290
Z. Andlib et al.
Cline 2007), reversing this trend would be an important component for Asian and
African strategies for coping with the potential risks from the expected changes.
15.5 Mainstreaming Gender into Adaptation Programmes
and Measures
Climate change impacts women’s lives differently than men. Consequently, adaptation policies and measures need to be gender-sensitive: restricted access to economic
resources may lead to fewer possibilities to adapt to climate change (e.g. to changing
weather conditions and their impacts on agricultural activities), less possibilities
of protection against disasters and recovering in the aftermath. Lacking control over
land/property affects the ability to crop changes or switching to other fields of income
generation; lack of transport systems leads to more time consumption and physical
burdens (like transportation of heavy loads over long distances). The lacking access
to political resources, like influence, networks, information, skills or control over
decision-making leads to poor participation in the project and programme development and poor recognition of the practical and strategic needs of women and
girls.
Gender aspects currently are poorly addressed in climate change debates. This is
due to lacking gender sensibility of those shaping the debates, leading to a strong technical and economical bias in the contents—best to be seen in the Kyoto Protocol.
Social issues and gender issues do not have space in these discussions and documents. In 1997, at UNFCCC COP3 in Kyoto, a female environmentalist asked via a
mailing list why women’s organizations did not take part in the process leading to the
Kyoto Protocol. The answer she gave was that ‘“the arguments used here are almost
entirely economic. Decisions are made mostly with little consideration being given to
survival. Perhaps women felt they could not penetrate this masculine perspective—
and stayed at home” (Sargent 1997)’. This assumption is backed by experiences
in other UN processes: If women’s organizations are not actively involved, gender
and women’s aspects will not be addressed. Thus, it is like a vicious circle: because
women’s organization or gender experts are not involved, women’s/gender aspects
are hardly addressed. And because they are not addressed, women’s organizations
don’t take part. Recently some efforts have been undertaken to sensitize the parties
of the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol as well as the constituencies taking part in
the process on gender issues. Because negotiations were coming into a new phase,
because the post-Kyoto regime may provide an entry point for gender perspective,
the situation is improving slowly. There are more women’s organizations interested
in the UNFCCC process now, and thus hopefully the vicious circle will be opened.
Z. Andlib et al.
Cline 2007), reversing this trend would be an important component for Asian and
African strategies for coping with the potential risks from the expected changes.
15.5 Mainstreaming Gender into Adaptation Programmes
and Measures
Climate change impacts women’s lives differently than men. Consequently, adaptation policies and measures need to be gender-sensitive: restricted access to economic
resources may lead to fewer possibilities to adapt to climate change (e.g. to changing
weather conditions and their impacts on agricultural activities), less possibilities
of protection against disasters and recovering in the aftermath. Lacking control over
land/property affects the ability to crop changes or switching to other fields of income
generation; lack of transport systems leads to more time consumption and physical
burdens (like transportation of heavy loads over long distances). The lacking access
to political resources, like influence, networks, information, skills or control over
decision-making leads to poor participation in the project and programme development and poor recognition of the practical and strategic needs of women and
girls.
Gender aspects currently are poorly addressed in climate change debates. This is
due to lacking gender sensibility of those shaping the debates, leading to a strong technical and economical bias in the contents—best to be seen in the Kyoto Protocol.
Social issues and gender issues do not have space in these discussions and documents. In 1997, at UNFCCC COP3 in Kyoto, a female environmentalist asked via a
mailing list why women’s organizations did not take part in the process leading to the
Kyoto Protocol. The answer she gave was that ‘“the arguments used here are almost
entirely economic. Decisions are made mostly with little consideration being given to
survival. Perhaps women felt they could not penetrate this masculine perspective—
and stayed at home” (Sargent 1997)’. This assumption is backed by experiences
in other UN processes: If women’s organizations are not actively involved, gender
and women’s aspects will not be addressed. Thus, it is like a vicious circle: because
women’s organization or gender experts are not involved, women’s/gender aspects
are hardly addressed. And because they are not addressed, women’s organizations
don’t take part. Recently some efforts have been undertaken to sensitize the parties
of the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol as well as the constituencies taking part in
the process on gender issues. Because negotiations were coming into a new phase,
because the post-Kyoto regime may provide an entry point for gender perspective,
the situation is improving slowly. There are more women’s organizations interested
in the UNFCCC process now, and thus hopefully the vicious circle will be opened.