It is undoubtedly a heavy time for those of us working to advance gender equality, inclusion, social justice and progressive systems change. All of these words and concepts are now under attack.
At the Skoll World Forum in Oxford last week, there was a palpable air of resistance to these attacks. And yes, I acknowledge impact changemakers come together, there may be confirmation bias at work. But there is also a recognition that, despite the rhetoric from Washington, the fundamentals are unchanged.
As such, there was a resounding consensus that we can’t afford, nor want, to erase more than 20 years of field building for gender-lens investing just like that.
Remember the business case
For the last two decades, there has been a consistent drumbeat of research, evidence and data about why gender and inclusion is material to business, investing and economic systems – from enhanced GDP to better returns to impactful outcomes. All of these things still hold true whether you add the labels or not.
In fact, the cost of inaction is mounting. Not accounting for climate and social risks are increasingly exposing portfolios and bucking fiduciary responsibility, while also stunting opportunities, as institutions like Generation, UBS and MSCI point out.
Focus on fundamentals
Just as Covid-19 made the invisible care work of women more visible, banning words and decimating diversity programs is shining a light on the importance of gender inclusion. Those trying to destroy the work are actually strengthening the case for it.
Gender parity gaps, in politics, economics, health, finance and more, persist and stand to worsen with development support vanishing. The other side of the coin is that by 2030, women in the US will control $34 trillion in wealth; they are leading the charge in advancing inclusive climate solutions, and as investors, they are producing better returns.
Labels matter, action trumps
I have empathy and understanding for those trying to traverse legal challenges in the current moment, particularly given the negative ripple effects. Taking away the labels of gender, diversity, equity, climate may be necessary to fend off legal action. Fortunately, for the most part, the work and commitment to action isn’t lessening.
Still, there are many who continue to embody more intentional approaches.
Catalyst Fund, ATG Samata, Sweef Capital, Deetken Impact, BII, Acumen, Include Ventures, Skoll Foundation, Women Moving Millions, Invest for Better, We are Enough and so many other fund managers, investors and movement actors persist in their work to unlock more gender-smart capital.
Heads may be down, messaging may be tweaked, websites scrubbed, but the belief that gender is both a lens that cuts across asset classes, and those advancing gender as an intentional strategy in its own right holds steady.
Doing the work
I’m not naive – we have a long way to go. There are many examples and case studies of good practices and “best in class”: Acumen, 60DB, Criterion Institute, MEDA, Root Capital, 2X Global, Sagana, Value4Women, G-Search and GIIN have all been at the forefront of this work, paving the way for others. But like the broader field of impact investing, there is still more ground to cover in the world of gender-lens investing in terms of outcomes and how we understand and deliver sustained change on the ground.
In the face of attacks on gender and racial progress, on climate agendas, sustainable development and humanitarian work, there is resolve among impact-minded changemakers to continue leveraging capital for social change and gender equality. Some of those who were just riding the wave are already changing course.
Yet, out here on these rocky seas, there are more than enough steady boats – and some new, eager-to-learn canoes pulling up. All are committed and charting the way forward with gumption, resilience and resolve. This moment will sift talk from action. Doubling down on depth along with breadth of the work will enable the movement to reach the next horizon.
Sana Kapadia is chief catalyst at Heading for Change.
