 2020b). In the education sector, the U.S. supports 5 million girls’ schooling programs globally. A funding reduction could worsen dropout rates, particularly in regions where only 39.8% of women participate in the labor force (e.g., India) (The World Economic Forum, 2024). A 10% reduction in girls’ secondary school enrollment in Latin America has been linked to economic crises (Birchall, 2020a). In economic terms, U.S.-funded microfinance programs benefit 7.8 million women entrepreneurs worldwide. If these were cut, women-owned businesses could lose US$1.2 billion in loans, reducing their financial independence (Birchall, 2020). The World Economic Forum report (2024) estimates that if current trends persist, closing the economic gender gap will take 152 years. Any setbacks in gender-focused aid will further extend this timeline, making global cooperation essential. To mitigate these risks, the European Union has increased gender-focused foreign aid by €1.5 billion (2025-2030), and Canada and Sweden have expanded their gender-responsive aid by 35% (The World Economic Forum, 2024). Additionally, the Gates Foundation invested US$560 million in 2023 to fill funding gaps in women’s health and economic empowerment (Birchall, 2020).”
“It is crystal clear that the suspension of funding by the Trump presidency has profound implications for the health, economic, and education sectors. The reduction of funding has likely jeopardized Afghanistan’s public health system and critical services for women. The cessation of aid has led to the closure of education programs, resulting in a lack of educational opportunities. Additionally, economic instability is a negative contributing factor that impacts women and girls, restricting their access to economic opportunities.”
As of 2024, the global gender pay gap means that women earn approximately 83 cents for every dollar earned by men. The international community’s efforts should focus on promoting policies that support women’s access to high-paying industries through education and skills training. For experts wanting to bring their expertise and contribution to achieve this goal, there are around 120 job openings in the gender sector available on the DevelopmentAid platform. Become an Individual Professional Members and access the opportunities today. Moreover, this membership offers access to tenders and grants for individuals, salary trends, and much more.
