Written submission to International Development Committee inquiry: Extreme Poverty and the Sustainable Development Goals

Evidence submitted by ActionAid UK

18 February 2022

How effectively do the FCDO’s strategy, policies and programmes address the needs of women and girls in extreme poverty?

The context

Extreme poverty is a result of multiple and interlinking factors – human rights violations and discrimination, climate change, conflict, economic inequality and, ultimately, political choices and failures. Gender inequality is a key part of this context and without achieving gender equality, we will not eradicate extreme poverty. The Covid-19 pandemic has laid bare and exacerbated these entrenched and systemic inequalities, worsening and entrenching extreme poverty. It is women and girls who are bearing the brunt of the social, political and economic consequences of the Covid crisis. UN Women and the World Bank recently explored the relationship between poverty and gender in this context[1]. They estimated that children make up 30% of the world’s population but comprise 50% of the extreme poor. Since children rarely live alone, this means that they and their caregivers (more often women than men) are disproportionately represented among the extreme poor. While more data is needed to effectively understand poverty and gender[2], the UN estimates that Covid will push 47 million women and girls into extreme poverty[3]. An estimated 740 million women are employed in the informal economy (more than two-thirds of female employment in countries in the Global South) without sick leave and unemployment benefits. As a result of Covid, they risk losing their jobs, further deepening existing gender poverty gaps.[4] All types of violence against women and girls have increased and girls are struggling to return to school due to the impact of Covid-19, instead facing child marriage and increased burdens of unpaid care work.[5] The pandemic is also exacerbating instability[6] and existing humanitarian crises, including those caused by conflict and climate change – creating more need. At the same time, disruptions to food supply chains caused by pandemic measures have resulted in rises in food prices around the world. Between February and November 2020 the global average price for rice has increased by 9.2%, for potatoes by 10%, for chicken by 7.4% and for meat of cattle by 8.3%[7]

Despite these multiple challenges, women's rights organisations (WROs), women-led organisations (WLOs)[8] and feminist thinkers and activists are providing essential and viable alternative propositions for recovery that can sustainably address the systemic inequalities and extreme poverty the pandemic has exposed and exacerbated[9]. With Covid pushing more women and girls into extreme poverty, now is the time to put these solutions at the heart of our recovery from the pandemic.

Prioritising gender equality

Ending extreme poverty is intrinsically linked to the realisation of human rights and the achievement of gender equality. In 2015, when governments adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – known as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) - there was an understanding of the interlinkages between the SDGs, with all goals needing to be met if we were to eradicate extreme poverty and ‘leave no-one behind’. The latter principle is core to the SDGs framework and is a principle that the UK Government itself had championed. Seven years on, and the world faces an unprecedented number of inter-connected crises – including Covid-19, climate change, conflict and rising inequality. Women and girls are impacted disproportionately by these challenges yet continue to lead responses to them, finding innovative and transformative solutions that meet the needs of the most marginalised women and girls. But progress is stalling, particularly against SDG 5 on gender equality. SDG 5 is inextricably linked to SDG 1, with gender equality being the linchpin to realising SDG1; eradicating extreme poverty and securing human rights, for all. It is disappointing then that, in its Integrated Review, the UK Government’s strategic priorities have been set with little to no prioritsation of gender equality.

To date, the UK Government’s work on gender equality has been guided by the 2018-2030 Strategic Vision for Gender Equality (SVGE), which the Government has committed to updating since the creation of the FCDO. The SVGE recognises that the SDGs - including SDG1 (ending poverty in all its forms) will not be met without prioritising gender equality and calls for a ‘greater focus on ensuring no girl or woman is left behind’. The SVGE also commits to ‘stepping up’ in key areas such as conflict and crises and calls for reform of the humanitarian system. The UK’s current National Action Plan (NAP) on Women, Peace and Security (WPS) is a key ‘delivery arm’ of the SVGE. As an important pillar for the UK’s commitment to advancing gender equality, the SVGE must be at the centre of policy-making across the FCDO, including in diplomatic missions and in humanitarian work, to create a step change from piecemeal disbursement and programming on gender equality.

