With smart filtering for Who Can Fund Me?  Database, you can search for funders based on:

Data Snapshots

Our collective power, wisdom, and commitment have no boundaries, but our bank accounts do.

Data snapshots are based on the responses of 1,174 feminist, women’s rights, LGBTQI+, and allied organizations (hereafter referred to as “feminist and women's rights organizations”) from 128 countries to the Where is the Money for Feminist Organizing? survey. These snapshots reflect experiences from 2021–2023, analyzed in the context of defunding trends unfolding in 2024–2025.

Here’s what you need to know about the current state of resourcing for feminist organizing.

Explore Data Snapshots

These 21 Women Human Rights Defenders (WHRDs) worked as journalists and more widely in the media sector in Mexico, Colombia, Fiji, Libya, Nepal, United States, Nicaragua, Philippines, Russia, Germany, France, Afghanistan, and the United Kingdom. 17 of them were murdered and in one case the cause of death is still unclear. On this World Press Freedom Day, please join us in commemorating the life and work of these women by sharing the images below with your colleagues, friends and networks using the hashtags #WPFD2016 and #WHRDs.

The contributions of these women were celebrated and honoured in our Tribute to Women Human Rights Defenders (WHRDs) Who Are No Longer With Us.

Please click on each image below to see a larger version and download as a file

See Our 2015 WHRD Tribute

Over eight years, we did four global surveys and built a research methodology.

In 2013, we published three global reports. These reports confirm that women’s rights organizations are doing the heavy lifting to advance women’s rights and gender equality by using diverse, creative and long-term strategies, all while being underfunded.

Our 2010 global survey showed that the collective income of 740 women’s organizations around the world totaled only USD 104 million. Compare this with Greenpeace International, one organization with a 2010 budget of USD 310 million1. Imagine the impact these groups could have if they were able to access all the financial resources they need and more?

AWID’s WITM research has catalyzed increased funding for women’s rights organizing. WITM research was a driving force behind the Catapult crowdfunding platform, which has raised USD 6.5 million for women’s rights. The Dutch Government cited WITM research as a reason for its unprecedented MDG 3 Fund of EU 82 million. WITM research has also led to the creation of several new funds: FRIDA – The Young Feminist Fund, the Indigenous Women’s Fund, Fundo Elas, the Mediterranean Women’s Fund and the Rita Fund.

Funding trends analyses

While the WITM research has shed important light on the global funding landscape, AWID and partners have identified the need to dig deeper, to analyze funding trends by region, population and issue. In response, organizations are now using AWID’s WITM research methodology to do their own funding trends analyses. For example, in November 2013, Kosova Women’s Network and Alter Habitus – Institute for Studies in Society and Culture published Where is the Money for Women’s Rights? A Kosovo Case Study.

At the same time, AWID continues to collaborate with partners in Where is the Money for Indigenous Women’s Rights (with International Indigenous Women’s Forum and International Funders for Indigenous Peoples) and our upcoming Where is the Money for Women’s Rights in Brazil? (with Fundo Elas).

Several organizations have also conducted their own independent funding trends research, deepening their understanding of the funding landscape and politics behind it. For example, the South Asian Women’s Fund was inspired by AWID’s WITM research to conduct funding trends reports for each country in South Asia, as well as a regional overview. Other examples of research outside of AWID include the collaboration between Open Society Foundations, Mama Cash, and the Red Umbrella Fund to produce the report Funding for Sex Workers Rights, and the first-ever survey on trans* and intersex funding by Global Action for Trans* Equality and American Jewish World Service.

Definition

There are varied conceptualizations about the commons notes activist and scholar Soma Kishore Parthasarathy.

Conventionally, they are understood as natural resources intended for use by those who depend on their use. However, the concept of the commons has expanded to include the resources of knowledge, heritage, culture, virtual spaces, and even climate. It pre-dates the individual property regime and provided the basis for organization of society. Definitions given by government entities limit its scope to land and material resources.

The concept of the commons rests on the cultural practice of sharing livelihood spaces and resources as nature’s gift, for the common good, and for the sustainability of the common.

Context

Under increasing threat, nations and market forces continue to colonize, exploit and occupy humanity’s commons.

In some favourable contexts, the ‘commons’ have the potential to enable women, especially economically oppressed women, to have autonomy in how they are able to negotiate their multiple needs and aspirations.

Feminist perspective

Patriarchy is reinforced when women and other oppressed genders are denied access and control of the commons.

Therefore, a feminist economy seeks to restore the legitimate rights of communities to these common resources. This autonomy is enabling them to sustain themselves; while evolving more egalitarian systems of governance and use of such resources. A feminist economy acknowledges women’s roles and provides equal opportunities for decision-making, i.e. women as equal claimants to these resources.

