Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Climate Change Is a Women's Issue

By Bojana Stoparic, Women's eNews. Posted July 10, 2006.


Some women's advocates are demanding that new climate policies address the different ways men and women will be affected by global warming.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Nobel Laureate Slams the Bible, Calls It "A Catalogue of Cruelties"
Mario de Queiroz

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
Do We Really Want to Enshrine Insurance Monopoly into Law? This and 5 Other Complaints About the Health Bill
John Nichols

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Study Claims Even the Most Sophisticated Readers Can Be Manipulated
Melinda Burns

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Bojana Stoparic

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

If climate change predictions by researchers at the University of Toronto prove to be right, low-lying Bangladesh will suffer some of the worst effects of global warming. Already, about a fifth of the country is flooded annually. As temperatures and sea levels rise, flooding may increase up to 40 percent.

For Bangladeshi women, this is particularly bad news. In some past floods--such as in April 1991 following a Category 4 cyclone--the death rate for women was five times that of men.

Several international women's rights groups from the United States, Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands have banded together at recent United Nations meetings on climate change to call attention to this and other examples that illustrate how global warming will perpetuate gender inequalities.

"Unless these realities are understood at the global, national and local level, our policies to prevent and redress climate change and natural disasters are unlikely to reach women, who are not only the most vulnerable but also key agents for survival and stability in the community," said June Zeitlin, executive director of the New York-based Women's Environment and Development Organization, which advocates for women's rights in global policy.

Neither the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change--the first international treaty to address global warming, which entered into force in 1994--nor the Kyoto Protocol, which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2012 through legally binding measures, mentions gender. Demanding Inclusion in Treaty

Since women's activists consider further changes to the Kyoto treaty unlikely they are focusing on negotiations over a post-Kyoto agreement, which began at a U.N. meeting in Montreal last December. They are demanding that this treaty addresses the different ways men and women will be affected by global warming and climate policies.

With the share of women in government delegations at the annual U.N. meetings on climate change ranging between 15 percent and 30 percent in the past 11 years, women's advocates are also pressing governments and the U.N. to fully involve women in planning and implementing environmental projects at both the international and local levels.

Many scientists attribute global warming to the release of greenhouse gases by industrial processes and the burning of fossil fuels. The White House, however, has been skeptical that global warming can be attributed to man-made causes. The Bush administration refused to sign the Kyoto treaty, saying its restrictions only on industrialized countries are unfair. Australia is the only other developed nation to not ratify Kyoto.

If the present rate of emissions is not reduced, the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts worldwide temperatures will rise between 2.5 to 10.4 Fahrenheit degrees by 2100, resulting in more extreme weather conditions. This, in turn, is expected to undermine access to food and other resources, as well as increase threats to human health. According to the panel's 2001 assessment, climate change will hit developing countries--and the world's poorest populations--the hardest.

"Women are particularly vulnerable to adverse impacts from climate change because they are disproportionately poor and lacking in access to clean water, adequate nutrition, health care and shelter," said Neil Leary, who directs a project assessing the impact of climate change for the United Nations Environment Program and the Global Change System for Analysis, Research and Training, a Washington-based environmental research organization. "The livelihoods of women are often highly dependent upon resources that are strongly influenced by climate."

Women--by tending livestock, growing vegetable gardens and cultivating subsistence crops such as rice--are responsible for between 70 percent and 80 percent of household food production in sub-Saharan Africa, 65 percent in Asia and 45 percent in Latin America.

Collecting water and firewood also often falls to women. As crop yields are reduced and resources become scarcer, women's workloads will only become more time-consuming and burdensome, jeopardizing chances to work outside the home or attend school.

At the same time, women's traditional knowledge and skills have helped communities cope with severe weather. During a drought in Micronesia, for instance, local women, familiar with island hydrology, found new water sources for their communities.

Amid scant data on gender and climate change, the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization has just given funding to Genanet--a project in Frankfurt, Germany, that promotes gender equality in environmental policies--to begin in August to analyze research and to develop gender-sensitive proposals for mitigating global warming and adapting to it.

Ulrike Rohr, director of Genanet, attributes the low participation of women's advocates in the gatherings to an exclusively scientific and technical approach to global warming and treaty negotiations.

"Women feel like they can't enter the discussions," she said. Although there are female experts and policymakers present at the meetings, the overall conversation has been dominated by emissions trading and new markets, without consideration for poverty or social and economic inequities, she argued.

Women's advocates, however, are beginning to wedge themselves into U.N. environmental policymaking.

At a meeting in Montreal last December, for instance, the Women's Environment and Development Organization, which advocates for women's rights in global policy, got involved for the first time. The group's Zeitlin says she was shocked to find the meeting almost exclusively concerned with science, technology and money.

"The social upheaval and social costs of climate change and natural disasters were barely discussed."

