Private Sector Has Crucial Role to Play in Women’s Empowerment

Q: Co-Impact describes its mission as strengthening health, education, and economic systems so they work for everyone, especially women and marginalized communities. How does this vision shape your selection of projects in Latin America and specifically in Mexico?

A: We focused on those three systems because they address the main challenges women and girls face globally, particularly in Latin America. In Mexico, project selection combines Co-Impact’s core criteria with local realities that shape how and who we support. A key factor is identifying political windows of opportunity. Both Mexico and Brazil have governments that are progressive or at least open to gender issues. One critical topic across the region is care work, which gained visibility during the COVID-19 pandemic when governments recognized it as a neglected but essential issue. We saw a regional opportunity, with governments open to collaboration on a topic central to women’s and girls’ well-being.

We also look for organizations well-suited to this type of work — those with a strong track record, legitimacy among grassroots and feminist groups, and credibility with government institutions. Our goal is to strengthen public and market systems, so partners must be capable of working with governments to co-create effective, sustainable solutions. These organizations need a deep understanding of politics or, in the case of markets, how the private sector operates. They must know the actors, formal and informal rules, and how to navigate these dynamics strategically and credibly, using data and evidence.

Q: How do you balance the perspectives and interests of governments, funders, and grassroots organizations on the ground, given the power imbalance that exists between them?

A: First, we are careful in selecting organizations that can collaborate with the government while remaining constructively critical when necessary. Many organizations in Mexico have long experience doing this, helping set budgets, providing data to legislators, supporting policy development, and keeping issues on the public agenda. When needed, they also hold authorities accountable. 

Second, Co-Impact assumes that no single organization can achieve systems-level change on its own. Building something like a national care system in Mexico requires a long-term, complex strategy involving many actors. We select organizations that can form partnerships with a broad network — including civil society, the private sector, consultancies, and media agencies — to create strategies that are scalable and sustainable. Many of the organizations we support have strong credibility with both government and grassroots movements. Most Co-Impact initiatives operate as coalitions. 

For example, GIRE, an organization with decades of experience working on sexual and reproductive rights in Mexico, leads a coalition with a Colombian partner that has successfully used strategic litigation to advance abortion rights in several Latin American countries. Together, they also collaborate with state-level grassroots groups to ensure that abortion access can be effectively implemented across diverse local contexts. GIRE also launched Abortitlán, a narrative media campaign imagining a country where abortion is universally accessible. This effort brought together new partners outside their usual networks, demonstrating how broad-based coalitions can strengthen impact and sustain systemic change.

Q: How does Co-Impact enable systemic change?

A: These systems — care, health, and economic opportunity — are interconnected and affect one another. About 80% of care work is done by women, and this impacts nearly every part of their lives. Many girls drop out of school to care for family members, which limits their education and future job opportunities. According to the OECD, young women are almost four times more likely to not study or work compared to young men in Mexico with motherhood being the key factor. This responsibility also affects their health — women often sleep less, experience higher stress, and carry more responsibilities. 

Economically, the impact is significant. Recent regional data presented by CELAC in Mexico showed that 30% to 40% of women who leave the workforce cite care responsibilities as the reason. According to data by ELCOS 20 million women cannot access paid employment because they dedicate themselves to unpaid care work. As populations age and social support systems remain underdeveloped, the burden of care will continue to fall largely on women. Mexican women spend67% of their total working time on care and unpaidwork in the home, compared to 28% for men.

Yet investing in care systems benefits everyone — it supports economic growth and improves quality of life. A well-functioning care system distributes responsibilities equitably across genders, as well as between governments and the private sector. According to INEGI unpaid work has an economic value of 7.2 trillion pesos in Mexico. If unpaid work were an industry, it would account for 24% of the national Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a figure higher than the value of economic sectors such as manufacturing (22%) or trade (22%)."

Co-Impact envisions a future where care is recognized as a social good and a human right, shared across society rather than assumed to be women’s work. The lack of care systems also has long-term economic effects. A World Bank study found that women earn less in pensions not only because of lower wages but also because time spent on care reduces their contributions. This creates greater dependency on public support later in life. Research also shows that strong care systems benefit men and children. Strengthening care systems, then, supports not only women and girls but entire economies and societies.

Q: How does Co-Impact approach selecting and funding its projects within the constraints of a market economy that often does not incentivize investment in long-term social change?

A: One of the most unique aspects of our model is the design grant. This is a one-year grant given to organizations solely to plan and strategize. There are no implementation requirements or deliverables beyond developing a clear, thoughtful strategy for systems change in their field. This kind of flexible funding is especially valuable for feminist and gender-focused organizations that often lack the time or resources to pause, think deeply, and plan long term.

Our work is grounded in human rights, equity, and justice. But we also recognize that systems change requires acknowledging how politics and markets function. Policymakers and institutions respond to incentives, political and often economic ones, and sustainable change happens when both moral and practical motivations align. 

At the same time, we are careful not to reduce these arguments solely to their economic value. When gender equality becomes framed only as a good investment, it risks losing its foundation as a human right. If the financial returns do not meet expectations, it is too easy for decision-makers to deprioritize the issue. So, our approach insists on holding both truths: these changes are economically smart and they are morally necessary.