Learn more about this proposition

• Reclaiming the Commons for Gender and Economic Justice: Struggles and Movements in India is an interview to scholar Soma Kishore Parthasarathy on how women in rural India are contesting this reality by proposing a shared management of common resources.
• Feminism And The Politics Of The Commons by Silvia Federici looks at the politics of the commons from a feminist standpoint shaped by the struggle against sexual discrimination and reproductive work, to clarify the conditions under which the principle of the common/s can become the foundation of an anti-capitalist program.

Our new research paper The Devil is in the Details addresses knowledge gaps around religious fundamentalisms within the development sector, and aims to improve understanding of how they constrain development and women’s rights in particular. It provides recommendations for ways development actors can avoid inadvertently strengthening and instead challenge fundamentalisms. [CTA download link: Read the full paper]

Seven pointers to consider

There has been a growth in the power and influence of religious fundamentalist actors globally.

The Devil is in the Details details the grave human rights violations, and violations of women’s rights in particular, caused by state-sponsored fundamentalism, as well as by fundamentalist non-state actors such as militias, religious community organizations, and individuals. Fundamentalist reinforcement of regressive, patriarchal social norms are leading to the rise of violence against women, girls, and women human rights defenders (WHRDs). The paper highlights these key insights for addressing the problem:

• [icon] Religious fundamentalisms are gaining ground within communities
• [icon] Political systems
• [icon] International arenas with devastating effects for ordinary people, women in particular.

There is an urgent need to act for development actors.

Development actors are in a position to take a strong role in this. The collective capacity of development actors to recognize and collaboratively address religious fundamentalisms is vital for advancing social, economic, and gender justice and the human rights of all people in sustainable development. It is vital to promote intersectional feminist understandings of power and privilege, and to apply these to questions of religion and culture. Women’s organizations already have knowledge and strategies to counter fundamentalisms development actors should build on this, and invest in cross-issue coalitions to help them reach new heights.

AWID spent close to two years working to identify a Forum location in the Asia Pacific region (the Forum location rotates regions).

Building on initial desk research and consultations with allies that led us to rule out many other options in the region, we organized a thorough round of site visits to Nepal, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Indonesia and (later) Taiwan. 

Each site visit included not just scoping the logistical infrastructure but meeting with local feminist groups and activists to better understand the context, and their sense of potential opportunities and risks of an AWID forum in their context.

In our site visits, we found incredibly vibrant, diverse local feminist movements.

They often expressed conflicted feelings about the opportunities and risk that the visibility of an event like the Forum could bring to them. In one, during the first 30 minutes of our meeting we heard unanimously from the activists gathered that an AWID Forum would be subject to huge backlash, that LGBTQ rights were a particular political hot-button and that fundamentalist groups would turn out in full force to interrupt the event. When our response was “ok, then you don’t feel it’s a good idea”, again the unanimous response was “of course it is, we want to change the narrative!”.

It was difficult to hear and see in some of these places how many feminist activists wanted to leverage the opportunity of a visible big event and were prepared to face the local risks; but our considerations as hosts of close to 2,000 people from around the world impose a different calculation of risk and feasibility.

We also grappled with questions of what it means to organize a feminist forum that is aligned to principles around inclusion, reciprocity and self-determination, when state policy and practice is usually directly counter to that (although officials in the ministries of Tourism work very hard to smooth that over).

We weighed considerations of infrastructure, with potential opportunity to tip momentum on some national level feminist agendas, and national political context.

In many of these places, monitoring the context felt like an exercise on a pendulum that could swing from open and safe for feminist debates in one moment to stark repression and xenophobia the next, sacrificing feminist priorities as political bargaining chips to pacify right wing, anti-rights forces.

The process has been a sobering reflection on the incredibly challenging context for women’s rights and gender justice activism globally.

Our challenges in Asia Pacific led us to consider: would it be easier if we moved the Forum to a different region? Yet today, we would not be able to organize an AWID Forum in Istanbul as we did in 2012; nor would we be able to do one in Brazil as we did in 2016.

With all of this complexity, AWID selected Taipei as the Forum location because:

• It offers a moderate degree of stability and safety for the diversity of Forum participants we will convene.
• it also has strong logistical capacities, and is accessible for many travellers (with a facilitated e-visa process for international conferences).
• The local feminist movement is welcoming of the Forum and keen to engage with feminists from across the globe.

In organizing the AWID Forum, we are trying to build and hold space as best we can for the diverse expressions of solidarity, outrage, hope and inspiration that are at the core of feminist movements.

At this moment, we see Taipei as the location in the Asia Pacific region that will best allow us to build that safe and rebelious space for our global feminist community.

The fact is, there is no ideal location in today’s world for a Forum that centers Feminist Realities. Wherever we go, we must build that space together!