The dangers of climate change have been seeping into our collective psyche for the past two decades as more and more people become convinced that it is actually happening. And thanks to the scientific community it is becoming increasingly clear that the human impact on the world and our local environments could have devastating consequences for the future. And while there are still some deniers trying to dissuade those in power, such as US President Donald Trump, that the situation isn’t as bad as it seems, those more enlightened are attempting to highlight ways in which we can address it, sooner rather than later.
Climate change has no regard for human structures, whether social, economic or physical. It doesn’t decide who to flood or which people it will affect most. It is only due to the existing social and economic world we have created that determines who will be affected first and most.
The world is warming and we can see this in the rising sea levels and global temperatures, which are causing the polar ice sheet to melt. Experts believe climate change will lead to desertification and depletion of farm land in many areas as well as water and resource scarcity leading to increased unrest, conflict and even war. The prevalence of natural disasters is also on the rise, which affect the poorest sections of society most — the majority of whom in the developing world are women.
Climate change affects women in various ways that are tied to existing disparities in economic and social life. Women are disproportionately located at the bottom of the socio-economic scale in all societies, and as such, are more likely to be affected by periods of drought, famine and other adverse environmental effects of climate change, including natural disasters. In times of crisis or disaster, women are also likely to be defined by their reproductive capacities, rather than their productive capacities. There are also few opportunities of land ownership and insecurity over rights, which make women more vulnerable to changes and crisis. As highlighted through various studies, women are seen as victims and helpless despite the major roles they play in risk and emergency management, such as taking care of the family and helping provide food and other essential items.
Women working in the home, on the land and in caring professions to provide for the family are the people more likely to be affected by drought, famine and natural disasters. Because of the conventional, socially constructed roles that women play in the home and in work, these roles have become feminised and are seen to be of less importance than other ‘masculine’ occupations.
Feminists see gender as a social construct — one that has been created by society through expectations and tradition. Historically, certain characteristics have been assigned to men and women; men are seen as strong, rational, independent and as protectors, women are viewed as weak, emotional and in need of protection.
There is also a feminised ideal of women being ‘at one with nature’, and also the image of women as vulnerable. But it is problematic for women to be seen as victims or as virtuous when it comes to climate change as it detracts attention from the main issue with regard to women in the developing world, and indeed women everywhere, and that is the power inequalities in decision-making in environmental management. Understanding the power relations that exist today is vital to produce the right policies to deal with the future in an equitable, meaningful and sustainable way.
Women are struggling to be seen on the international level and in theories of international relations, and have struggled to gain access to decision-making platforms both globally and locally. This can have a bearing on how climate change is tackled by the global community. However, efforts are being made, by organisations such as the Mary Robinson Foundation, to highlight the aspects of climate change policy that can exacerbate existing gender inequalities among men and women.
In recent years, there has been a push by various groups to make women more visible to ensure an appropriate response to the dangers of climate change. Since its inception in 1995 the Conference of the Parties (CoP), has been held every year as part of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), with a focus on global discussions of climate change. But the discussion has mainly focused on the economic, security and technological effects of climate change and has failed to address the social aspects. Focusing on the social aspects can improve the measures that need to be taken to reduce the effects of climate change and will broaden the debate by attracting more women to the table. Bringing a gender perspective to the table in negotiations, experts hope to work to avoid the negative effects that climate change measures can have on women.
There must be an awareness of other forms of inequality due to race, class, sexuality, when discussing international relations, and this is particularly pertinent in gender equality. We must also keep in mind the discrimination that subordinated men experience in the developing world, to encourage support for gender equality with regard to climate change and indeed, all policies.
As most policymakers see climate change as a security and economic issue, there is a high likelihood of policies being created and acted upon in the same way as in times of conflict when security is deemed of paramount importance. Such actions can make the lives of ‘women and children’ even more difficult, such as the adverse effect of UN sanctions on women in Iraq in the 1990s. Studies have shown that identifying ‘women and children’ as a distinct and separate single grouping can be detrimental to the lives of women in times of conflict, by assuming that they are protected when in fact they are bearing the brunt of policies and actions of national or international governments.
Reinforcing gender inequalities
Some of the policy measures seeking to mitigate the effects of climate change have the capacity to reinforce existing gender inequalities. For example, in the home, if policies seek to reduce the use of energy or resources, this will affect women more as those tasked with providing food, water and health care. Campaigning for energy efficiency should focus on who uses what and when.
To understand the global dimensions of climate change we must address the issues surrounding women with a view to getting a complete picture of the current system to reveal ways it can be improved to reduce the effects of climate change. The COP 22, which was held in Marrakech in November last year, featured discussions on gender and climate change, noting the “importance of coherence between gender-responsive climate policies and the balanced participation of women and men in the Convention processes and the provisions of international instruments and outcomes …” It also recognised the need for women to be represented and that gender-responsive climate policy still needed further strengthening.
But there needs to be a careful evaluation of how current research will be interpreted.
There is a danger that current discussion over the security and economic aspects of climate change could overshadow the social dimension, which is what women’s organisations at the global level are challenging.
There is also the fear that gender equality will be pushed out by those in the international system who prefer the status quo. Or those who prefer to go backwards in time rather than forward, such as Trump with his view on energy and climate change.
Once notions about gender are embedded in the system, some researchers have found that institutions’ policies and practices reproduce these assumptions. As such, it is important for people to keep the pace and continue to challenge the existing order for the benefit of all.
Christina Curran is a journalist currently studying a Masters in International Relations at Queen’s University, Belfast.