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Bojana Stoparic is a freelance writer based in New York.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Not Another Gender Issue
Posted by: ChristopherLL on Jul 10, 2006 3:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am for protecting the environment and climate on this planet at all costs. I always have and I always will. But to view it as another divisive gender issue only diffuses the focus and divides the energy for the mamoth effort needed to change social, economic and political policy. There are many perspectives to the issue of global warming and human population growth is one. I suggest to women (and men) that they begin to find real answers to birth control (look at China)and limit the number of human beings born simulaneous to reducing our excessive use of energy. We are all in this together.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Not Another Gender Issue Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: Not Another Gender Issue Posted by: Aussie Kim
» Women's wealth control Posted by: BlueTigress
» RE: Women's wealth control Posted by: Burton
» RE: Women's wealth control Posted by: Burton
» Global Warming Posted by: derfb1
» RE: Global Warming Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: Global Warming Posted by: Ratskii
both the feminism angle and the environmental angle bore me to tears
Posted by: four_legs_good_two_legs_bad on Jul 10, 2006 4:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As the previous poster said, this feminism lense through which all progressive media sees the world is divisive. Also, stale.

As for environmentalism and the supposed global warming, I have been on this earth for quite some time. It does not seem any warmer to me. Also, the earth goes through many temperature fluctuations anyway.

Of course it seems logical that more people living a western lifestyle is going to warm the planet through the increased use of energy. So here is a solution --stop immigration into America.

Problem solved. Of course that means rich investors will make less profit because wages would go up. Tough for them. However, the so called progressive faction of America seems closely aligned with the rich and the right wing, and supports more and more immigration despite the costs to the environment.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» God/Nature Are Racists! Posted by: knocko
» RE: God/Nature Are Racists! Posted by: MatthewSavage
Climate Change
Posted by: drappleby on Jul 10, 2006 4:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I realise that one of the sacred tenets of the liberal religion is that Global Warming is real and is caused by Greenhouse gases from human activity. Since I am an openminded agnostic on this issue I have a few questions for the Global Warming faithful and true believers. 1. One thousand years ago the earth's climate was considerably warmer. The Norse had a traditional Viking lifestyle on Greenland with horses, cows, pastures, etc. England had about 250 vineyards, as they did one thousand years earlier in Roman times. Why was it so much warmer back then? 2. In the last 2 and a half million years Connecticut had been covered by glaciers about 2 dozen times with ice and snow a mile thick. We also have a Dinosaur park where dinosaurs walked and ate tropical type plants. If these extremes are normal, then how can one blame human activity for a few degrees of change well within the normal limits? Could sun activity and strength or changes in the tilt of the earth's axis cause the changes? regards to all

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Climate Change Posted by: mazel
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: drappleby
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: knocko
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: knocko
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: mazel
» Relax and enjoy the warmth Posted by: knocko
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: knocko
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: grokked
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: drappleby
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: grokked
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: grokked
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: Ratskii
» RE: Climate Change Posted by: Lincoln fan
For once I agree with the critics of this splintering of focus.
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Jul 10, 2006 5:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The ecosystem, agriculture, and civilization AS A WHOLE are in serious danger from global warming. It doesn't really matter who piles up more corpses first-- the point is, we need to do something BIG to stop global warming before the corpses start piling. Malaria doesn't care-- mosquitos bite male and female. Locust swarms don't care who the crops they were going to eat belong to. Men may stand a better chance of evacuating from hurricanes, but telling them that doesn't mean they will fear hurricanes more for that reason. To persuade people we have to tell them what global warming means to them:
Nutrient-poor crops. Submerged beach houses. Tornado warnings in California. Doubled hurricane activity in the gulf. Fewer airplane flights. Increased insect populations. Tropical diseases moving northward. Dead fisheries. Drought. Ground buckling with the loss of permafrost.
Everyone gets effected eventually. Let men sign the treaties to save their own asses; that's more likely to convince tham than worrying about the little old ladies of Bangladesh. Old ladies' lives are just as valuable (if not more so), but the point is getting something done, not grandstanding.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Micro makes the macro
Posted by: SBK on Jul 10, 2006 5:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No people. You totally missed it. Ok sure, the US needs to care about climate change and that's a start--albeit 30 years too late +/-. However, while we've been busy consuming, the rest of the world has working on these issues and the differential impact on the poor--most of whom are women-- is a more refined aspect to examining the topic. The whole of the topic matters not just "does America care". When our policymakers begin to pay attention to predicting scenarios like Katrina and actually preparing for them, they will need to know how different groups are affected. To not do this analysis is irresponsible, that is why the poor got left behind last summer. A gender analysis for climate change recognizes that women's roles in society are diverse and they will experience climate change in a way policy needs to be ready for. It's not losing the debate; it's getting better at telling ALL the chapters of the story. Both micro and macro analysis is important for the WHOLE picture. Climate change is more than pollution trading.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh goodness. There they go, giving the President more authority...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Jul 10, 2006 11:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bush administration refused to sign the Kyoto treaty, saying its restrictions only on industrialized countries are unfair.

