Doubts & Risks Abound Over a Possible Merger of 2 UN Entities Focusing on Women

29 January 2026 – Countries are treading carefully about the possible merger of two major United Nations agencies focusing solely on women’s rights and reproductive health as experts warn about the vast perceived risks of diluting the two entities’ distinct roles into one.

Diplomats want assurance that the respective gender equality and reproductive health mandates of UN Women and the United Nation Population Fund (UNFPA) will remain fully intact amid the UN Secretary-General António Guterres’s reform initiative of the 80-year-old organization.

The work of UN Women and UNFPA, both agencies based at UN headquarters in New York City, have always been contentious for member states like Russia and some in the Mideast. Experts and civil society groups said the all-encompassing gender focus of the two entities could face potential rollbacks as a final decision of the agencies’ fate is debated by their boards and Guterres and approved by the General Assembly in the next several months.

A wide range of countries, such as Armenia, Brazil, Japan, Pakistan and Romania, voiced their concerns during an informal town hall at the UN on Jan. 26, saying they were ready to engage in more discussions to ensure that the merger proposed by the UN Secretariat (Guterres) does not undo their mandates, which are authorized by member states, but instead aims to reinforce the entities’ role.

The concerns reflect broader unease by some member states and civil society over whether a restructuring process under the guise of UN reform could reopen politically sensitive debates around women’s rights, sexual and reproductive health rights and gender equality. Amina Mohammed, the deputy secretary-general, assured member states during the Jan. 26 meeting that the merger “is not about reopening and it’s not about diluting the mandates.”

Susana Malcorra, a former top UN official who is a founder of GWLVoices, which is holding a “dialogue” this week in Madrid on women leading the UN in the 21st century, said of the merger discussions: “It is a decision that is not easy to make and must be taken with the preservation of institutional mandates as a priority, while seeking opportunities to optimize resources.”

The merger may mean we “get the worst of both worlds,” Helen Clark, a former prime minister of New Zealand and ex-head of the UN Development Program, told PassBlue regarding the two agencies.

The biggest risks

Still, internal UN assessments, public reports by civil society groups and expert opinions all suggest that there’s a gamble of restructuring or outright disengaging from the gender work of the two agencies. One assessment commissioned by UNFPA and seen by PassBlue listed “mandate dilution or political backlash” as a potential problem. It also noted a disruption to operations, particularly to humanitarian and lifesaving services, as well as funding instability during such a transition.

Fòs Feminista, an advocacy organization, said in its recent analysis on the merger that it would weaken the institutional ability to promote women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights, dilute gender equality mandates and dismantle relevant infrastructure built in the last 30 years.

According to the group, the merger “would be felt most acutely at the national level, where governments, civil society organizations, and millions of women and girls depend on the technical support, operational infrastructure, and normative leadership these agencies provide.”

Similar considerations surfaced during recent closed-door meetings between UN Secretariat officials tasked with reform and the respective executive boards of UN Women and UNFPA. Recordings of the gatherings reviewed by PassBlue show board members repeatedly requesting data, legal analysis and clear alternatives to support the claimed benefits of a merger. One diplomat requested specific numbers, while another top donor questioned whether the union could really help solve the UN’s financial problem.

It remains unclear how much the agencies’ mandates will be negotiated in the General Assembly, if at all. Mohammed, the deputy secretary-general, has said the body will be consulted before a final decision is made.

Cristal Downing, the director of the Gender and Conflict Project at the International Crisis Group, a think tank, said that negotiation in the current geopolitical climate “is definitely something to be scared of.”

The truth about overlaps

Only 20 to 30 percent of the work between the two agencies overlaps, according to Fòs Feminista. UN Women leads efforts holding governments and UN agencies accountable to international gender commitments, while UNFPA delivers large-scale reproductive health services, population data and humanitarian aid in 150-plus countries.

Gender equality, sexual reproductive health and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) — the latter a focus for both agencies — have become contentious in the Security Council and across UN organs as the United States dissociates itself from these agendas in many ways, like repeatedly denouncing the SDGs.

Some UN peacekeeping mandates, which are authorized by the Security Council, that have come up for renewal in the last 12 months, since power changed hands in Washington, have gone through more-than-usual tense negotiations. Gender elements were stripped from a few of the mandates as a condition for their renewal, with US leading the charge. While Washington said this month that it would withdraw its participation in and funding to UN Women and UNFPA, it could still wield enormous influence through allied member states. The tactic played out in the negotiations for the final declaration of the Commission on the Status of Women’s annual conference in March 2025.

