By Elizabeth Dartnall, Diana Arango, Craig Harding and Avni Amin
After two decades of global investment, policy commitments, activism, and research, rates of violence remain shockingly high. Almost one in three or 840 million women worldwide will experience physical or sexual violence in their lifetime, mostly by an intimate partner. And one in fifteen or 263 million women will have experienced sexual violence by someone other than their partner.
Progress on reducing intimate partner violence has stalled, declining by just 0.2 percent a year in the last 20 years. At this pace, even a modest 20 percent reduction would take more than a century. Anything close to zero sits far beyond reach, which means that the SDG target 5.2 is not going to be achieved in 2030 or for a long time thereafter without urgent, sustained investment in evidence-based actions.
Violence begins early – 16 percent or 12.5 million ever-partnered adolescent girls will have experienced intimate partner violence in the past year alone before they reach their 20th birthday. Around 650 million girls and women alive today, one in five, were subjected to sexual violence as children.
While violence against women and violence against children occurs in all countries and regions, prevalence varies widely across settings. Risks increase in climate-induced, fragile and humanitarian contexts, including conflict, where economic insecurity, displacement and limited social support undermine prevention and response efforts. This variation shows that violence is not inevitable and that there are real opportunities for prevention.
National studies show that although costs vary, violence against women and children remains one of the biggest drains on national economies – comparable to the impact of malnutrition, road injuries or climate-related disasters. Estimates range from 0.47 per cent of GDP in Canada to 6.5 per cent in Morocco. Countries spend billions on health care, legal processes, policing and social services – resources that could instead support education, livelihoods and community development.
Yet the world’s most widespread forms of violence receive the least investment.
For violence against women, only 0.2 per cent of Official Development Assistance was dedicated to prevention in 2022, and with shrinking aid budgets – often with cuts falling hardest on gender equality – this share is likely to be even smaller today. The picture for children is similarly stark. In 2020, only about 0.72 per cent of total ODA was allocated to ending violence against children, which amounts to roughly USD 0.64 per child per year.
These are not obscure budget lines. They reflect global priorities. And they reveal a harsh truth: the violence affecting hundreds of millions of women and children is treated as an afterthought, not the urgent development, health, and human rights crisis that it is.
Women’s rights organisations – the lifeblood of advocacy, prevention, and survivor support – remain chronically underfunded and overstretched. Organisations working to protect children face similar constraints, despite the enormity of the task.
We know what works. But progress is stalling.
We are not short of knowledge or evidence on what works. Global frameworks such as the second edition of RESPECT women (to prevent violence against women) and INSPIRE (to end violence against children) clearly outline evidence-informed strategies. These frameworks show that prevention is possible – but only through evidence-based, sustained, multi-sectoral coordinated action at scale.
For example, a systematic review of reviews on how violence against women is addressed in health and multisectoral policies found that, of the 174 countries included, 75 per cent relied on stand-alone mass media campaigns for prevention – an approach that, according to the RESPECT framework, does not work. In contrast, the interventions shown to be effective – community mobilisation and group-based social norms education – appeared in only a quarter and a third of national policies.
We also have national strategies, high-level political commitments, and growing evidence from practice and research. A UN Women global assessment shows that 81 per cent of the 200 countries reviewed have multi-sectoral national action plans on violence against women, yet only 42 per cent include a dedicated budget line to implement them. And even where budgets exist, they are often far below what is required. Progress is stalling – and in some places reversing.
Consider Australia. The National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022–2032 provides a long-term, whole-of-government framework for prevention, early intervention, response and recovery. Despite this, recent rises in female intimate-partner homicides have caused national alarm. At the same time, a review of government funding found that, although investment in preventing violence against women did increase during the plan’s early phase, inconsistent budget reporting and the absence of an embedded fiscal strategy across the plan’s lifespan have created uncertainty about the total funding committed. Evaluations show promising outcomes in well-supported communities, but short-term funding cycles, fragmented coordination and persistent structural inequalities continue to undermine sustained progress.
Or take South Africa, where powerful advocacy led to one of the most comprehensive national plans globally: the National Strategic Plan on Gender-Based Violence and Femicide. GBVF has also been declared a national emergency. Whilst levels of femicide have fallen, the broader picture remains alarming: one in three South African women has experienced physical violence in her lifetime, and more than one in twenty faced physical or sexual violence in just the past year. Chronic underfunding, lack of prioritisation, governance gaps, and slow implementation have limited the plan’s impact and prevented the shift in safety it was designed to deliver.
Even Spain – often held up as a global leader on violence prevention – continues to face persistent and in some areas rising levels of violence. In 2023, the number of women recorded as victims of gender violence rose by 12.1%, and GREVIO has highlighted ongoing gaps in professional training, access to protection, and coordination across services. In addition to these challenges, Spain, alongside many countries, is experiencing a marked rise in backlash and gender-based disinformation. Together, these trends are testing political resolve and public support for sustained investment in prevention.
Nicaragua offers a powerful example of both progress and fragility. Ground-breaking research such as Candies in Hell, sustained activism by women’s rights movements, and major legal reforms – including the passage of Law 779 – were key levers in reducing intimate-partner violence over two decades. But these gains proved vulnerable. As political conditions shifted and government support for gender equality weakened, advances in women’s rights stalled and the momentum for violence reduction slowed. Nicaragua’s trajectory underscores that research, social movements and strong laws can drive real change — but only when backed by consistent, long-term government commitment. Sustainable progress requires all these elements working together.
These are not isolated examples. They reflect a broader, systemic problem. They signal that well-written plans fail without long-term investment. They signal that political commitments mean little without implementation and budget backing. And they signal that progress is fragile – vulnerable to inequality, austerity, authoritarianism, digital harms, and deepening polarisation.
Why is violence against women and children not going down?
We now have a clearer understanding of the factors that drive violence and growing evidence about the approaches that show promise when implemented well. The experiences of Nicaragua, Australia, South Africa and Spain point to the same pattern: progress emerges when strong laws, well-financed systems, active social movements, scaled up evidence-based prevention, multi-sectoral survivor-centred services, and sustained political will reinforce one another. But these elements rarely align at scale or over time, and we still lack robust evidence on how to deliver large-scale, sustainable prevention without unintended harm.
Preventing violence against women and against children requires long-term structural change: shifting deeply rooted social norms, addressing multiple layers of inequality, strengthening institutions and funding prevention and response services as part of the core mandate of state actors. It demands doing a lot, often, consistently, over a long period of time.
Yet political cycles reward short-term wins, not structural change. Funding remains fragmented and unpredictable. Technology is reshaping societies faster than regulation and research can adapt. And violence is still too often treated as an individual incident rather than the predictable outcome of unequal systems. This failure to recognise it as a core area contributing to economic and social wellbeing of all nations allows for its de-prioritisation.
What needs to shift? Five key actions to end violence
First, accountability and investment must match the scale of the problem. Governments produce plans, make pledges and sign global declarations, but without real financial commitments, whether through ODA or domestic budgets, and without mechanisms to track progress and expose inaction, these commitments remain symbolic.
Second, prevention and response to violence against women and against children must be embedded in the budgetary commitments of multiple systems, including health, education and social protection, regardless of who is in power. Transparent reporting at national and global levels is essential if we are to close the gap between what is promised and what is delivered.
Third, civil society must be properly funded and protected. Women’s rights organisations and child-focused agencies are driving some of the most effective prevention and support efforts worldwide, yet they continue to operate on short-term and unpredictable grants. No long-term social change is possible without their stability, leadership and voice.
Fourth, research and practice need continuous support. This does not mean one-off studies, but sustained investment in learning what works, for whom and in which contexts, especially as digital environments, social norms and policy landscapes evolve.
Fifth, implementation must become non-negotiable. Political leaders should be expected, and compelled, to act on the commitments they make. Where governments fail to deliver, consequences should follow.
