INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 173

www.rsisinternational.org

Financial Inclusion Strategies as Mechanisms for Mitigating Domestic

Violence Against Women (SDGs 5, 8, & 16)

Temitope Teniola, ONILEOWO

Department of Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Management Sciences, Ekiti State University, Ado Ekiti,

Nigeria.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.15020000015

Received: 12 February 2026; Accepted: 17 February 2026; Published: 03 March 2026

ABSTRACT

Domestic violence against women remains a widespread global issue, significantly impeding gender equality,

economic development, and the establishment of peaceful societies (SDGs 5, 8, & 16). This study explores the

impact of financial inclusion strategies in mitigating domestic violence against women. Drawing on secondary

evidence sourced from peer-reviewed literature, global databases, and institutional reports, grounded on an

integrated theoretical framework combining Resource Theory with the Theory of Gender and Power. The study

elucidates how financial inclusion may boost women's bargaining power, broaden their economic resources, and

challenge established gender hierarchies. Findings show that financial inclusion significantly mitigates domestic

violence when interventions are tailored to the specific context, promote gender equality, and are underpinned

by strong institutional frameworks. The study makes recommendations for four principal stakeholders:

policymakers should formulate gender-responsive financial inclusion policies; financial institutions are

encouraged to create accessible and secure financial products tailored for women; civil society organizations are

advised to implement community-based financial literacy and empowerment initiatives; and development

partners are called upon to finance and oversee programs that blend economic empowerment with the prevention

of gender-based violence. By doing so, strategic implementation of financial inclusion can serve as an effective

mechanism to enhance women's safety and agency, thereby contributing to sustainable development and gender

equality.

Keywords: Domestic violence; financial inclusion; gender power; resource theory; women’s economic

empowerment.

INTRODUCTION

Domestic violence against women remains a pervasive global challenge with profound implications for public

health, social stability, and fundamental human rights. Beyond its immediate physical and psychological

consequences, it constrains broader development trajectories and undermines progress toward the Sustainable

Development Goals, particularly those related to gender equality, decent work and economic growth, and peace,

justice, and strong institutions (Fordjour, Amoah, & Chan, 2025; Hope Sr, 2020). Although governments,

development agencies, and civil society organisations have implemented diverse prevention and response

strategies, structural drivers of violence persist. Increasingly, financial inclusion has been positioned as a

complementary pathway to women’s empowerment, premised on the assumption that economic autonomy can

reshape intra-household power relations. However, financial inclusion is commonly defined as the provision,

accessibility, and responsible use of affordable financial services—such as credit, savings, insurance, mobile

banking, and social transfers—delivered sustainably and equitably (Siano, Raimi, Palazzo, & Panait, 2020;

Onileowo, Muharam, & Ramily, 2022).

Moreover, contemporary discourse extends beyond economic participation to encompass agency, dignity, and

freedom from coercion, thereby linking financial systems directly to questions of gender justice. This linkage

has stimulated substantial scholarly attention to the relationship between financial inclusion and intimate partner

violence (IPV). In many low- and middle-income countries, women face persistent barriers to formal financial

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 174

www.rsisinternational.org

systems, limiting their capacity to accumulate assets, smooth consumption, manage shocks, or exit abusive

relationships. Therefore, financial exclusion can deepen dependency and reinforce patriarchal power structures

(Byrt, Cook, & Burgin, 2025). In response, interventions such as microfinance, digital financial services, savings

groups, and cash transfers are increasingly promoted as mechanisms to strengthen women’s bargaining power

and reduce vulnerability to violence. Empirical evidence, however, remains mixed. While some studies

document reductions in psychological, physical, or economic violence, others report backlash effects, where

shifts in women’s economic status provoke resistance from male partners (Horn, Puffer, Roesch, & Lehmann,

2014; Eggers del Campo & Steinert, 2022; Byrt, Cook, & Burgin, 2025). These divergent findings underscore

that financial inclusion is not inherently protective; its effects are mediated by social norms, relational dynamics,

and institutional contexts.