At the same time, the UK has made multiple commitments related to meeting the needs of women and girls – including those most in need - in crises, including through the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit, the Grand Bargain (recently ‘updated’ in 2021) and the 2018 G7 Whistler Declaration on Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women and Girls in Humanitarian Action. The former Department for International Development published its Humanitarian Reform Policy in 2017, which outlined its intention to maintain the UK’s commitment to international Humanitarian Principles; support the empowerment of girls and women, and ‘spearheading’ attention to Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG). The UK has also made a number of commitments under the Call to Action on Protection from Gender Based Violence (GBV) in Emergencies and is a signatory to the WPS-Humanitarian Action Compact. In its forthcoming International Development Strategy, it is vital that the UK Government reaffirms its commitment to these processes. It is essential that these commitments are both implemented, and built upon, for real change to the lives of women and girls, including those living in extreme poverty.

Reversing cuts to UK ODA

The UK has consistently positioned itself as a ‘development superpower’ and a ‘global leader’ in the delivery of humanitarian assistance, as well as championing the principle of ‘leaving no-one behind’. In 2015, it became the first and only country in the world to enshrine in law the UN-recommended target of spending 0.7% of Gross National Income (GNI) on Official Development Assistance (ODA). At the same time, it has supported international humanitarian law and humanitarian principles.

Yet, as Covid pushes more people into extreme poverty, the Government has implemented devastating cuts to ODA including to programmes in countries experiencing some of the world’s most severe crises, which particularly impact women and girls. Reducing ODA at this time is short-sighted and goes against the principle of ‘leaving no-one behind’– the cuts are likely to have a further destabilising effect in crisis settings, create more need and impact on the ability of communities to ‘build back better’ from Covid. 

In recent months, the Foreign Secretary has made a welcome announcement that ODA cuts to gender equality and humanitarian assistance will be reversed. It is not clear how this ODA will be reinstated and what this means for other programming[10]. Nor is it clear what the amount of ODA pre-cuts was. If we are to end extreme poverty and leave no-one behind, it is vital that the UK Government reverses cuts to ODA and returns to the UK’s legal commitment to spend 0.7% of GNI on ODA. 

Shifting power and resources to women’s rights actors

Strong partnerships with WROs, WLOs and girl-led groups, are integral if we are to end extreme poverty and deliver gender equality as set out in SDG 5. The Covid-19 crisis has forced a recognition of the central role played by these organisations as ‘first responders’, with WROs and WLOs often best placed to first access and then understand and address the needs of women and girls, including those most marginalised.

In ActionAid’s experience, funding to WROs and WLOs is essential for the delivery of women and girls’ rights, including for those living in extreme poverty. It is the most transformational, cost-effective and empowering approach for people and economies. WROs and WLOs are grounded in communities with longstanding and trusting relationships and without them it would be impossible to identify and deliver the life-saving services women and girls need, including in crises. The UK Government themselves note in their commitment to tackling violence against women and girls (VAWG) that meaningful programming requires development and humanitarian funding to be directly channelled to WROs and WLOs.[11] Yet, the leadership of women is consistently undervalued - lacking political and financial support.[12]

Humanitarian response

A reformed humanitarian system – which focuses on shifting power to national and local responders and on women’s leadership – is vital to ensuring that resources are used most effectively to tackle extreme poverty and respect rights. But it is also vital that a reformed humanitarian system is backed up by political support. To that end, the UK Government’s forthcoming International Development Strategy must reaffirm the UK’s commitment to international humanitarian law and humanitarian principles and to investment in expertise to support both preparedness and immediate response to acute and protracted crises. It is also essential that the Conflict Strategic Framework and the Humanitarian Framework speak to the rights of women and girls, including those most in need. The International Development Strategy is an opportunity to recommit to ‘leave no-one behind’ and this applies to the humanitarian context too. Crucially, the UK must ensure that humanitarian response is centred on reaching those must in need as opposed to the UK’s national security, political or military agendas.

