Beyond the Grant: Redefining Sustainability for the Global Feminist Movement

As gender equality faces a renewed global onslaught, the institutions and grassroots organizations tasked with defending human rights find themselves at a critical juncture. For years, the term "sustainability" has been hollowed out, relegated to a bureaucratic checkbox in grant applications—a technical requirement rather than a lived reality. However, a new comprehensive analysis from the Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID), Where Is the Money for Feminist Organizing?, suggests that if the feminist future is to be secured, the entire global funding ecosystem must undergo a radical transformation.

The State of Feminist Resourcing: Key Facts

The current funding landscape is defined by a paradox: while feminist movements have achieved significant policy gains, their organizational foundations remain structurally precarious. The AWID report, which aggregates data from 1,174 organizations across 128 countries, highlights that the "sustainability" currently offered by donors is insufficient to withstand the rising tides of far-right authoritarianism and militarization.

The core of the crisis lies in the nature of the grants themselves. While advocacy has successfully pushed 71% of organizations to receive at least some core funding—a massive improvement from the 50% reported in 2010—the quality of that funding remains problematic. For the majority of recipients, core support is marginal, accounting for less than one-fifth of total annual budgets. Most critically, long-term stability is virtually non-existent; only 4% of organizations have access to grants exceeding three years. This leaves movements in a perpetual state of "scarcity-driven" strategy, where survival is prioritized over long-term impact.

A Chronology of Advocacy and Progress

The evolution of feminist funding can be traced through decades of movement-led pressure:

2010: AWID’s inaugural global survey revealed a dire landscape where half of all feminist organizations were excluded from core, flexible support.
2010–2020: A decade of relentless advocacy by feminist coalitions and the rise of autonomous women’s funds (such as the global network of feminist foundations) began to shift the donor narrative toward trust-based philanthropy.
2020–2024: The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent global economic volatility exposed the fragility of organizations reliant on short-term, restrictive project grants.
2025–2026: Recent research confirms that while movement-led funds have become the primary source of support for 55% of organizations, mainstream philanthropic and development institutions still largely rely on restrictive, short-term funding models that inhibit organizational growth.

Supporting Data: The Fragility of the Status Quo

The data presented in the latest AWID report paints a picture of a system that actively creates dependency. Approximately 29% of feminist organizations still receive zero core funding. Furthermore, 63% of respondents reported being forced to compromise their mission or pivot their political priorities simply to align with the changing agendas of their funders.

This is not merely a matter of administrative preference; it is a political issue. In a climate where 86% of organizations report that funding for their specific regional or thematic focus is already scarce, the ability to refuse a donor with "strings attached" is a luxury few can afford. This pressure has manifested in alarming ways, including donor-led efforts to censor language regarding Palestine solidarity, where organizations have faced implicit threats of defunding if they use terms such as "genocide" or "apartheid."

The Rise of Autonomous Resourcing

In response to these systemic failures, feminist movements are increasingly looking toward "autonomous resourcing"—a practice of gathering financial, material, and human resources that carry no conditions imposed by bilateral or multilateral funders.

Autonomous resourcing acts as a shield for political autonomy. It allows organizations to build reserves, invest in collective care, and sustain their work during periods of intense political backlash. The AWID research underscores that this is not just an alternative; it is a survival strategy. For many, it represents a commitment to self-determination, enabling movements to focus on their actual missions rather than "chasing the grant" to satisfy foreign donor metrics.

Official Perspectives: The Need for a "Just Transition"

The leadership at AWID argues that philanthropy must stop viewing itself as the savior and start acting as a partner in a "just transition." This implies a departure from traditional models of "financial inclusion" or "innovation" buzzwords. Instead, the call is for a fundamental restructuring of the global financial architecture.

"We need to be able to invest in our own feminist economies," the researchers note. "For decades, millions of dollars earmarked for gender equality have ultimately flowed into hotel chains, global consulting firms, and airlines, simply because funding rules prohibited those funds from being used to build feminist-owned infrastructure."

The proposed transition involves three pillars:

Defining Sustainability on Feminist Terms: Moving away from donor-defined KPIs to a model that measures the ability to sustain people, politics, and work over time.
Celebrating Existing Wins: Recognizing the infrastructure already built by feminist funds, which prioritize trust-based relationships and long-term wellbeing.
Dismantling Structural Barriers: Ending the prohibition on building financial reserves and allowing movements to develop their own revenue-generating enterprises, such as cooperative housing, agroecological food systems, and independent financial services.

Implications for the Future

The implications of failing to act are clear: a continued erosion of the feminist infrastructure that prevents further democratic backsliding. If movements are forced to remain in a state of chronic precarity, their capacity to resist authoritarianism and militarization is diminished.

Conversely, the potential for a properly resourced movement is vast. When feminist organizations are granted the freedom to build assets and infrastructure, they do not just "survive"—they transform societies. They create community wealth, foster climate justice, and build systems of care that serve as alternatives to the very structures that currently exclude them.

As the global community reflects on these findings, the message to those with access to wealth is unequivocal: the time for incremental change has passed. Philanthropy must move beyond the restrictive, paternalistic models of the past. The sustainability of feminist movements is not a financial condition to be calculated; it is a political commitment to be honored. The future of human rights, in an increasingly fragmented world, depends on resourcing the very movements that have the courage and imagination to build a more equitable world.