Consequently, the persistence of contradictory outcomes highlights a deeper conceptual limitation in the

literature. Many studies evaluate single intervention types or focus narrowly on economic indicators without

integrating theoretical explanations of household bargaining and gendered power. To address this limitation, this

study draws on Resource Theory and Gender-Power Theory as complementary analytical lenses. Resource

Theory posits that access to valued economic assets enhances bargaining power and reduces vulnerability to

coercion (Schmalz, Ludwig, & Webster, 2018). In contrast, Gender-Power Theory emphasises structural

inequalities embedded in patriarchal systems and explains how men may deploy violence to reassert dominance

when traditional hierarchies are threatened (Simon & Hasan, 2025). Integrating these perspectives enables a

more nuanced understanding of how financial inclusion may simultaneously expand women’s resources and

destabilise entrenched gender norms, producing either protective or adverse outcomes (Eggers del Campo &

Steinert, 2022; Byrt, Cook, & Burgin, 2025).

Despite growing empirical attention, a significant gap persists: there is limited systematic, theory-driven

evaluation of diverse financial inclusion strategies within a unified framework that jointly considers resource

redistribution and power renegotiation. Existing research remains heavily concentrated on microfinance, with

comparatively less attention to digital financial inclusion, savings groups, financial literacy, and social protection

in relation to domestic violence outcomes. This fragmentation obscures the mechanisms through which financial

inclusion may mitigate or inadvertently exacerbate violence and constrains evidence-based policymaking.

Accordingly, the central research question guiding this study is: How and under what conditions do different

financial inclusion strategies influence domestic violence against women when examined through the integrated

lenses of Resource Theory and Gender-Power Theory? By comparatively assessing five key strategies—

microfinance, digital financial services, savings groups, financial literacy, and social protection—this study

sharpens the problem statement and advances a comprehensive, theory-driven synthesis of both protective and

risk-related pathways. In doing so, it contributes to clarifying the circumstances under which financial inclusion

functions not merely as an economic instrument but as a structural mechanism capable of reshaping household

power relations and influencing the prevalence of domestic violence

LITERATURE REVIEW

Global Landscape of Domestic Violence and Financial Exclusion

Violence against women in domestic environments remains a critical global concern, with approximately 27

percent of women worldwide experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV) at some stage in their lives (Ma,

Chen, Kong, Chen, Geldsetzer, Zeng, & Li, 2023). Although the prevalence varies by region, persistent gender

inequalities, restricted access to economic opportunities, and entrenched patriarchal norms consistently serve as

enabling factors.

However, the literature reveals that studies on domestic violence and financial inclusion converge around a

shared structural premise: gender inequality and economic exclusion interact to heighten women’s vulnerability.

Globally, approximately 27 percent of women experience intimate partner violence (IPV) during their lifetime

(Ma, Chen, Kong, Chen, Geldsetzer, Zeng, & Li, 2023). Simultaneously, 742 million women remain excluded

from the formal financial system (Sikka & Bhayana, 2024). Rather than treating these as parallel crises, emerging

literaturs positions them as interlinked structural phenomena.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 175

www.rsisinternational.org

Comparative analyses suggest that financial exclusion intensifies dependency and constrains exit options,

thereby reinforcing patriarchal power hierarchies (Saluja, Singh, & Kumar, 2023; Byrt, Cook, & Burgin, 2025).

However, the literature diverges on whether financial inclusion consistently mitigates this vulnerability. While

some studies frame financial access as a protective buffer that enhances agency (Ma et al., 2023; Saluja et al.,

2023), others caution that shifts in women’s economic positioning may destabilize entrenched hierarchies and

provoke resistance (Koomson, Villano, & Hadley, 2020; Saha & Qin, 2023). Thus, the inconsistency across

contexts signals that financial inclusion operates within contested gender-power systems rather than neutral

economic spaces.

Financial Inclusion as Empowerment: Competing Development Narratives

The literature on financial inclusion reflects two dominants but competing narratives. The first—rooted in

development economics—conceptualizes financial inclusion as an empowerment mechanism. It extends beyond

account ownership to encompass affordability, financial capability, and gender-responsive programming

(Obisike & Adalikwu-Obisike, 2021). Empirical studies within this tradition argue that access to credit, savings,

and stable income increases women’s bargaining power and decision-making authority (Siano, Raimi, Palazzo,

& Panait, 2020). Participation in savings groups and cooperatives is similarly linked to enhanced mobility and

social capital, which can indirectly reduce IPV risk (Eggers del Campo & Steinert, 2022).

The second narrative, informed by feminist political economy, challenges the assumption of automatic

protection. Although improved financial access may reduce economic strain—a known correlate of IPV (Siano

et al., 2020)—it may simultaneously threaten established gender hierarchies in contexts characterized by rigid

patriarchal norms (Ade, 2021). Thus, the literature increasingly recognizes that financial inclusion can generate

both protective and risk-enhancing pathways. This divergence underscores the necessity of embedding empirical

analysis within gender-power frameworks rather than relying solely on economic outcome indicators.

Comparative Evidence by Financial Inclusion Strategy

A systematic categorization of empirical studies reveals variation across five major intervention types:

microfinance, digital financial services (DFS), savings groups, financial literacy, and social protection. Within

each category, findings cluster into three patterns: protective effects, backlash effects, and conditional or context-

dependent outcomes.

Microfinance and Credit-Based Interventions

Microfinance remains the most extensively studied intervention. A substantial body of research reports

reductions in emotional and physical violence linked to income growth, enhanced self-efficacy, and expanded

support networks (Esmaeil Zaei, Kapil, Pelekh, & Teimoury Nasab, 2018; Ranabahu & Tanima, 2022; Williams,

Wamue-Ngare, Malelu-Gitau, Heise, Glass, Edeh, & Decker, 2025). These studies align with empowerment-

based interpretations.

Conversely, other studies document increased violence when loans intensify debt burdens or undermine male

authority (Ade, 2021).

This contrast suggests that microfinance outcomes are mediated by household debt dynamics and normative

expectations about male provision. However, the divergence indicates that credit expansion alone does not

uniformly transform gendered power relations.

Digital Financial Services (DFS)

Studies on DFS suggest that mobile money and digital platforms may reduce women’s dependence by enhancing

financial privacy and autonomy (Siano et al., 2020). Unlike traditional microcredit, DFS can facilit ate discreet

savings and reduce cash-related vulnerability.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 176

www.rsisinternational.org

However, the literature also notes emerging forms of digital surveillance and economic monitoring, which may

reproduce control in technologically mediated ways. Empirical work remains limited, indicating a significant

research gap in understanding DFS-specific IPV pathways. Thus, while DFS holds transformative potential,

evidence remains underdeveloped and theoretically fragmented.

Savings Groups (VSLAs and Rotational Models)

Research on Village Savings and Loan Associations (VSLAs) and similar collective models highlights

reductions in IPV attributed to social cohesion and collective support (Leight, Cullen, Ranganathan, &

Yakubovich, 2023). Unlike individual credit models, savings groups embed economic participation within

community networks, potentially buffering backlash.

Yet critics note that savings obligations may reinforce unpaid labour burdens or create intra-group financial

strain (Esmaeil Zaei et al., 2018). Compared to microfinance, savings groups appear more socially embedded

but not immune to structural pressures. Their effectiveness may hinge on group governance and broader

normative change.

Financial Literacy and Gendered Power Dynamics

Financial literacy interventions are frequently framed as complementary to access-based strategies. Evidence

suggests improved budgeting skills and financial planning reduce household conflict linked to economic

mismanagement (Kanchi, Phalke, Joglekar, & Kadam, 2024). However, compared to credit or cash transfer

studies, the IPV-specific evidence remains thin and fragmented.

Critically, financial literacy alone rarely produces structural change unless paired with material resource access.

