The Intersection of Gender and Environmental Justice

speaker1

Welcome, everyone, to this episode of 'The Intersection of Gender and Environmental Justice.' I'm your host, and with me today is the incredibly insightful and engaging [Speaker 2]. Today, we're going to explore how gender inequality and environmental crises are deeply intertwined and what we can do to create more equitable solutions. [Speaker 2], it's great to have you here!

speaker2

Thanks so much for having me! I'm really excited to dive into this topic. It's such an important conversation, and I think it's often overlooked. So, let's start with the basics. How are gender and environmental crises connected?

speaker1

Absolutely, it's a critical connection. The biodiversity and climate crises are universal, but their impacts and solutions are highly gendered. Women, especially in low-income countries, are disproportionately affected by environmental degradation. For example, women make up about 80% of those forced to migrate due to climate change impacts. However, they are often underrepresented in the decision-making processes that shape climate and biodiversity policies. This lack of representation perpetuates injustice and harm, as the solutions designed often fail to address the unique challenges women face.

speaker2

That's so important to highlight. It's not just about the impact on women; it's about the systemic exclusion of their voices. Can you give us some examples of how men dominate the leadership in climate and conservation efforts?

speaker1

Certainly. At the highest levels, leadership in climate and conservation is overwhelmingly male. For instance, over 85% of environment ministers are men, and at COP27, only seven out of 110 world leaders were women. This dominance extends to the private sector as well. Not one of the top ten carbon-emitting companies has a woman CEO or Board Chair. This imbalance means that the perspectives and needs of women, especially those in low-income countries, are often overlooked or ignored in the development and implementation of environmental policies.

speaker2

Wow, those statistics are staggering. It's clear that there's a significant power imbalance. Let's talk about market-based solutions. How do these initiatives, like carbon and biodiversity offsets, perpetuate gender inequality?

speaker1

Market-based solutions, such as carbon and biodiversity offsets, often fail to account for gender dynamics. These initiatives are primarily designed and controlled by men, especially wealthy men in high-income countries. For example, in a carbon offset project in Northern Uganda, a Norwegian company, Green Resources, faced criticism for excluding local women from the decision-making process. Women were denied access to the land they relied on for food and firewood, leading to increased hunger and hardship. The company's technical solutions, like fuel-efficient cookstoves, while well-intentioned, didn't address the root issues of land access and food security that women faced.

speaker2

That's a powerful example. It shows how even well-intentioned solutions can have unintended negative consequences when they don't involve the communities they affect. Speaking of real-world case studies, can you share another example where gender inequity has impacted conservation efforts?

speaker1

Certainly. In Papua New Guinea, external advisors focused on large-scale carbon projects and clean cookstove technology but failed to understand the social and gendered aspects of how these solutions would work in practice. Women were expected to maintain and fuel these technologies without adequate support or consideration of their daily challenges. This led to confusion and ultimately, the women put a halt to the clean cookstove initiative. This highlights the importance of involving women in the design and implementation of conservation projects to ensure they are effective and equitable.

speaker2

It's clear that involving women is crucial. But how can we ensure that gender is integrated into research and policy? What steps can be taken to make these processes more inclusive?

speaker1

One key step is to mandate gender diversity in leadership and research teams. This includes setting performance metrics to ensure a minimum of 33% women, especially from low-income countries, are included in these roles. Additionally, all standards and audit processes should take a gender-sensitive approach, developing new metrics that reflect social impact and most significant change, not just quantitative data. Gender analysis should be a mandatory part of any climate or biodiversity project to understand the social context and potential impacts. This information can then be used to work with women to design strategies that ensure safe, equitable benefits for the whole community.

speaker2

Those are excellent recommendations. But what about more radical changes? How can we fundamentally alter the systems that perpetuate gender inequality in environmental efforts?

speaker1

To truly address gender inequity, we need to imagine a world where women are the majority in leadership and decision-making positions. This means mandating that at least 50% of women, especially those from low-income countries, hold leadership roles in governments, the private sector, and the most polluting industries. Financial flows should be transparent, and those most impacted by biodiversity loss and climate change should be compensated. Unpaid labor, which is predominantly performed by women, should be fully accounted for and valued. Women should have the agency to decide what compensation looks like and how it aligns with the profits of men in high-income countries.

speaker2

That's a vision of a truly transformative future. But how do we get there? What steps can be taken to empower women in conservation and climate solutions, especially those in low-income countries?

speaker1

Empowering women starts with providing them the space, confidence, and support to work in conservation and science. This includes investing in education and training, ensuring that women have equal access to resources and opportunities. We need to address systemic barriers that prevent women from participating fully in these fields. For example, the W+ Standard, developed by WOCAN, is a women-specific standard that measures women's empowerment in a transparent and quantifiable manner. It provides a channel to direct money to women and their organizations at the local level. By compensating local women and building gender into budgets from the outset, we can ensure that women are not only included but also benefit equitably from environmental solutions.

speaker2

It's inspiring to hear about these solutions. Lastly, what does the future of gender-equitable environmental policies look like? How do we ensure that these changes are sustained and effective?

speaker1

The future of gender-equitable environmental policies is one where women are not just included but are leaders and decision-makers. It's a future where the unpaid labor of women is recognized and valued, and where the voices of marginalized communities are heard and acted upon. We need to be committed and intentional in addressing the systemic barriers that women face. By working together, we can create a world where environmental solutions are not only effective but also just and equitable for all.

speaker2

Thank you so much for this insightful conversation. It's clear that we have a lot of work to do, but there's also a lot of hope. I'm excited to see the progress we can make together. Thanks for joining us, everyone, and stay tuned for more episodes of 'The Intersection of Gender and Environmental Justice.'