Care is a great example. It is not just a service; it is the foundation of how societies function. When we treat care only as a sector to expand rather than a shared social responsibility, we lose sight of its deeper contribution to community well-being and equality.

Q: What role do you see for the private sector within your funding strategies and investments? 

A: The private sector has opportunities that governments often do not. Governments have countless competing priorities, limited budgets, and constant political negotiations over what gets funded. That environment does not always lend itself to prioritizing social or gender equity issues. The private sector, on the other hand, can often be more agile and forward-looking in putting new topics on the public agenda.

The private sector’s responsibility is twofold. First, by addressing these issues, companies ultimately create better environments to operate in, regardless of the immediate business case. And second, whether they act or not, these issues are going to catch up with them. It is much better to adapt early and be seen as a leader than to wait until regulation or social pressure forces change.

The private sector is also changing how it views sustainability. From 2017 to 2023 70% of businesses ranked in their Corporate Human Rights Benchmark have progressed in their practices (World Benchmarking Alliance). In Mexico we’re seeing trends like sustainability rankings in the Mexican Stock Exchange, and the creation of other certifications and taxonomies to promote climate and gender considerations. Increasingly, forward-looking companies understand that the way we have been operating — both in terms of human resources and natural resources — is not sustainable. In a decade, ESG will sound outdated because sustainability will simply be built into business models, because consumers today care more about human rights, climate justice, gender justice, and fair trade."

Governments will hopefully catch up, though their time horizons tend to be shorter and their risk tolerance lower. That is why both philanthropy and the private sector need to take on more risk. For philanthropy, that means investing in unproven ideas that could drive systemic change. For the private sector, it means taking bold stands on issues that governments are slow to act on, setting examples and even applying pressure for policy reform.

Q: What strategies and appeals does Co-Impact employ when engaging with donors from the private sector

A: Co-Impact has intentionally chosen not to fundraise from donors who already invest in gender equality. That pool is already small, and the field often operates on a sense of competition for limited resources rather than collaboration. The organization has over 50 funders worldwide, including high-net-worth individuals, traditional philanthropies, and newer funding models. The goal is to “grow the pie,” not compete for the same limited funds.

At the same time, funding for gender equality is becoming even scarcer. According to OECD data, less than 1% of global development funding goes to gender-related initiatives, and less than 1% of that supports feminist organizations. Bilateral funding has also declined, with key donors such as USAID and the Dutch government scaling back. Among Co-Impact’s three regions — Latin America, Africa, and Asia — Latin America receives the least gender-focused funding. That gap represents both a challenge and a major opportunity, particularly for private and local philanthropy.

Funding through Co-Impact allows private donors to amplify their impact. Instead of small, short-term project grants, Co-Impact provides larger, longer-term grants for systems level initiatives. Pooled funding enables larger-scale, longer-term efforts to address the structural causes of inequality rather than isolated projects.

Local philanthropy is also essential. In many countries, governments restrict international funding, making domestic support not only more sustainable, but essential. In Mexico, there is significant private wealth but a philanthropic culture that still leans toward charity, addressing immediate needs rather than systemic causes. However, a new generation of donors is beginning to shift that mindset, prioritizing structural and environmental change.

Q: What role does sustainability play within the initiatives you fund? 

A: At least seven of our partner organizations from Brazil and Mexico will participate in the COP30 in Brazil, working on various aspects of climate and gender justice. In Mexico, we support two initiatives that both seek to build corporate human rights accountability frameworks, especially in the extractive sector. These companies often operate massive projects in Indigenous territories where women are most affected, partly because they typically do not hold land titles and are excluded from decision-making spaces. The health consequences of these projects also disproportionately fall on women, who shoulder caregiving roles and face reproductive health challenges linked to environmental degradation.

One of these Mexican organizations works from the grassroots level, building mechanisms for community participation and feedback. The other engages directly with corporations to promote regulatory frameworks that balance profit-making with social and environmental responsibility, reflecting a global trend toward more ethical business practices.

Another initiative we support is a climate change lab in Mexico led by Astrid Puentes, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Climate Change. The lab explores how to amplify women’s local, often ancestral, knowledge, recognizing that women are not just the most affected by climate change but also key holders of solutions. From the Amazon to the savannah, it is women who manage land, sustain local agriculture, and safeguard ecological practices. Yet their voices are often overlooked because they lack access to formal spaces, resources, and data. 

Q: How do you envision Co-Impact’s footprint evolving in the next few years within Mexico? 

A: Co-Impact is still relatively new in the region, so we are not yet top of mind for most funders. We do not yet have any organizations in Mexico implementing their full strategies, but we will soon have tangible results that demonstrate why our approach works. We would also like to collaborate more with established funders. After a decade in philanthropy, we have built strong relationships in the philanthropic world but fewer with the private sector. We aim to strengthen those ties, learn from other private philanthropies, identify opportunities to leverage rather than duplicate efforts, and co-fund projects that improve the lives of women and girls. 

Compared to other parts of the region, Mexico offers a more stable and potentially supportive environment for gender equality efforts. The political context may not be perfect, but it provides room for meaningful progress.