This limitation indicates that knowledge without economic leverage may insufficiently shift bargaining

dynamics.

Social Protection and Cash Transfers

Studies on conditional and unconditional cash transfers report reductions in IPV through stabilized consumption

and reduced financial stress (Kyeyune & Ntayi, 2025). Unlike microfinance, cash transfers do not generate debt

burdens, potentially reducing backlash risks.

Nevertheless, program design and cultural norms shape outcomes (Ade, 2021). Where transfers are perceived as

externally imposed or threatening male provider roles, resistance may occur. Moreover, cash transfers may

alleviate immediate strain without addressing entrenched patriarchal norms.

Thus, they demonstrate short-term protective potential but uncertain long-term relational transformation

(Kyeyune & Ntayi, 2025)

Theoretical Integration: Explaining Divergent Outcomes

The empirical contradictions across intervention types reflect deeper theoretical tensions. Resource Theory

(Goode, 1971) suggests that access to income and assets enhances bargaining power and reduces vulnerability

(Baranov, Cameron, Contreras Suarez, & Thibout, 2021).

Empirical studies demonstrating protective effects—particularly in microfinance and cash transfers—align with

this logic (Ranabahu & Tanima, 2022).

However, Resource Theory alone fails to explain backlash phenomena. Gender-Power Theory emphasizes that

violence is embedded within patriarchal structures that normalize male dominance (Radtke, Morgan, &

Rogerson, 2023).

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 177

www.rsisinternational.org

Studies documenting retaliatory or controlling behaviours following women’s economic gains (Ade, 2021;

Fordjour, Amoah, & Chan, 2025) align with this framework. Moreover, women’s access to resources remains

socially mediated by norms governing autonomy and legitimacy (Ranabahu & Tanima, 2022).

When integrated, Resource Theory and Gender-Power Theory clarify why financial inclusion produces

heterogeneous outcomes. Economic gains may simultaneously expand bargaining capacity and destabilize

hierarchical gender norms. Thus, intervention effects are conditional upon context, institutional safeguards, and

normative environments.

Synthesis and Identified Gaps

Across intervention categories, three patterns emerge:

Three patterns emerge across interventions. First, initiatives such as microfinance, savings groups, and cash

transfers tend to enhance protective resources and economic security. Second, these shifts sometimes provoke

backlash or control dynamics, particularly where male dominance is challenged. Third, evidence is context-

specific and fragmented, especially for digital financial services and financial literacy, underscoring the need for

more rigorous and generalizable research.

The literature remains heavily concentrated on microfinance, while digital inclusion, literacy-based approaches,

and comparative cross-strategy analyses are underdeveloped. Furthermore, many empirical studies assess

economic outcomes without explicitly integrating gender-power theory, limiting explanatory depth.

Therefore, a systematic, theory-driven comparison of diverse financial inclusion strategies—examining both

resource redistribution and power renegotiation—is necessary to reconcile conflicting findings and inform policy

design. The next section advances this objective through an integrated theoretical framework that jointly

operationalizes Resource Theory and Gender-Power Theory to evaluate protective and risk-generating

mechanisms.

The integration of these theories offers a thorough framework for understanding the impact of financial inclusion

on domestic violence:

Financial Inclusion

Effect

Resource Theory Explanation

Gender-Power Theory Explanation

Women gain

income/savings

Increases bargaining power

May challenge established gender norms

Decreased dependency

Improves exit options

May incites partner backlash

Enhanced domestic well-

being

Mitigates financial strain

Fails to modify systemic inequalities

Access to digital finance

Increases individual

privacy/autonomy

Enables new mechanisms of control and

surveillance

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 178

www.rsisinternational.org

Figure 1. Conditional Resource–Power Bargaining Framework (CRPBF)

The integration of both theories elucidates the rationale behind the notion that financial inclusion is neither

intrinsically protective nor universally fraught with risk. The impact is instead influenced by various factors,

including context, design, cultural norms, and institutional safeguards.

