Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Why the International Climate Negotiations in Durban Matter for Women
This has been a year of unprecedented weather-related disasters, at home and around the world. The world’s leading climate scientists have proclaimed these disasters related to climate change, and have told us to expect more severe, frequent extreme weather events.
Who bears the brunt of the increasingly steep costs of “global weirding” as the world’s weather goes haywire? Women and their children. And who may be the key to stopping global warming, and to helping communities around the world adapt to the damage that has already been done? Yes, women too.
Who bears the brunt of the increasingly steep costs of “global weirding” as the world’s weather goes haywire? Women and their children. (photo: Oxfam International)
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s special report on extreme weather hit the headlines just before international climate negotiations began again in Durban, South Africa this week. However, experts have known for some time now that women pay a heavy price in our changing climate.
One UN study estimates that women are four times as likely as men to lose their lives in a natural disaster, and far more likely to suffer ill-health as well. The reasons are sometimes obvious, and sometimes less so. Women are often more susceptible than men to inadequate nutrition, for example, which can be exacerbated by weather and climate changes. Women and girls face a steeply increasing threat of violence and injury as they walk further and further every day to collect water and fuel. Many have limited access to healthcare, due to lower incomes and, in many cases, restrictive cultural practices. This problem is compounded as a changing climate allows new diseases to take hold, and old ones to reemerge.
Seventy percent of the world’s poor are women, and poor people are most in the line of fire of climate change, though they have done the least to cause it. Researchers estimate that the poorest people in the world, who contribute the least to carbon emissions, will suffer the most from the effects of rising temperatures – up to 500 times the loss of life compared to those in developed countries.
Yet women are also extraordinarily under-represented in the very forums designed to address climate change. At the last international climate conference women accounted for just 30 person of all delegation members, and less than 15 percent of all heads of delegations.
At the same time, however, women around the world hold valuable knowledge and skills that can make them powerful forces for positive change. Advancing women’s empowerment and health are the right thing to do for the attainment of universal human rights and equity. But these same strategies also foster sustainable development. Chief among these are investments in women’s and girls’ health and education, which build women’s resilience, leadership, capacity for economic innovation and autonomy.
Investments in reproductive healthcare, assisting women in avoiding, spacing, or limiting pregnancies, are crucial to lowering high rates of unintended pregnancy, and of maternal and infant mortality. When women are able to plan their pregnancies, they can exercise their fundamental human rights and decide what they as individuals want to achieve educationally, economically, and socially. These gains improve their own livelihoods and that of their families, and increase their ability to access food and health services for themselves and their children.
Women are among those most affected by climate change, but they are also able to bring forward innovative solutions – starting with the family, through the community and up to the national and international negotiating tables. Empowering women is first and foremost a matter of health, equity and justice, but it is also a key pathway to achieving healthy, resilient and sustainable communities and societies.
Numerous statistics and studies support the paramount importance of investing in women’s and community health as part and parcel of any climate change plan. However, the real power of this argument is in the on-the-ground experience of changing a community by investing in the ideas and initiatives of women themselves. It is these entrepreneurs who change things one person, one family, one village and one state at a time until that change is as endemic as poor health and malnutrition are today.
It is not only economically and politically smart to make these targeted investments, it’s the right thing to do. These days, the moral imperative may get short shrift. But as leaders gather in Durban this week, we believe it’s time for them to get serious about tackling the human impacts of an increasingly volatile climate.





9 Comments so far
Show AllIt's time to put an end to patriarchal carbon colonialism, which disproportionately affects women!
Read more at Transition Times:
http://bethechange2012.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/carbon-colonialism-just-say-no/
The interest of the Common Dreams community in gender equality is not overwhelming big. Where are the thoughtful comments?
"Why the International Climate Negotiations in Durban Matter for Women"
With all due respect, given the magnitude of the adverse consequences caused by the warming earth, why write an article whose headline suggests that a case need be made that ". . . the International Climate Negotiations in Durban Matter for Women"?