As a signatory to the Grand Bargain, the UK has supported radical reform of the humanitarian system. Emergencies magnify existing inequalities and extreme poverty, with long-lasting and detrimental impact on women and their rights. In these circumstances, women are more likely to experience an increase in violence, take on more unpaid care responsibilities, and experience limited social protection, with underfunded essential services. This is particularly damaging for women already facing multiple forms of discrimination. Despite this, women and girls and their organisations are often best placed to understand and address the needs of women and girls as they hold invaluable knowledge of their communities. Nevertheless, women and girls are also consistently excluded from decision-making spaces and humanitarian funding remains largely inaccessible. The UK must remain committed to delivering on its localisation agenda and directing aid to WROs and WLOs as a means towards sustainable and resilient humanitarian action, including for the most marginalised. This means:

-          Programme responses need to analyse and address how gender inequality intersects with other forms of discrimination.

-          Intersectional analysis – informed by quality data disaggregation – should be undertaken in humanitarian action to understand how different forms of exclusion and discrimination can be intensified for some groups, in order for humanitarian response to reach and be effective for the community. 

-          Increased commitment to promoting women’s leadership and protecting women’s rights. This means working in a coordinated way and ensuring that women have a meaningful voice in decisions on funding, modalities of operation, capacity strengthening efforts and measuring success. 

The FCDO should recognise the opportunity of working with local WROs and WLOs towards integrated work along the humanitarian and development nexus. The NAP on WPS, speaks directly to this nexus and acknowledges the importance of contextual knowledge. It underscores that WRO/WLOs are critical partners who need an enabling environment to participate and lead in peace and resilience building. Moreover, WROs and WLOs can be catalysts for long-lasting and transformational change – by understanding the root causes of inequalities and extreme poverty they can pursue solutions to tackle them. By directing ODA to national and local organisations – especially WROs and WLOs – the FCDO ensures that programmes are locally legitimate, sustainable and help to build resilient communities and economies.

The International Development Strategy should also aim to ensure humanitarian funds arrive with national and local responders quickly, avoiding bureaucratic blockages. It is imperative that humanitarian funding be made more agile and flexible – when funding is delayed, those in extreme need are not assisted and lives are lost. The UK must also use its influence to ensure humanitarian actors have access to conflict-affected zones.

Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG)

VAWG remains one of the most widespread and persistent human rights violations. Not only are women and girls living in extreme poverty more at risk of violence but violence is a contributing factor to poverty. Again, VAWG has been exacerbated and made more visible by Covid-19[13]. Violence has an impact on every aspect of women’s and girls’ lives - their physical and mental health, their education, their ability to work and ultimately, to reach their full potential. If we are to eradicate extreme poverty and recover from the pandemic and other global crises, women and girls must be free from violence.

An increase in poverty [14] shows that job insecurity puts women in a precarious position, making them more prone to violence and hampering their ability to leave a violent partner. Evidence also shows that women who experience domestic violence or intimate partner violence, are employed in higher numbers in casual and part-time work (including within the informal economy), and their earnings are up to 60 per cent lower, compared to women who do not experience such violence. Women already in informal jobs facing income loss and job insecurity due to the pandemic may also face an increased risk of violence and abuse. The unpaid care work burden, combined with other challenges, such as climate change, conflict and economic instability, also leads to women’s increased exposure to sexual exploitation, child marriage and other forms of violence. With sparser resources and more difficulty accessing water, food, firewood and medicines, women and girls will have to travel long distances and be at greater risk of harassment and violence[15].

Eradicating VAWG is a key part of ending extreme poverty and the UK can play a valuable global role in this. Its continued commitment to tackling VAWG - such as the ground-breaking ‘What Works To Prevent Violence’ programme - is commendable. What Works II will present a critical opportunity to build on the existing evidence base in a way that is accessible to southern-based practitioners as well as the international development community, and to elevate and amplify the knowledge and expertise of southern-based WROs and WLOs working to tackle VAWG.

Last year, the FCDO also announced £20 million in new funding for sexual violence in conflict and vowed to establish a ‘Global Agreement’ to condemn the use of sexual violence as a ‘weapon of war’. We welcome any new funding to end VAWG – it is vital that violence is eliminated wherever it occurs. This is especially important in light of the cuts to the ODA budget which are likely to have a significant impact on women and girls. It is important to note, however, that VAWG is a continuum, of which sexual violence in conflict is a part. A holistic, life cycle approach to VAWG must be taken, including in conflict settings and other crises. It is also important that the UK addresses sexual violence in conflict as part of its work on women, peace and security more broadly.  On the UK’s plans for a Global Agreement, we are mindful that there are already numerous international processes and conventions which aim to end VAWG in conflict - what is important is that these existing processes are implemented and funded adequately.

Women’s economic rights

Eradicating extreme poverty requires a fundamental and feminist overhaul of the economic system. Despite having the right to participate in economic life without discrimination, patriarchal norms underpinning state, social and household dynamics block women and girls from doing so. Women and girls do the vast majority of unpaid care and domestic work and they are overrepresented in poorly paid and precarious work. Covid-19 has exacerbated these long-standing injustices.

Informal economy

Many countries in the Global South have vast informal sectors which have been deeply affected by the pandemic. Women are overrepresented in these sectors; holding the majority of the lowest paid, most insecure, informal and precarious jobs[16]. These jobs often lack any form of social protection, workers rights, and have limited opportunities to unionise, falling far short of the standards of decent work as defined by the ILO. As a result of the pandemic, women workers found it more difficult to work due to childcare responsibilities as schools and childcare centres were closed during lockdowns.

If we are to end extreme poverty and ensure women’s economic rights are fulfilled, it is vital that in planning post-Covid economic recovery, the UK Government considers the informal sector and women’s over-representation within this sector. This means the FCDO should conduct a gender-responsive analysis of the experiences and needs in the communities in which they are operating, including the prevalence of informal work, the fiscal policy space of the respective Government to enact social protection measures or bolster public services, and the existence of social protection measures, so that UK response addresses the diversified needs of a country’s whole population. Although the FCDO should aim to support governments to manage and fund their own, universal social protection systems, initial, evidence-based support from the FCDO can help to kickstart the process towards this.

Unpaid care and gender-responsive public services

Covid-19 has highlighted the importance of public services and of women’s role as the main givers of unpaid care and domestic work. Women undertake over 76 per cent of all unpaid care work globally – with the burden greatest in contexts of poverty and extreme poverty, where public services are lacking or inadequate[17]. This constrains the time that women have to secure work, engage in education, training, or community decision-making. In 2019, the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimated that it would take 209 years to close the gender gap in time spent on unpaid care work[18].

As long argued by women’s rights advocates and recognised in SDG target 5.4, the provision of gender responsive public services is vital for women’s unequal care load to be reduced and redistributed to the state. To be gender-responsive, public services – including health systems, water and sanitation, early childcare and education – should be universally accessible, available, appropriate and adaptable[19]. This means they should be designed and delivered in consultation with women, recognising they are not a homogenous group and have both distinct needs and face multiple forms of discrimination.

Provision of gender responsive public services is vital to addressing extreme poverty and ending gender inequality. Yet for decades, austerity policies advocated by institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank has meant that public services in the Global South have been chronically underfunded, leaving many countries completely unprepared for the Covid pandemic. The WHO recommends that governments spend $86 per person per year on health services. Yet Uganda spends just $6 and Malawi spends just $8[20]. Austerity is not necessary and there are a number of alternative policy options, which could be better used for meeting the needs of those living in extreme poverty. These include progressive taxation; eliminating illicit financial flows; expanding social security and reallocating public spending (for example, from military spending)[21]. Beyond the donor conditionalities and policy advice itself, a key factor affecting government revenue and spending is debt. The Covid crisis hit at a time when countries were already spending increasing shares of their government revenue on debt repayments[22]. Cancelling debt payments is the fastest way to keep money in countries and free up resources to tackle extreme poverty and the urgent and long-term impacts of Covid. Analysis from ActionAid and Jubilee Debt Campaign estimated how much extra finance countries would have had in 2019 if their debt servicing was reduced to the acceptable threshold of 12% of government revenues. Bangladesh and Ghana, for example, would each have had over $5 billion to invest in public services every year and Kenya would have had over $4 billion a year in extra revenue. These sums would be transformative if invested in tackling extreme poverty and provision of public services[23].

Gender-just trade

Trade can play an important role in addressing extreme poverty through job creation and supporting the development of economic strategies and domestic markets. However, the rise of trade liberalisation globally has created both winners and losers. This is because trade liberalisation leads to major shifts that have multiple economic and social impacts, particularly for the most marginalised communities. These shifts have the potential to both destroy and reformulate existing livelihoods, market patterns and access to basic services such as health and education[24].

Because of unequal trading relationships between the Global North and the Global South, women in the Global South are more likely to bear the brunt of the negative impacts of free trade. For example, Southern countries often lack access to patents, technology and general support to build domestic economies on the basis of high value-added activities. Instead, they must join global trade at the bottom of supply chains, competing against each other by offering the lowest production price possible. This can only be possible by reducing labour costs, and as such, at the bottom of global supply chains are insecure, low-wage jobs – predominantly held by women.

The UK’s position on trade and women’s rights is yet to be set out through a clear, comprehensive UK trade strategy in a post-Brexit and Covid-19 recovery context. The Conservative Party manifesto indicates, however, that the UK’s future trading arrangements would align with its international commitment to gender equality. The UK has also signed up to the 2017 WTO’s Joint Declaration on Trade and Women’s Economic Empowerment. The Declaration includes commitments on sharing best practices for conducting gender-based analysis of trade policies. Similarly, the SheTrades initiative, supported by the UK and others, aims to connect three million women entrepreneurs to global markets.

However, these commitments are predominantly concerned with removing the barriers women face to engaging in trade, notably by supporting women entrepreneurs, whilst ignoring the impacts of WTO rules on women as workers, producers, consumers, small-scale farmers, and as principal providers of unpaid care. As Covid-19 pushes more women and girls into extreme poverty, it is critical that leaders to move beyond the focus on women’s entrepreneurship and urgently address the broader impacts of current trade rules and deals on the rights of the most marginalised women.

In addition, trade deals forged with developing and emerging economies should not limit the fiscal policy space of governments – in particular by constraining their ability to decide how to meet the needs of those in extreme poverty or provision public services. This can be achieved by ensuring new trade deals do not include provisions which lock-in privatisation of vital services or that open up opportunities to foreign firms to bid for government procurement contracts. Such provisions can make it almost impossible for countries to reverse privatisation in future even if there is a public need – such as a global pandemic – or a democratic demand to do so. The UK should develop its own bespoke Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) framework, that ensures its trade ambitions do not undermine its international development priorities and existing obligations/commitments, and that it can speak with a single – and legitimate – voice on the global stage.

Recommendations to the UK Government

ActionAid UK recommends that the UK Government ensures that all of its efforts to eradicate extreme poverty are inextricably linked to fundamental human rights and the achievement of gender equality. To this end, we recommend the UK Government:

Prioritises the achievement of gender equality and leaves no woman or girl behind by:

-          Reaffirming, reflecting and delivering on the UK’s existing international and national commitments to gender equality within the International Development Strategy, and subsequent strategies in development.

-                                                                                                                             Ensuring the SVGE and NAP on Women, Peace and Security are incorporated as central to FCDO policymaking and incorporated into the forthcoming International Development Strategy.

-          Meaningfully consulting with WROs/WLOs based in the Global South and conducting rapid, meaningful gender-conflict data collection and analysis as a foundation of its approach to humanitarian crises and long-term development programming. 

Funds WROs and WLOs to support the most marginalised women and girls by:

-          Committing to returning to spending 0.7% of GNI on ODA – as is required by law.

-          Ringfencing 25% of the ODA that goes to local responders for WROs and WLOs and their self-defined priorities, ensuring access to flexible, predictable, multi-year funding that supports both core operational and technical costs.

-          Committing to increase the proportion of ODA dedicated to both VAWG prevention and response programmes to a minimum of 1%, in line with key policy frameworks, and include ring-fenced investment towards research and evidence including that generated by research institutions and practitioners in the Global South.

-          Piloting new, flexible funding models led by WROs and WLOs to support the leadership of women in longer-term strategic recovery and resilience (good practice includes the Global Fund for Women, Mama Cash, African Women’s Development Fund, and the Women’s Voice and Leadership Fund) and increase the share of funding allocated through localised funding mechanisms, including the Start Network.  

Ensures its humanitarian response meets the needs of the most marginalised women and girls by:

-          Ensuring programmes analyse and address how gender inequality intersects with other forms of discrimination.

-          Conducting intersectional analysis – informed by quality data disaggregation – to understand how different forms of exclusion and discrimination can be intensified for some groups

-          Ensuring that women and girls – in all their diversity - have a meaningful voice in decisions on funding, modalities of operation, capacity strengthening efforts and measuring success. 

-          Providing funding to national and local responders – including WROs and WLOs – rapidly and using its influence to ensure humanitarian actors can access conflict-affected settings.

Supports the long-term and transformational work of women and girl leaders by:

-          Tracking and publishing the proportion and amount of ODA that goes directly to WROs and WLOs under OECD DAC code 15170.

-          Ensuring that programmes – including VAWG programmes - are being informed and led by the expertise of a range of specialist WROs and WLOs in the Global South.

-          Supporting the representation and influence of women and national and local WROs across the whole development and humanitarian programme cycle and within decision-making structures, including coordination spaces such as the UN cluster system. 

Supports women’s economic rights and tackles the exploitation of women and girls by:

-          Centring economies around care, ensuring that fiscal, monetary, trade and investment policies prioritise the wellbeing of people and planet.  This will include dropping GDP and growth as sole measures of progress and develop additional transformative indicators based on well-being, human rights and tackling intersectional inequalities.  It will also require enshrining the right to full and universal access to gender responsive public services (GRPS), decent work standards, and participatory process that consult with civil society, feminist economists and the women’s movement.

-          Using its place on the IMF Board to advocate for an end to loan conditionalities and policy advice that promote austerity and funding cuts to vital public services and social protection, and instead avoid limiting fiscal space for states to build up and sustain robust public health and wider public services systems that will ensure global commitments to gender equality, women’s rights and wider development are met.

-          Ensuring a just transition that moves away from harmful agricultural, food and energy systems that addresses - rather than exacerbates - inequalities.  This includes climate policies that protect precarious communities from harmful development practices, securing access to ecologically sustainable food systems and shifting away from fossil fuel dependencies. Plans must be developed through inclusive participation of women, workers, farmers, communities and stakeholders, especially the most marginalised.

-          Building the conditions feminist economic alternatives that can genuinely deliver women’s rights to flourish by cancelling all debt servicing (even more needed in the current context where global southern debt continues to rise) and ensure that all governments have the fiscal policy space for enhanced spending on care and GRPS, along with investments in social protection.  This includes policy approaches to ensure tax-to-GDP ratios of at least 20%, redistributing wealth and maximising resources through progressive, gender-responsive taxation, tackling corporate tax avoidance, and ensure gender responsive human rights due diligence within business.

Develops a gender-just trade policy, which meets the needs of the most marginalised women and girls by:

-          Developing a pro-women, pro-human-rights trade policy which puts sustainability and respect for human rights as a primary objective, and which references international obligations on human rights, gender, the climate and sustainable development.

-          Improving the trade policy scrutiny process by mandating a ‘mid-point review’ in negotiations where impact assessment findings have to be considered and taken on board and by ensuring parliament can act as a final brake on any deal.

-          Developing the current scoping assessments into mandatory women’s-rights-focused impact assessments, drawing on best practice and gender-just methodologies, embedded into a wider impact assessment programme.

-          Commissioning an independent statutory body to conduct gender-just impact assessments.

-          Ensuring transparency of all impact assessment documents at all stages.

-          Taking active steps to ensure meaningful participation of women and marginalised groups in assessment exercises and ongoing dialogue, including representation on, or expert advice to the Strategic Trade Advisory Group STAG (and possible trade training for certain groups).

-          In agreements with countries in the Global South, considering providing resources for conducting independent impact assessments in these countries using their own expertise and methodology.

9