This study advances the Conditional Resource–Power Bargaining Framework (CRPBF) to reconcile divergent

empirical findings. The framework integrates Resource Theory and Gender–Power Theory into a unified

explanatory model that conceptualizes financial inclusion as operating through dual and potentially competing

pathways within households.

First, drawing from Resource Theory (Goode, 1971), financial inclusion enhances women’s access to valued

economic assets—income, savings, credit, or transfers—which strengthens bargaining power, reduces

dependency, and expands exit options. This constitutes the resource-enhancement pathway, through which

financial inclusion is expected to mitigate domestic violence.

Second, informed by Gender–Power Theory (Connell, 1987), the framework recognizes that economic gains

may destabilize entrenched patriarchal hierarchies. In contexts characterized by rigid gender norms, shifts in

women’s economic positioning may provoke resistance, control behaviours, or retaliatory violence. This

constitutes the power-renegotiation pathway, through which financial inclusion may generate backlash effects.

Crucially, the framework is conditional rather than linear. The net effect of financial inclusion depends on socio-

cultural norms, institutional safeguards, and program design. Where gender-equitable norms and protective

institutions prevail, the resource-enhancement pathway is likely to dominate. Conversely, in highly patriarchal

environments lacking institutional protection, the power-renegotiation pathway may weaken or reverse

protective gains.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 179

www.rsisinternational.org

Thus, the CRPBF conceptualizes financial inclusion not as inherently protective or inherently risky, but as

operating within structured bargaining environments shaped by both material resources and gendered power

relations.

Conceptual Hypotheses Derived from the Conditional Resource–Power Bargaining Framework

Building on the CRPBF, this study advances three core hypotheses that capture the framework’s dual and

conditional logic.

Direct Resource-Enhancement Mechanism

Consistent with Resource Theory, increased access to financial services enhances economic capital and

bargaining leverage within the household Baranov, Cameron, Contreras Suarez, & Thibout, 2021; Ranabahu &

Tanima, 2022).

H1 (Resource-Enhancement Hypothesis):

Greater access to financial inclusion is negatively associated with domestic violence against women through

increased bargaining power and reduced economic dependency (Goode, 1971; Baranov et al., 2021; Ranabahu

& Tanima, 2022).

Power-Renegotiation (Backlash) Mechanism

Gender–Power Theory suggests that when women’s economic gains challenge traditional authority structures,

backlash risks may emerge.

H2 (Power-Renegotiation Hypothesis):

The negative association between financial inclusion and domestic violence weakens or reverses in contexts

characterized by strong patriarchal norms, where women’s economic empowerment is perceived as a threat to

established gender hierarchies (Radtke et al., 2023; Fordjour et al., 2025; Ranabahu & Tanima, 2022).

Conditional Moderation Mechanism

The CRPBF posits that outcomes depend on the normative and institutional environment in which financial

inclusion is embedded.

H3 (Conditional Moderation Hypothesis):

The relationship between financial inclusion and domestic violence is moderated by socio-cultural norms and

institutional safeguards, such that financial inclusion reduces violence in gender-equitable contexts but may have

null or adverse effects in highly unequal normative environments (Ranabahu & Tanima, 2022; Radtke et al.,

2023; Fordjour et al., 2025).

Core Theoretical Proposition

Synthesizing the above hypotheses, the Conditional Resource–Power Bargaining Framework advances the

following integrative proposition:

Financial inclusion influences domestic violence through two structurally embedded pathways: (1) a resource-

enhancement pathway that strengthens women’s bargaining power and reduces dependency, and (2) a power-

renegotiation pathway that may provoke backlash under patriarchal constraints. The net outcome is conditional

upon socio-cultural norms, institutional protections, and intervention design.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 180

www.rsisinternational.org

By explicitly theorizing both protective and risk-generating mechanisms within a single conditional model, the

CRPBF moves beyond linear empowerment assumptions and single-theory explanations. It provides a structured

mechanism-based account capable of explaining heterogeneous empirical findings across financial inclusion

strategies (Ranabahu & Tanima, 2022; Radtke et al., 2023; Fordjour et al., 2025).

