from a quick look you could be mistaken that it is primarily a multi-gender study, and it is, but i think what they are trying to convey is very specific to women's rights.
it proves that investing in women's education and health is the soundest investment of the twenty first century. here's a snippet from page 13, it references population models leading into year 2100:
"The large range in global TFR (total fertility rate) across the scenarios (figure 6, same page) translated into a total difference of 7.29 billion people between the slower scenario and SDG (sustainable developmental goal) scenario population projections."
put plainly: we don't do anything versus we do it well is a difference of 7 billion humans at the turn of the next century.
i could go on for days about this but i have had enough eye rolling in my real life that i'm hesitant to keep talking about it.
blows my mind a little more every time i reread it.
i feel like this is probably significant because its like a non-misanthropic, non-eugenic, non-genocidal answer for pop growth. Anytime I hear anybody say the word "overpopulation" it's like a red flag for misanthropy.