Gender inequality remains a pervasive challenge, not only from a development perspective but also from a human rights perspective. Recent years have seen a renewed interest in empowering girls and women across sectors, particularly due to the focus the Sustainable Development Goals have put on women’s involvement and engagement as equal partners and on achieving gender equality. There is a broad spectrum of interventions targeted at gender equality in developing countries. However, to our knowledge, there is no evidence gap map on the effectiveness of interventions to improve women’s empowerment in developing countries. This evidence gap map (EGM) plots studies on the effectiveness of interventions for women’s empowerment in developing countries (defined here as the list of countries defined by the Kyoto Protocol as non-Annex I countries). This EGM is based on a comprehensive and systematic search of academic databases and grey literature sources, screening of selected academic journals published in the last five years and citation tracking of selected systematic reviews during February 2022. Though we were primarily interested in mapping effectiveness studies, we also included process evaluations that might be useful in understanding some of the implementation issues in the effectiveness of interventions. The EGM thus comprises impact evaluations, process evaluations and systematic reviews of interventions for women’s empowerment in developing countries. The eligible population for this map included girls and women of any age, although the intervention could also be targeted at boys and men of any age. A theory of change and an intervention–outcome framework were developed for this EGM, and the map followed the conventional Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes and Study (PICOS) framework. The EGM contains 423 studies, of which 288 are impact evaluations, 105 are process evaluations and 38 are systematic reviews (which totals 431 studies because a single study may be an impact evaluation as well as a process evaluation). Nearly 80 per cent of included systematic reviews are assessed to be low-confidence reviews. Most of the evidence is from studies conducted in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. There is a relatively large amount of evidence on economic interventions and capacity-building interventions, and both these categories in the map have a high number of impact evaluations and systematic reviews. There is a dearth of evidence on policy and institutional interventions. In terms of outcomes, political empowerment outcome categories are far less populated than other outcome categories. Women’s representation in political bodies, digital access and access to justice shows very little evidence. It appears that researchers frequently use the Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index to measure women’s empowerment. Variations of this index such as the projectlevel Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI) and the Women’s Empowerment in Livestock Index are also used to measure empowerment in a range of studies. This EGM serves as a useful visual resource for the Green Climate Fund, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, practitioners, policymakers and researchers to understand the areas in which most research on the effectiveness of interventions for women’s empowerment is concentrated. The map also highlights intervention–outcome combinations where a limited amount of research has been conducted. The highly populated combinations can be explored further to conduct systematic reviews if prior systematic reviews are not available. More primary research may be conducted where there is a scarcity of evidence. Overall, this EGM provides granular information on the sp