Implications and Recommendations for Future Research

Given that this study is conceptual in nature, grounded in the Conditional Resource–Power Bargaining

Framework (CRPBF), and despite considerable evidence, identifies significant gaps that necessitate further

exploration of an in-depth empirical research to enhance the understanding of the nexus between financial

inclusion and domestic violence. The findings indicate that financial inclusion interventions cannot be treated as

universally protective against domestic violence; their effectiveness hinges on interactions between economic

resource gains, gendered power dynamics, and institutional safeguards.

Institutionally, robust financial inclusion programmes must strengthen the resource-enhancement pathway while

mitigating potential backlash. Microfinance, digital financial services, savings groups, financial literacy, and

cash transfers should be embedded in gender-responsive frameworks with safeguards such as flexible

repayments, secure digital platforms, dialogue-based savings groups, and cash transfers that reinforce women’s

control. Complementary strategies—including community engagement, male involvement, and interventions

addressing patriarchal norms—ensure economic gains translate into meaningful reductions in domestic violence.

Legal protections, accessible reporting channels, responsive financial institutions, and cross-sector coordination

are essential to sustain safety outcomes.

Theoretically, the study highlights the need for longitudinal and quasi-experimental research to capture the

dynamics between resource acquisition and power renegotiation. Comparative evaluations across financial

instruments will clarify how different interventions activate resource–power pathways, while digital ecosystems

warrant deeper study due to dual effects of autonomy and surveillance. Intersectional and contextual analyses

considering age, location, economic class, and institutional strength will enhance generalizability. Finally,

validating moderation effects—especially socio-cultural norms and institutional safeguards—is critical for

transforming the Conditional Resource–Power Bargaining Framework into a policy-relevant guide.

CONCLUSION

This study advances a conditional, mechanism-based understanding of the relationship between financial

inclusion and domestic violence, conceptualized through the Conditional Resource–Power Bargaining

Framework. By integrating resource-enhancement and power-renegotiation pathways, it demonstrates that

financial inclusion is neither inherently protective nor uniformly risky; outcomes depend on programme design,

socio-cultural norms, and institutional support. Economic interventions such as microfinance, digital finance,

savings groups, financial literacy, and cash transfers can enhance women’s agency but may destabilize

entrenched gender hierarchies if not paired with normative and institutional safeguards.

The CRPBF reconciles empowerment and backlash perspectives, offering both theoretical clarity and practical

guidance. Financial inclusion should be understood not merely as an economic tool but as a politically embedded

intervention capable of transforming material resources and gendered power relations. When implemented

within gender-responsive, institutionally supported environments, financial inclusion can reduce domestic

violence and contribute to broader goals of gender equality and social justice.

REFERENCES

1. Ade, N. P. (2021). Rethinking the implications of the patriarchic system of male dominance and female

subordination in the twenty first century. International Journal of Sustainability Management and

Information Technologies, 5(1), 1–6.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 181

www.rsisinternational.org

2. Ahmed, S. I., Haque, M. R., Chen, J., & Dell, N. (2017). Digital privacy challenges with shared mobile

phone use in Bangladesh. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(CSCW), 1–20.

3. Baranov, V., Cameron, L., Contreras Suarez, D., & Thibout, C. (2021). Theoretical underpinnings and

meta-analysis of the effects of cash transfers on intimate partner violence in low- and middle-income

countries. The Journal of Development Studies, 57(1), 1–25.

4. Byrt, A., Cook, K., & Burgin, R. (2025). Addressing economic abuse in intimate-partner violence

interventions: A Bacchian analysis of responsibility. Journal of Family Violence, 40(2), 419–433.

5. Dulhunty, A. (2023). Disciplinary mobility and women’s empowerment: A complicated connection.

Mobilities, 18(2), 282–296.

