«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»
Climate Change Will Affect Women More Severely Than Men
Today is International Women's Day. You'd hardly know it.
Though the IUCN (World Conservation Union) has celebrated by releasing a disturbing report on global warming predicting that the physical, economic, social, and cultural impacts of global warming will jeopardize women far more then men. Just as Hurricane Katrina and the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami disproportionately affected women far more then men.
The report, Gender and Climate Change (available here as a PDF), concludes that women are more severely affected by climate change and natural disasters because of their social roles and because of discrimination and poverty. To make matters worse, they're also underrepresented in decision-making about climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, and, most critically, discussions and decisions about adaptation and mitigation. From the report:
For example, the 20,000 people who died in France during the extreme heat wave in Europe in 2003 included significantly more elderly women than men. In natural disasters that have occurred in recent years, both in developing and in developed countries, it is primarily the poor who have suffered—and all over the world, the majority of the poor are women, who at all levels earn less than men. In developing countries, women living in poverty bear a disproportionate burden of climate change consequences. Because of women's marginalized status and dependence on local natural resources, their domestic burdens are increased, including additional work to fetch water, or to collect fuel and fodder. In some areas, climate change generates resource shortages and unreliable job markets, which lead to increased male-out migration and more women left behind with additional agricultural and households duties. Poor women's lack of access to and control over natural resources, technologies and credit mean that they have fewer resources to cope with seasonal and episodic weather and natural disasters. Consequently traditional roles are reinforced, girls' education suffers, and women’s ability to diversify their livelihoods (and therefore their capacity to access income-generating jobs) is diminished.
The report notes examples from other sources, including this:
An Oxfam Report (March 2005) on the impact of the 2004 Asia Tsunami on women raised alarms about gender imbalances since the majority of those killed and among those least able to recover were women. In Aceh, for example, more than 75 percent of those who died were women, resulting in a male-female ratio of 3:1 among the survivors. As so many mothers died, there have been major consequences with respect to infant mortality, early marriage of girls, neglect of girls' education, sexual assault, trafficking in women and prostitution. These woes, however, are largely neglected in the media coverage.
And this:
In a study executed on behalf of ACTIONAID in 1993-1994 in the Himalayan region of Nepal, it became clear that environmental degradation has compounded stress within households and pressure on scarce resources. This meant that the pressure on children, particularly girl children, to do more work and at an earlier age was increasing. Girls do the hardiest work, have the least say and the fewest education options. Programmes that concentrate only on sending more girls to school were failing as the environmental and social conditions of the families deteriorated.
Ironically, women also produce less greenhouse gas emissions than men, the report concludes. Flatulence jokes aside, this includes women in the developed world.
In Europe, in both the work and leisure contexts, women travel by car less frequently and over shorter distances, use smaller, energy-saving cars and fly considerably less frequently than men.
Women are over represented as heads of low-income households and under represented in high-income groups. In this respect, income levels play a role in CO2 emissions: the higher the income, the higher the emissions from larger houses with more electrical equipment, bigger cars and so on.
Lower income people, who happen to be—you guessed it—mostly women, also have less access to energy-efficient appliances and homes because these tend to be more costly. Most frustrating of all, women perceive global warming as a more dangerous threat than men do and would do more to address it, given the tools.
Women and men perceive the cause of climate change (including CO2 emissions) differently. In Germany, more than 50 percent of women compared to only 40 percent of men, rate climate change brought about by global warming as extremely or very dangerous. Women also believed very firmly that each individual can contribute toward protecting the climate through his/her individual actions. However, policy planning does not reflect in anyway these perceptions.
By excluding women, the world loses vital input and profound knowledge—knowledge that may prove key to adapting to climate change.
Inuit women in Northern Canada have always had a deep understanding of weather conditions, as they were responsible for assessing hunting conditions and preparing the hunters accordingly. During a drought in the small islands of the Federal States of Micronesia, it was local women, knowledgeable about island hydrology as a result of land-based work, who were able to find potable water by digging a new well that reached the freshwater lens.
The report concludes:
There is a need to refocus the thinking and the debate on energy and climate change to include a human rights perspective. Integrating a rights-based approach to access to sustainable and affordable energy is an approach that will recognise and take into account women's specific needs and women's human rights. Current economic models based primarily on privatisation strategies do not include accountability in terms of meeting people’s basic needs.
The UN has established a website on gender and climate change, where you can learn more, get involved.
Comments
Fascinating. Are men necessary?