Argentina, which under President Javier Milei has dismantled sexual reproductive health care for women in his country, mounted opposition to the adoption of the UN political declaration, partly in obeisance to the US. Paradoxically, Milei is backing the sole official candidate running so far for UN secretary-general, Rafael Mariano Grossi, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency. The IAEA, as it’s known, supports the SDGs as a UN body.

The savings

Another internal assessment prepared for Guterres seen by PassBlue said the merger could create a single entity that would complement the mandate of both organizations but warned that hasty execution could erode funders’ confidence that could hobble the new agency. The organizations’ combined expenditure, workforce and presence will birth an entity with $2.1 billion in total costs, 9,400 personnel and 180 country offices globally.

Downing of the International Crisis Group said a bigger gender organization is good on paper, but the UN’s current financial crisis — linked directly to the US having not paid its annual mandatory dues — could affect whether a new entity concentrating on women can actually maintain its footprint.

UN Women is funded partly by member states’ assessed dues and voluntary donations from governments and other, smaller sources. UNFPA, however, relies on voluntary contributions and earmarked funding. These various financing sources are already strained, so a merger would not automatically pool resources or make them interchangeable, Fos Feminista said.

“We have read with interest the Fòs Feminista report ‘Getting UN80 right: protecting mandates while improving coordination,’” Selinde Dulckeit, UNFPA’s media and communications boss, told PassBlue. “The merger assessment is ongoing, and we look forward to continued engagement with civil society partners on the UN80 initiative in the months ahead.”

UN Women did not respond to PassBlue’s request for comment.

Trump effect

The end of USAID in 2025 by the Trump administration and the slashing of development funding by many European countries at the same time have had devastating effects on development programs across UN agencies. Yet, a merger will translate only into a $2 million decrease in the UN’s general operating budget for 2026-2027, according to oversight documentation. UN Women’s budget presentation identifies 50 posts that are scheduled to be moved from New York City to Nairobi, Kenya, and Bonn, Germany (presented as 31 percent of New York City-based institutional-budget posts).

UNFPA also went through a sharp downsizing as a result of the current UN-wide liquidity crisis and the hatcheting of USAID. A UNFPA-commissioned independent evaluation linked the 2025 funding cuts to “immediate staffing reductions across all levels.” The US contributions to the agency in 2025 dropped by $335 million, according to Diene Keita, the chief executive of UNFPA, defunding about 100 jobs and 40 of 48 US grants to the organization.

“The merger is likely to result in deep cuts, undermining the work of both institutions, their institutional knowledge and partnerships they have cultivated over the years,” Aili Mari Tripp, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, told PassBlue.

“I fear we are going to see massive setbacks in this area and a rollback of hard-won gains. Women globally are not well served by weakening the institutions that have provided such important support to the advancement of women’s rights and human rights.”

In addition, staff members of both organizations who spoke with PassBlue on the condition of anonymity so they could speak freely about the issue, said there was no clarity in the conversations they have with the agency’s respective leaders and the UN Secretariat.

One staffer told PassBlue that the impression from Mohammed, UN deputy secretary-general, is that the merger is a “done deal” — as conveyed in a staff meeting held early this year.

UNFPA leadership strikes a different tone on the merger, according to some staff members. Keita told employees in one meeting that she would ensure that the mandate of UNFPA is protected in such a plan. Keita, like her counterpart at UN Women, Sima Bahous, might offer expert opinion on the need to preserve mandates, but the final decision lies with Guterres and member states.

But perhaps the most frustrated staff members are those who have relocated to Nairobi amid the systemwide job cuts and transfers that have swept through many UN agencies in the last year, since Guterres’s reform acts began in March 2025.

For starters, staff members’ employment contracts have been revised to an annual frequency instead of the traditional biennial contracts. This is particularly destabilizing for personnel who have uprooted their lives to move to Nairobi, another UNFPA worker told PassBlue.

“UNFPA staff care deeply about their work and the women and girls they serve,” Nicole Kim, the agency’s staff representative, told PassBlue. “Naturally, there is some anxiety and concern about how a merger would impact staffing, the integrity of our mandate and our ability to continue to deliver the important work we do.”

WUNRN

Doubts and Risks Abound Over a Possible Merger of 2 UN Entities Focusing on Women – PassBlue