6. Eggers del Campo, I., & Steinert, J. I. (2022). The effect of female economic empowerment interventions

on the risk of intimate partner violence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, &

Abuse, 23(3), 810–826.

7. Esmaeil Zaei, M., Kapil, P., Pelekh, O., & Teimoury Nasab, A. (2018). Does micro-credit empower women

through self-help groups? Evidence from Punjab, Northern India. Societies, 8(3), 48.

8. Fordjour, G. A., Amoah, P., & Chan, C. L. W. (2025). Gender Equality and Decent Work Environment in

Sub-Saharan Africa: A Review and Future Agenda towards Sustainable Development. Gender and

Sustainability in the Global South, 2-36 https://doi.org/10.1515/gsgs-2024-0014

9. Goode, W. J. (1971). Force and violence in the family. Journal of Marriage and Family, 33(4), 624–636.

10. Hope Sr, K. R. (2020). Peace, justice and inclusive institutions: overcoming challenges to the

implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 16. Global Change, Peace & Security, 32(1), 57-77.

11. Horn, R., Puffer, E. S., Roesch, E., & Lehmann, H. (2014). Women’s perceptions of effects of war on

intimate partner violence and gender roles in two post-conflict West African countries: Consequences and

unexpected opportunities. Conflict and Health, 8(1), 12.

12. Kabeer, N. (2021). Gender equality, inclusive growth, and labour markets. In Women’s economic

empowerment (pp. 13–48). Routledge.

13. Kanchi, S., Phalke, V., Joglekar, S., & Kadam, P. (2024). Women empowerment in financial literacy. IPE

Journal of Management, 14(21), 110–115.

14. Koomson, I., Villano, R. A., & Hadley, D. (2020). Effect of financial inclusion on poverty and vulnerability

to poverty: Evidence using a multidimensional measure of financial inclusion. Social Indicators Research,

149(2), 613–639.

15. Kyeyune, G. N., & Ntayi, J. M. (2025). Empowering rural communities: The role of financial literacy and

management in sustainable development. Frontiers in Human Dynamics, 6, 1424126

16. Leight, J., Cullen, C., Ranganathan, M., & Yakubovich, A. (2023). Effectiveness of community

mobilisation and group-based interventions for preventing intimate partner violence against women in

low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Global Health, 13,

04115.

17. Leite, T. H., Moraes, C. L. D., Marques, E. S., Caetano, R., Braga, J. U., & Reichenheim, M. E. (2019).

Women economic empowerment via cash transfer and microcredit programs: Is it enough to decrease

intimate partner violence? Evidence from a systematic review. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 35,

e00174818.

18. Lukwa, A. T., Odunitan-Wayas, F., Lambert, E. V., Alaba, O. A., & “Savings for Health” IDRC

Collaborators. (2022). Can informal savings groups promote food security and transformative changes

among women in urban Sub-Saharan Africa? A narrative systematic review. Sustainability, 14(6), 3153.

19. Ma, N., Chen, S., Kong, Y., Chen, Z., Geldsetzer, P., Zeng, H., ... & Li, Z. (2023). Prevalence and changes

of intimate partner violence against women aged 15–49 years in 53 low- and middle-income countries

(2000–2021). The Lancet Global Health, 11(12), e1863–e1873.

20. Mbaula, W. (2019). Contribution of social transfer interventions towards universal health coverage in

Dodoma Region, Tanzania (Doctoral dissertation, University of Dodoma).

21. Maharaj, Z. (1995). A social theory of gender: Connell's Gender and Power. Feminist Review, 49(1), 50-

65.

22. Nziku, D. M., & Struthers, J. J. (2018). Female entrepreneurship in Africa: Strength of weak ties in

mitigating principal–agent problems. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 25(3), 349–

367.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue II, February 2026

Page 182

www.rsisinternational.org

23. Obisike, E. E., & Adalikwu-Obisike, J. (2021). Gender-sensitive health and social policy and programs:

Fundamental mechanisms for sustainable gender-equitable access to health and social services.

