Financial Literacy Isn't Gender Neutral
One of the things that struck me most during my time in Kenya this August wasn't simply what we were teaching. It was about how people experience financial education differently.
Over the past two years, Women Working Worldwide (WWW) has been working with the Kenya Financial Education Centre (KEFEC) on financial literacy programs for women working in Kenya's hair and beauty sector and in the flower sector.
KEFEC brings considerable experience to this work. It is a specialist financial education and consultancy organisation working across Kenya and the wider East African region, with experience in financial literacy, entrepreneurship, savings groups, smallholder farmers, SACCOs (Savings and Credit Cooperatives) and training of trainers. Its team has worked with a wide range of development and financial sector organisations.
So why did WWW think we needed to add a specific gender focus into our second program?
Because financial literacy is not gender neutral and we needed to strengthen KEFECs delivery through training of trainers, as well as providing a module in the overall financial training to support the participants who had survived GBVH.
The training of trainers program (ToT) was for the new KEFEC trainers; Barbara, Irene and Vincent. This was to train them to deliver KEFEC’s financial education program and was led by the KEFEC CEO, John Gitau. We then had specific gender training for all the KEFEC team and John, led by a local development group, CIFCAD (Community Initiatives For Change and Development) and their CEO Esther Muhai and her team.
WWW had engaged CIFCAD to deliver the gender training, as we felt it was important for the session to be delivered by Kenyan practitioners for it not to be seen as a ‘western imposition’ (which we know it is not!) and to enable KEFEC to identify with and connect to the training. WWW worked with Esther to shape the training - both for the training of trainers and for the wider participant training.
At first, there were some difficult conversations. The men found some of the gender issues challenging. There were questions. There was laughter. There were disagreements about some of the feminist analysis of the root causes of inequality and the position of women within Kenyan society..
And actually, I think that was important. Because gender training shouldn't simply be a process of telling people what they are expected to think. It needs to create space to question, challenge, explain and learn.
Esther and the CIFCAD trainers responded to the questions and raised some of their own. I contributed my experience of working with women workers and women's economic empowerment. The other KEFEC trainers Barbara and Irene, as well as Patricia, the KEFEC admin support, brought their own experiences and perspectives. A lively debate commenced!
Slowly, the conversation became less about "Why are you saying women experience this differently?"
And more about:
"What does this mean for the way we actually deliver financial education?"
That is a much more useful question.
Imagine teaching someone how to save money without asking whether she actually controls the household income. Or teaching someone about accessing credit without understanding the different risks women may face when borrowing.
Or talking about entrepreneurship without considering childcare, unpaid domestic work, mobility, access to technology or social expectations about what women should and shouldn't do. Or encouraging women to become financially independent without asking whether they have the freedom to make financial decisions.
The financial knowledge itself might be exactly the same. But the conditions in which that knowledge is used are not.
KEFEC itself makes an important distinction between financial education, financial literacy, financial capability and financial inclusion. Its own explanation recognises that knowledge alone is not enough: people also need the ability and opportunity to use financial services and make informed choices.
That distinction matters enormously when we are talking about women. A woman can understand how a savings account works. She can understand interest rates. She can understand how to make a budget. She can understand how to run a business. And still face barriers that have nothing to do with her financial knowledge.
That is where gender comes in.
Financial capability is shaped by the social and economic environment in which people make decisions. The World Bank similarly defines financial capability as more than knowledge: it includes the capacity to act in one's best financial interests within socioeconomic and environmental conditions.
So, gender awareness shouldn't be an additional module bolted onto the end of financial literacy training. It should influence how the training is designed and delivered from the beginning.
Who is in the room?
Who speaks?
Who controls money?
Who has access to a phone?
Who can travel?
Who has childcare responsibilities?
Who can open a bank account?
Who is confident asking questions?
Who is comfortable negotiating?
Who has experienced violence or financial control?
Who is making decisions about household expenditure?
And perhaps most importantly:
Who gets to decide what financial security looks like?
These questions don't make financial literacy less practical. They make it more realistic. And that was one of the most valuable things about the discussions with KEFEC. It certainly shaped the design of the financial training and support to the wider group - where we had arranged transport, per diem, childcare, accommodation and food. We weren't simply delivering gender training alongside financial training. We were challenging ourselves to think about how the two connected. The difficult conversations were part of that process.
In fact, I would argue that they are necessary.
If we only train people who already understand gender inequality, we may create very comfortable conversations, but we won't necessarily change the way mainstream programmes are delivered. Sometimes we need to have uncomfortable conversations. We need to ask why a woman might not be able to implement the financial advice we are giving her.
We need to recognise that what looks like an individual financial decision may actually be shaped by power within a household, workplace or community. And we need to avoid another familiar trap: blaming women for the consequences of systems they did not create.
That is particularly important when financial literacy is presented as a route out of poverty. Financial education can be powerful. I have seen that through our work in Kenya.
It can build knowledge.
It can build confidence.
It can help women make different decisions.
It can contribute to savings, business development and greater economic security.
But it cannot, by itself, remove structural inequality.
That requires wider change.
It requires decent work.
It requires access to resources.
It requires worker voice and organisation.
It requires tackling violence and harassment.
It requires changing attitudes about women's roles.
And sometimes it requires men to change too.
This is why I think the experience with KEFEC is important.
It isn't about adding a "women's issue" to financial education. It is about recognising that people experience financial systems through their social realities. If we understand those realities, we can design better programmes. If we listen to participants, we can adapt. If we can provide the access to training people will engage. If we allow trainers to question and challenge each other, we can learn. And if we combine financial expertise with gender expertise and the lived experience of women themselves, we can create training that actually works and brings impact.
This brings me back to the theme running through these blogs.
Numbers matter.
Training matters.
Reach matters.
But what happens inside the training room matters too. And what happens after people leave it matters even more.
Jane showed us what one participant can go on to do. Lintons showed us how an idea can become another programme. KUHABWO showed us how an intervention can become part of a much bigger organisational journey. And the work with KEFEC reminded me that the training itself needs to continually adapt to social realities .
Perhaps that is the real lesson from this trip.
We don't just need to ask whether women are being given opportunities. We need to ask whether those opportunities recognise the realities of women's lives. Because financial literacy can teach women how to navigate a system.
But gender-responsive financial education can also ask whether the system itself needs to change.
And that is where financial empowerment starts to become something much bigger than just money.
Comments