And what "thoughtful comments" might such an underlying predicate elicit?
You could channge "women" to "workers" in most of this article and have end up with a more inclusive statement. But then , corporate feminists like these authors don't care if they are divisive and undermine working class solidarity.
For example:
"At the same time, however, [workers] around the world hold valuable knowledge and skills that can make them powerful forces for positive change. Advancing [workers'] empowerment and health are the right thing to do for the attainment of universal human rights and equity. But these same strategies also foster sustainable development. Chief among these are investments in [workers'] and [their childrens] health and education, which build [workers] resilience, leadership, capacity for economic innovation and autonomy."
Women should organize to advance their particualr needs and interests, but it is wrong to define class interests as "women's" interests. For one thing it is divisive and downplays class based oppression. For another many wealthy women do not share or actually oppose the interests of poor and working women.
One important difference is lack of mobility. Moving to a new location in the face of climate disasters is one common response, thus the term "climate refugee". Women have a harder time picking up and leaving to find a better situation. They have children in tow, exclusions from many job opportunities, and higher threats of personal violence (sexual and otherwise) against them when they leave the matrix of home town or village, extended family and friends. They are also the ones who carry the direct burdens of pregnancy, childbirth and nursing. Giving birth is always dangerous to the poor, but especially so when you are on the road.
So whereas climate changes threaten all the workers and the poor of the world, women are affected in different ways, and more. Paying attention to women does not undermine working class solidarity in my opinion, but is a part of having true solidarity. Otherwise you are dismissing the intrinsic social and physical qualities of 50% of the working class as irrelevant or aberrant. You get stuck in a socialist realist poster of the muscular independent white guy as the worker, and ignore the complexities of the modern working class.
Well I agree with most of what you write, but the passage I altered was a particularly pointless exercise in gender exclusion and certainly is "dismissing the intrinsic social and physical qualities of 50% of the working class as irrelevant."
With the exception of some articles by Michelle Chen, the articles posted on CD by feminists on economic issues tend to be gender exclusive and divisive, framing things like economic disparity and lack of health insurance as uniquely "women's issues." This is utterly divisive and dismissive of 1/2of the working class.
Also the problems facing working men get no coverage in the Left media or in the MSM; whereas women's issues are covered extensively. So who's being exclusive here?
I agree that some feminist writing can be very boojie and dismissive of working class men. But I did not see it in this article.
Men are invisible in this article. Basic human issues such as healthcare and education ae presented exclusively as womens issues. I find this bourgeosie and dismissive.
Working class men are generally invisible in US society. When images of working class men appear in the media, they are phony images of "get er done" heroes who act but are never portaryed as thinking. Usually the use of such caricatures advances nationalist, pro business and militarist memes.
The union movement has become much more representitive of working class women, blacks and hispanics, but still has challenges ahead in that regard, particularly where undocumented workers are concerned, but progress happened in the past 10 to fifteen years.
Far too many of the lowest paid workers are without unions because they do not represent "a good market." They require a lot of services but are paid poorly and there is not a lot of money to pay union dues. The services provided to union members are quite expensive as they represent services generally provided by the professional classes, ie lawyers, arbitrators, contract writers, researchers.
This "professionalization of labor relations" ultimately benefits the capitalists because they can afford to purchase far more "professional services," which in turn are the primary mechanisms of influencing the levers of power, particularly at the State & national level.
Ultimately the feminist movement and working class men present a kind of dialectic that requires synthesis in order for the masses to advance.
The feminist movement, as epitomized by NOW, has done very little to include working class women, and it is often indifferent or outright hostile towards working class men. NOW has virtually no relationship with the US union movement.
I have some hope that the burgeoning Occupy phenomenom will help to bring class issues to the forefront in general, and will introduce new and revolutionary energy into a union movement that can use a shot of that, for sure.
Good for you -- And if one channged "women" to "people" in most of this article the article might have more merit.