Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 97, Issue 1, pp 69–71 | Cite as

Globalization, Poverty and Women’s Health

Mapping the Connections
  • Suzanne R. SicchiaEmail author
  • Heather Maclean
Commentary
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

Poverty and other forms of inequity undermine individual and population health and retard development. Although absolute poverty has reportedly declined in recent years,1 research suggests that relative poverty or the gap between the rich and poor within and between countries has been exacerbated over this same period.2 There is growing concern about the feminization of poverty, and the impact globalization is having on this important social problem. Gender inequality persists in all regions, and women and girls continue to be over-represented among the world’s poor.2 This suggests that women are not consistently benefitting from the economic, political and social gains globalization can offer. Instead, it appears that poor women and girls, particularly those living in developing countries, are disproportionately burdened by the costs of these swift changes to the detriment of their personal health and well-being.3 Immediate action is needed to correct these disparities and ensure that globalization supports both national and international commitments to poverty reduction, and the promotion of women’s health and human rights.

MeSH terms

Women’s health poverty public health social change social conditions 

Résumé

La pauvreté et d’autres formes d’inégalités minent la santé individuelle et collective et retardent le développement. Malgré un recul de la pauvreté absolue ces dernières années selon certaines sources1, des études donnent à penser que la pauvreté relative ou l’écart entre les riches et les pauvres à l’intérieur des pays et entre les pays s’est creusé pendant la même période2. On se préoccupe de plus en plus de la féminisation de la pauvreté et de l’impact de la mondialisation sur cet important problème social. Les inégalités entre les sexes subsistent dans toutes les régions, et les femmes et les filles sont encore sous-représentées parmi les pauvres du monde2. Les femmes ne profiteraient donc pas uniformément des gains économiques, politiques et sociaux que la mondialisation peut procurer. Au lieu de cela, il semble que les femmes et les filles pauvres, surtout dans les pays en développement, supportent démesurément le fardeau des coûts de ces changements rapides, au détriment de leur santé et de leur bien-être3. Il faut agir immédiatement pour corriger ces disparités et faire en sorte que la mondialisation appuie à la fois les engagements nationaux et internationaux envers la réduction de la pauvreté et la promotion de la santé des femmes et des droits humains.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Dollar D, Kraay A. Growth is good for the poor. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2000. Available from http://www.worldbank.org (Accessed on November 15, 2003).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Human Development Report: Globalization with a human face. New York, NY: UNDP, 1999.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Maclean H, Sicchia SR, Labonte R (Eds.). Globalisation, Gender & Health. Final report prepared for the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Institute of Gender & Health. Ottawa, ON, November 2004.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    UNDP. Human Development Report. Millennium Development Goals: A compact among nations to end human poverty. New York, NY: UNDP, 2003.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Case A, Deaton A. Consumption, health, gender and poverty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, Research Program in Development Studies, 2002.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Narayan D, Patel R, Schafft K, Rademacher A, Kock-Schulte S. Can anyone hear us? Voices from 47 countries. Voices of the Poor, Volume 1. New York: World Bank, Poverty Group, PREM, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    World Bank. Gender Equality and the Millennium Development Goals. Washington: World Bank, Gender and Development Group, 2003.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Doyal L. Putting gender into the health and globalisation debates: New perspectives and old challenges. Third World Q 2002;23(3):233–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    UNIFEM and WEDO. Women challenging globalisation: A gender perspective. United Nations International Conference for Financing for Development, Monterrey (Mexico), March 18–22, 2002.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    BRIDGE. Briefing paper on the feminisation of poverty. Sussex, UK: University of Sussex, Institute of Development Studies and Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, April 2001. Available online at: http://www.bridge.ids.ac.uk (Accessed on February 15, 2004).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM). Women’s empowerment and economic justice. New York: UNIFEM, 2000.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    UNIFEM. Pathway to gender equality: CEDAW, Beijing and the MDGs. New York: UNIFEM, not dated.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    UNIFEM. Progress of the World’s Women 2005: Women, Work & Poverty. Chen M, Vanek J, Lund F, Heintz J, Jhabvaia R, Bonner C (Eds.). New York: UNIFEM, 2005.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sachs JD, McArthur W. The Millennium Project: A plan for meeting the Millennium Development Goals. Lancet 2005;365(9456):347–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    World Health Organization (WHO). Women and development: Improve our health, improve the world. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO, 1995.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Farmer P. Social inequalities and emerging infectious diseases. Emerg Infect Dis 1996;2(4):259–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee K. The impact of globalisation on public health: Implications for the, UK. J Public Health Med 2000;22(3):253–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Review of the developments pertaining to the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms of Indigenous Peoples. Paper presented at the 21st session of the UNESCO Working Group on Indigenous Populations (E/CN.4/Sub.2/AC.4/2003/14). Geneva: UNESCO, July 21–25, 2003.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Elson D, Cagatay N. The social content of macroeconomic policies. World Dev 2000;28(7):1347–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Subramanian SV, Kawachi I. Income inequality and health: What have we learned so far. Epidemiol Rev 2004;26(1):78–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Upadhyay, UD. India’s new economic policy of 1991 and its impact on women’s poverty and AIDS. Fem Econ 2000;6(3):105–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fetherolf-Loutfi M (Ed.). What is equality and how do we get there? Women, gender and work. Geneva: International Labour Organization, 2001.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    UNIFEM. Progress of the world’s women 2002. New York: UNIFEM, 2002.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Women’s EDGE. Framework for gender assessments of trade and investment agreements. Report prepared by Sarah Gammage, Helene Jorgensen, Eugenia McGill, Marceline White. October 15, 2002.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Labonte RL, Torgerson R. Globalization and health. In: Maclean H, Sicchia SR, Labonte R (Eds.), Globalisation, Gender & Health. Final report prepared for the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Institute of Gender & Health. Ottawa, ON, November 2004;14–32.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Research in Women’s HealthUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations