FfD4 Falls Short on Feminist Financing Goals, But Global South Advocates Push Back

The 4th International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4), held in Seville, Spain, has been sharply criticized for failing to deliver on gender equality and the feminist agenda. 

Feminist leaders and civil society actors say the meeting fell far short of reforming the international financial architecture and missed the opportunity to address key challenges impeding progress towards the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

At a parallel session hosted by SHE & Rights—Sexual Health with Equity & Rights—advocates emphasized how the outcomes of FfD4 did little to influence decisions on taxation, debt relief, trade, aid, and public financing, all of which disproportionately affect women, girls, young people, and gender-diverse groups.

“FfD4 failed to restructure the global economy and financial systems to serve all equitably. Women and girls were viewed as economic tools rather than as individuals with fundamental rights,” said Shobha Shukla, SHE & Rights Coordinator. “There was no genuine commitment to addressing systemic gender injustices, labour rights, or violence in workplaces.”

Shobha will be the only lead discussant for SDG 3 at the upcoming UN High-Level Political Forum (HLPF 2025), where these themes will continue to take centre stage.

The SHE & Rights session, “Did FfD4 Deliver on Gender Equality and the Feminist Agenda?”, was convened ahead of both HLPF 2025 and the 13th International AIDS Society Conference on HIV Science (IAS 2025). 

It was co-hosted by organizations including the International Conference on Family Planning (ICFP 2025), IPPF, ARROW, WGNRR, and the Asia Pacific Media Alliance for Health and Development (APCAT Media), among others.

The second edition of the SHE & Rights Media Awards was also launched during the session. Journalists covering feminist issues in Africa and the Asia Pacific are encouraged to apply (www.bit.ly/sheandrights2025). First prize winners will attend ICFP 2025 in Colombia.

Despite these ongoing efforts, participants expressed deep frustration with FfD4. Many argued that the final outcome document represented a step backward compared to the Addis Ababa Action Agenda (2015), the Doha Declaration (2008), and even the original Monterrey Consensus (2002). 

“It compromised on long-standing global commitments, including ICPD 1994 and the Beijing Platform for Action,” said Sai Jyothirmai Racherla of ARROW.

For Mabel Bianco, a physician-activist and founder of FEIM (Argentina), the conference’s failure was personal. “The so-called compromise text doesn’t even mention sexual and reproductive health. Without these rights, how can we achieve the SDGs?” she asked.

Worse still, participants revealed that the FfD4 outcome document had been finalized weeks before the event even began. “The negotiation process was opaque, exclusionary, and driven by Global North countries that actively blocked progress on debt relief, aid architecture, and gender equality,” said Lidy Nacpil of the Asian People’s Movement on Debt and Development (APMDD).

Civil society organizations also faced serious restrictions in Seville. “From surveillance and censorship to being physically segregated from government delegates, the shrinking space for civil society at FfD4 mirrored global power disparities,” said Zainab Shumail of the Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD). Even handheld fans with slogans like “Debt Kills Development” were confiscated.

Despite this, speakers emphasized that the feminist movement remains undeterred. “We didn’t lose. We only lose if we stop fighting,” said Bianco.

Several participants highlighted the disconnect between stated commitments to peace and rising military spending. “During FfD4, NATO nations pledged to increase defense budgets by 5%, even as they refused to endorse debt cancellation for the Global South,” said Swetha Sridhar of Fos Feminista. “These decisions pull funding away from human rights, health, and gender equality.”

Activists underscored the urgent need to reform global financial governance, not just in terms of policy but power. “Debt justice, climate justice, and gender justice are inseparable. The Global North owes reparations. Feminist financing is not charity—it’s justice,” said Racherla.

The road ahead is clear, if steep. “We will keep pushing for a decolonial, intersectional, and people-centered economic model—one that values care, redistribution, and accountability,” concluded Racherla. “True financing for development must guarantee flexible, inclusive, and equitable funding. Anything less fails us all.”