To the best of my knowledge, the POTUS (and his administration) lacks authority to sign the treaty into law.*

Ratifications of treaties are a matter for Congress.**

*9th grade civics, test 1

**9th grade civics, midterm

Goodness is it ever frustrating when people on the left rush to give the grand poobah more authority than he's already lavished upon himself.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

None So Blind...
Posted by: munchkinpup on Jul 10, 2006 8:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is truly amazing just how ignorant people can be. It is not a black and white issue. Women and children already have suffered the effects of environmental degradation more so than men because they are usually on the lesser end of the economic scale. (Got to be a big lie right?) Yea, we ARE all in this big shitpile together, and I don't see the author of this piece excluding men from the discussion, just ADDING the women into the mix, as it should be.
Of course, global warming exists. How many reputable scientists have to yak about this truth before humankind wakes the hell up???!!! Maybe all of you morons won't be around to find out what happens, but your grand-children or great grand children just might have to worry about it!
Why don't all you trolls go find something else to do this summer- like jump into a nice cool polluted lake or river.

Here's some additional reading for your hopeful enlightenment from the year 2001, and David Corn's words prove to be prophetic: "George W. Bush: The Un-Science Guy" By David Corn, June 19, 2001
"George W. claims that global warming theory isn't based on "sound science." How long can he pull off this act -- until Coppertone stock splits and New Orleans is underwater?"

Kind of creepy isn't it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: None So Blind... Posted by: Aussie Kim
» RE: None So Blind... Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: None So Blind... Posted by: Aussie Kim
Just women whingeing again?
Posted by: Aussie Kim on Jul 10, 2006 11:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In some parts of tsunami-affected Asia, 80% of the people killed were female, either because they weren't safe by being out to sea in fishing boats at the time or they were on land and had never learned to swim or could just not escape.

This has led to enormous problems in some places in Indonesia, for example, where girls in the camps have been forcibly married off to men in order to make sure they don't marry anyone else, since there are so few women to go round. Abuse of women in these areas became rife.

And some people wonder why these causes get taken up by women? Instead of whingeing yourselves, JOIN them so we can all work together, instead of sitting around and abusing women for, apparently, trying to steal these issues for themselves. Just because YOU didn't think of it in the first place doesn't mean that women can't...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Earth warmer in the Past
Posted by: drappleby on Jul 11, 2006 3:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
good morning, again I still ask the same question I have asked for several years now, IF global warming is real, and If it is caused by greenhouse gas emissions released by mankind, then why was it considerably warmer 1000 years ago and 2000 years ago?? This was before the industrial revolution and the massive CO2 release. Christopher tells me "hundreds of articles over the last 20 years" support his conclusions. Mazel tells me "the scientic evidence is out there", DrClaw directs me to an interesting site (thankyou DrClaw). but no one seems to have an explanation for this apparent anomaly. I think it is good in science to always be testing and retesting your theories. Not to become personally attached to them. I see over and over where the weather service cannot get the weather correct for later that DAY, much less the next day, but we are supposed to believe complex computer generated programs that accurately can predict the global temperature 100 years from now? The reason I refer Global Warming (with the caveat that it is ALWAYS, ALWAYS caused by the activities of mankind) as one of the sacred tenets of the liberal religion is that if you doubt or question Global Warming they act like the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Giordano Bruno (we all know what happened to him for questioning sacred dogma). Let's be honest, the reason that it is SO important that Global Warming, if it exists, HAS to be caused by mankind, is that the Marxist/Socialists want to use this issue to get control of the economy...and these people dont have a clue about how economies work (perfect examples...Che, Castro,Mao, Lenin/Stalin,Pol Pot, North Korea etc etc). 30 years ago, the liberals were fretting about the climate getting colder, we were entering a new ICE AGE, check Newsweek 1975, and they had all kinds of graphs and charts to prove it and many dire predictions of disaster,famine, etc,. but the SAME solution: BIG GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS to fight the coming ice age. regards to all and I enjoyed your posts (you too Mazel)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who dies more????
Posted by: Joe Ox on Jul 11, 2006 10:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By implication, we should redouble our efforts here because women suffer more. Therefore, if men were the ones suffering more the gender side would not be an issue. Like many here I am sick and tired of this feminist side to everything. Hell since women are 51% of the population they are DYING more, therefore I recommend a serious redoubling of efforts to wipe out death!!!! Nevermind the life expectancy of her is much higher, she dies at a rate of 51% to 49%,
DOWN WITH DEATH
DOWN WITH DEATH
DOWN WITH DEATH

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here's a solution
Posted by: Burton on Jul 15, 2006 10:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why don't university womyn's studies programs come up with a solution. Since a woman can do anything a man can do, only better, I am sure that womyn's studies could come up with a scientific solution to end environmental disasters.

PS: I am quite serious about this. It pains me to see so much university space wasted on gender based pop-sociology. I'd like to see some real scientific work come out of womyn's studies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

coulio
Posted by: coulio on Nov 7, 2006 7:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
coulio
Posted by: coulio on Nov 7, 2006 7:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement