What Works for Girls’ Education in Crisis Settings? Emerging Evidence from ERICC
The Education Research in Conflict and Protracted Crisis (ERICC) programme is a six-year Education in Emergencies (EiE) research initiative funded by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO). Focus countries include Bangladesh (Cox’s Bazar), Jordan, Lebanon, Myanmar, Nigeria, South Sudan, Iraq, and Syria. In each context, local policymakers and government officials are heavily involved in co-constructing the ERICC programme’s research agenda, to ensure that any evidence generated is relevant and useful to local actors.
The ERICC team is committed to advancing equity and inclusion in education research. As part of its commitment, several country-level ERICC studies have explored the different challenges and modalities of gender-responsive education. In addition, the global team recently conducted a systematic review of research on girls’ education. This blog synthesises emerging insights across both the country-specific studies and the global evidence base.
Recognising the complexity of girls’ education in crisis settings
Research consistently shows that learning disruptions disproportionately affect young women and girls, especially refugees and migrants in displacement settings. In Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, for instance, approximately 99% of Rohingya adolescent girls are out of school. In a recent ERICC study, families cite early marriage, domestic responsibilities, economic hardships, safety concerns, and restrictive gender norms as key barriers to accessing and remaining in school.
While crises can sometimes disrupt harmful norms and expand opportunities for girls and women, these shifts can be fragile and, in some cases, provoke backlash and increase gender-based violence. Such violence can have lasting damage on girls’ lives, health, wellbeing, and education. In Northeast Nigeria, where there are frequent attacks on schools, girls have been targeted with violent assaults and abductions from school, leading them to face severe mental health issues upon return, affecting not only their access to education but also their overall quality of life.
These examples underscore the need for at minimum gender-responsive interventions that account for dynamic, intersecting political, economic, social, cultural, and security factors. Effective programming requires flexibility in modality, nonlinear theories of change, and adaptation to both complex and intersecting pre-existing biases and emerging barriers, such as safety, ongoing displacement, and economic hardship.
Flexible, adaptive, and multidimensional programming has greater impact on access and learning
The recent ERICC synthesis of 40 studies on girls’ education in conflict- and crisis-affected settings highlights both the promise and the limitations of the current evidence base. Despite extensive research on how conflict impacts education, only a small set of studies were included in this review because many lacked a focus on interventions, had unclear methodologies, or were published in languages beyond English, French, and Spanish. Despite the limitations, the review highlights both the promise and the limitations of the current evidence base.
The evidence indicates that interventions that combine support for girls’ education (such as cash transfers or digital learning) with strategies to address gender norms (such as through girls' clubs, community engagement, work with caregivers, and campaigns against gender-based violence) have the strongest impact on girls’ education outcomes.
Most of the researched interventions focus on improving access and learning, primarily through supporting school construction, cash transfers, or the direct provision of alternative learning opportunities (such as remedial instruction or radio lessons). Financial and in-kind support helps reach girls from economically vulnerable households and incentivises families to continue sending girls to school rather than pressure them to marry early or prioritise domestic or caregiving responsibilities. However, in order to be truly effective, programs must also address social barriers, such as concerns around gender-based violence or social norms around girls’ mobility and participation in public life.
Similarly, for interventions focused on providing learning opportunities through accelerated education, remedial classes, radio instruction, and digital tools, the evidence generally shows positive impacts on learning outcomes. This is particularly true when such interventions are adapted to local realities, such as shifting to digital models when girls’ mobility is a challenge, or when working with different actors to address restrictive social and cultural norms.
We need stronger evidence linking interventions to broader shifts in gender equality
While the evidence shows that flexible and multidimensional interventions have had the greatest impact, we need more evidence to better understand the specific approaches and pathways linking these interventions to broader gender equality outcomes.
For example, evidence from interventions such as girls’ clubs and community engagement indicate the positive impact of direct engagement with social norms, but very little research has engaged carefully with the relationship between approaches to support girls’ education, and gender equality and support for girls’ and women’s rights beyond education in conflict and crisis settings. This is important because education interventions can reinforce or challenge existing power dynamics: while they may expand girls’ access to learning, we do not yet fully understand whether or how they translate into greater voice, agency, or opportunities in other spheres of life.
Moreover, no studies explicitly focus on engaging men and boys in work to promote gender equality, revealing a critical research gap. Further research focused on addressing these evidence gaps can ensure a stronger understanding of how and why interventions affect change in gender-related values and norms.
Structural change is under-researched
Only a quarter of the reviewed studies in the evidence synthesis focused on efforts to develop institutional cultures supportive of girls’ education and gender equality at different levels. Even fewer examined these interventions at scale.
Some studies did focus on interventions addressing health and reproductive awareness, employability, or peace education in schools, but these were typically small-scale and supplementary. Similarly, while teacher training was included in some interventions, these did not typically focus on structural norms or the barriers facing female educators. Though promising, the reviewed evidence shows that these structural efforts remain fragmented and their potential to shift institutional cultures or affect long-term gender outcomes is still poorly understood, highlighting a critical gap in the evidence base.
Conclusion
The evidence emerging from ERICC shows that advancing gender-responsive education in crisis settings is complex, requiring multidimensional, contextually grounded approaches that directly engage with deep-rooted social norms and systemic barriers. While there is growing evidence on what works to improve girls’ access and learning, significant gaps remain in understanding how they are linked to broader gender equality outcomes. Structural and system-level reforms, such as gender-responsive teacher training, institutional accountability, and policy change, are especially underexplored.
The research shows a clear opportunity for policymakers, practitioners, and donors to engage with these insights, push for more holistic and scalable solutions, and ensure that gender equity remains central to education efforts in crisis and conflict-affected contexts.
This material has been funded by UK International Development from the UK government. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed here are entirely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the ERICC Programme, the authors’ respective organisations, or the UK government’s official policies.