International Journal of Gender Studies in Developing Societies, 4(1), 36–51.

24. Onileowo, T. T. (2019). Motivational factors of women entrepreneurs in Ado, Ekiti State: An empirical

appraisal. World Journal of Entrepreneurial Development Studies, 4(1), 2695–2483.

25. Onileowo, T. T., & Fasiku, A. I. (2021). The concept and application of ICT on SMEs performance in

Nigeria: Limitation and challenges. E-Academia Journal, 10(1), 1–8.

26. Onileowo, T. T., Muharam, F. M., & Ramily, M. K. (2022). Financial structure and business development

in Southwest Nigeria. Journal of Hunan University Natural Sciences, 49(10).

27. Ranabahu, N., & Tanima, F. A. (2022). Empowering vulnerable microfinance women through

entrepreneurship: Opportunities, challenges, and the way forward. International Journal of Gender and

Entrepreneurship, 14(2), 145–166.

28. Radtke, H. L., Morgan, M., & Rogerson, A. (2023). Power, gender, and intimate partner abuse:

Empowerment, patriarchy, and discourse. In The Palgrave Handbook of Power, Gender, and Psychology

(477–498). Springer.

29. Rustamova, N., Sharifzoda, S., Burxanxodjaeva, X., Rahimqulova, L., Turdialiev, M., Nurullaev, F., &

Eshchanova, D. (2025). Social protection in developing countries: Legal, economic, and social trends.

Qubahan Academic Journal, 5(1), 118–149.

30. Saha, S. K., & Qin, J. (2023). Financial inclusion and poverty alleviation: An empirical examination.

Economic Change and Restructuring, 56(1), 409–440.

31. Saluja, O. B., Singh, P., & Kumar, H. (2023). Barriers and interventions on the way to empower women

through financial inclusion: A 20-year systematic review (2000–2020). Humanities and Social Sciences

Communications, 10(1), 1–14.

32. Schmalz, S., Ludwig, C., & Webster, E. (2018). The power resources approach: Developments and

challenges. Global Labour Journal, 9(2).

33. Schneider, M. C., Holman, M. R., Diekman, A. B., & McAndrew, T. (2016). Power, conflict, and

community: How gendered views of political power influence women’s political ambition. Political

Psychology, 37(4), 515–531.

34. Scott, K., Shinde, A., Ummer, O., Yadav, S., Sharma, M., Purty, N., ... & LeFevre, A. E. (2021). Freedom

within a cage: How patriarchal gender norms limit women’s use of mobile phones in rural central India.

BMJ Global Health, 6(5), e005596.

35. Sen, G., Govender, V., & El-Gamal, S. (2018). Universal health coverage, gender equality and social

protection: A health systems approach. UN Women.

36. Shahi, A. (2024). Role of microfinance on entrepreneurship capacity building. Journal of Nepalese

Management and Research, 6(1), 156–172.

37. Siano, A., Raimi, L., Palazzo, M., & Panait, M. C. (2020). Mobile banking as an innovative solution for

increasing financial inclusion in Sub-Saharan Africa: Evidence from Nigeria. Sustainability, 12(23),

10130.

38. Sikka, V., & Bhayana, P. (2024). Barriers to comprehensive financial inclusion across the globe: From

sociocultural norms to systemic challenges. In E-financial strategies for advancing sustainable

development (89–126). Springer.

39. Simon, R., & Hasan, S. (2025). Patriarchy and gender inequality: A comprehensive analysis of women’s

empowerment in contemporary India. Gender Issues, 42(1), 7.

40. Williams, A., Wamue-Ngare, G., Malelu-Gitau, A., Heise, L., Glass, N., Edeh, C., ... & Decker, M. R.

(2025). A systematic review of microfinance interventions and violence against women in low- and

middle-income contexts. BMJ Global Health, 10(4).

41. Broderick, C. B. (1971). Beyond the five conceptual frameworks: A decade of development in family

theory. Journal of marriage and family, 33(1), 139-159.