Finally, multilateral agencies must use their voice more confidently, highlighting the profound impact that violence against women and against children has on every development objective. Silence or cautious diplomacy serves neither survivors nor the field. These institutions have the platform and legitimacy to insist that governments uphold their commitments and provide the funding required to institutionalise prevention and response efforts.
The path forward: We can end violence if we choose to
Ending violence against women and children is possible. The evidence is stronger than ever, the tools exist and communities are already showing what works. What is missing is the political will, long-term financing and accountability to turn commitments into action.
For too long, this crisis has been treated as peripheral to development. That must change. If violence against women and children is a national emergency, then we must ask what other emergency would be left so chronically underfunded, so consistently sidelined and so dependent on short-term grants to survive.
The path forward is clear. Governments must fund, implement and monitor the commitments they make. Donors must invest in sustained prevention and response. Multilateral agencies must use their voice. Safety is not optional. It is central to every development goal.
Progress is possible. Whether we achieve it depends on whether we are willing to match our promises with courage, accountability and long-term investment.
About the authors
Elizabeth Dartnall, SVRI Executive Director, is a global health and development specialist with more than twenty-five years of experience working across health systems, mental health, and violence prevention, with a particular focus on violence against women and violence against children. She has worked across government, academia, and the non-profit sector in diverse country contexts, and brings deep expertise in evidence-informed policy and systems change. Elizabeth has led the Sexual Violence Research Initiative since 2006, overseeing its evolution into a globally recognised, independent NGO. Under her leadership, the SVRI has strengthened the evidence base and advanced knowledge sharing in low- and middle-income countries through feminist, ethical and equity-driven approaches. She serves on several advisory boards, including the Global Women’s Institute Leadership Council, the MenEngage Global Alliance Board, and the Accelerator for GBV Prevention, and currently chairs the Safe Futures Hub.
Diana Arango is the Portfolio Coordinator for gender-based violence in the Social Sustainability and Inclusion Unit for the Latin America and Caribbean region at the World Bank. In this role, she leads efforts to mitigate risks of sexual exploitation and abuse and sexual harassment associated with World Bank–financed operations. Diana has fostered a strong partnership with the Sexual Violence Research Initiative, helping to fund innovative research in low- and middle-income countries to expand the evidence base on what works to prevent and respond to gender-based violence. She previously served as a Research Scientist at George Washington University’s Global Women’s Institute, where she led research on violence against women and girls in conflict settings. Before this, she was the Global Coordinator for the development and implementation of the Gender-Based Violence Information Management System, an inter-agency initiative that supports humanitarian workers to collect and use timely, reliable data on GBV.
Avni Amin, works at WHO’s Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research as the Unit Head of the Rights, Equality and Wellbeing throughout the Life Course Unit. Avni has been at the WHO for nearly 20 years and her primary focus has been on violence against women and gender equality. She has led implementation research to facilitate the uptake of WHO guidelines on responding to violence against women and supported Ministries of Health in the translation and uptake of these guidelines. She has led the development of clinical guidelines for responding to child and adolescent sexual abuse, the RESPECT prevention framework, and is a lead author of the WHO global plan of action on strengthening health systems response to addressing interpersonal violence, in particular against women and girls and against children. Avni is a passionate feminist scientist with a fierce commitment to gender equality and women’s health. She has a PhD in International Health from the Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Hygiene and Public Health. She is originally from India and considers herself as a global citizen.
Craig Harding, SVRI, Non-Executive Director. Craig is a chartered accountant and co-director of Insurance Studio Consulting. His 30-year career in life and health insurance across Africa includes a long list of innovation, transformation and pioneering initiatives aimed at improving access to high quality insurance products for consumers previously excluded from participating in these products. Exclusion from financial services products comes in many forms, ranging from financial to health to geographic circumstances. Craig’s work has focussed on finding creative solutions to these challenges. In addition to holding CEO and CFO leadership roles in many of these ventures, Craig has held board positions in companies listed on four stock exchanges. Today Insurance Studio Consulting provides deep operational involvement in financial services businesses and initiatives, and has interests across multiple African countries.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog are those of the authors alone and do not represent the views of the organisations they represent.