Julia Whitty is brilliant at seeing just a little farther than most. Here's a counterpoint - that global warming will be disastrous for men. Pollutants such as PCBs, Dioxins etc. reach northern latitudes by the grasshopper effect. They land in snow and are held in snow and ice harmlessly. When warming occurs those contaminants are mobilized into the environment and consumed by fish which are then consumed by marine mammals and humans. Female killer whales, for example, who accumulate these pollutants off load them to their new borns (yes, I know this is about as perverse a situation as one can imagine). The females thus reduce their toxic burden but males have no such mechanism and it is the males who are dieing out in killer whale pods such as those of Puget sound. We are now conducting research on whether human females who have breast fed their children are less susceptible to lymphomas than men.
Posted by: Hardy Jones on 03/09/07 at 7:22 AM Respond
Current alarmist, incompetent stories regarding CO2 and Climate Change is a fraud.
Junk science is infesting the media, the Internet and public schools, affecting public health, squandering your tax dollars, poisoning sick people and miseducating our children.
Pseudoscientific claptrap abounds. Quackery is now found everywhere.
Educate, inform yourself, take a science class.
See CO2 and Climate Change
http://www.InteliOrg.com/co2_climate_change.html
Stop listening to folks that have a financial interest in the subject.
Posted by: Dr Coles on 04/19/07 at 11:36 AM Respond
Dr Coles,
That's a very funny post on your part. First, everything you said parses to semantically null. There is no content. I almost couldn't tell which side you were on. So, then I went to intelliorg's website. The first thing listed on their criteria for credibility is:
"A site should display the institutions or organizations' name as well as the name and the title of the authors."
It's a start. Personally, I strongly prefer peer review. Anyone can say anything on their own website. So, that criteria is fairly weak. However, as weak as it is, they failed to meet it!!
That's hillarious. Best joke I've seen in a long time. There isn't even a simple "about us" link or a "contact us" link. Absolutely no information. There literally wasn't even enough to let me check whether they're funded by Exxon. I'm guessing not. The Exxon sites look far more professional than this. This looks like a couple of guys getting stoned in the basement threw it together in about 15 minutes. Of course a couple of stoners would be more liberal. But, other than that, just the idea of putting up criteria they fail to meet is ludicrous.
Oh, even better. I just read the page on Gore's film being called into question. Lots of fluff on that one. But, on the entire page, there is NOT ONE SPECIFIC BIT OF INFORMATION FROM GORE'S FILM THAT IS CHALLENGED!! This is great stuff, really.
Oh, so then I searched for them on google. There were exactly two references. Damn, most of my collegues and friends would have more hits than that.
Wow. This stuff, if it were a bit more professional, and a bit more polished, just might make a really good satire of all of the Exxon/Mobil sites out there. If done well, it could be an article for theonion.com.
Stick to scholar.google.com. The only real criteria is peer review.
Posted by: Misanthropic Scott on 04/19/07 at 7:08 PM Respond
My Grandfather was right!He
said "Americans are easy to
fool" The Global Warming Hoax
is the Proof!
Posted by: Marshall on 12/19/07 at 8:13 AM Respond
Women talk more then men, they produce more green house gas throught the mouth. It is true, that the increased green house gas produced by women talking is greatly off set by the more farts from men. But we can all try to talk less and fart less for the coming year.
Posted by: Billybob T. on 12/19/07 at 11:09 AM Respond
ARCHIVE
RECENT COMMENTS
Eat Less, Save The World (1)
Pastor Leroy Jackson wrote:
What message does a church full of fat Christians send to ...
[more]
Prescription Drugs Are in our Drinking Water: What to do Now? (6)
Folkie wrote:
Look at the bright side in all this story... You can start...
[more]
Horse Virus Spreading to Humans (3)
sixthseal wrote:
Humankind will die...and those left standing, will be left...
[more]
How Long Will You Live? Depends Where You Live (4)
Pastor Bob wrote:
Nearly all religions have strong injunctions against glutt...
[more]
Commemorating Bush's Sh*t (18)
Sok To wrote:
This would be an insult to the sewerage plant, which is ac...
[more]
Beijing Spectators Risk Heart Attacks (3)
Roderick Ventura wrote:
Advice from docs #2:
Whenever possible, don't breathe. Inh...
[more]
Pharma Spends Twice as Much on Marketing as Research (1)
Shari wrote:
I wonder how much Pharmaceutical and Device Companies spen...
[more]
Bad Air Killing Eastern US (1)
Fair Trade wrote:
If McCain gets in it won't just be the bad air killing Eas...
[more]
African-Americans Genetically Prone to HIV, AIDS (23)
Lars, the Viking wrote:
P, let me clarify. If you are gay, the Nordic type is defi...
[more]
What's the Most Polluting Car? (28)
D S wrote:
D.Groover - obviously you didn't look too hard for a car w...
[more]
Movable Type 3.33


Posted by: m mcdermott on 03/08/07 at 5:13 PM Respond