Critical review uncovers the co-optation of Gender and Development frameworks under authoritarian neoliberalism, suggesting avenues for feminist revitalization amid rising global inequality.
The 2020s have resulted in multiple substantive challenges to gender equality globally. Democratic backsliding and backlash to feminist gains have led to a rollback in progress towards gender equality. Global inequality has worsened and cost-of-living crises have heightened the burdens of social reproduction. In this challenging environment, neoliberal prescriptions for ‘development’ have remained entrenched within donor policies and international financial institutions. While the form of neoliberalism has shifted from a ‘progressive’ to an authoritarian model, programs aimed at achieving gender equality have continued to follow an instrumentalist logic, compatible with the expansion of global capital. ‘Smart economics’ continues to dominate; whereby a narrow version of women’s economic empowerment is promoted above all else. What then can a feminist response be to these current challenges? In the 1990s, ‘Gender and Development’ (GAD) emerged as a critical alternative to narrow financial approaches to women’s inclusion, emphasising the crucial role of power and gender relations, yet is this relevant for today? This Special Issue explores the way that GAD was co-opted and what this looks like in the late 2020s, and also how, if at all, it may be revitalised to meet the needs of our present dark times.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dulhunty et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: