Advertisement

Gender, Climate Change and Sustainable Development Goals

  • Úrsula Oswald Spring
Chapter
Part of the Pioneers in Arts, Humanities, Science, Engineering, Practice book series (PAHSEP, volume 17)

Abstract

Climate change is severely affecting Mexico and Central America (IPCC 2014a) and has caused different impacts on men and women, regions and social classes. Several studies have shown that during disasters more women die than men. Why do the Red Cross, the World Bank and insurance companies only report the global number of deaths and damage, while other international agencies address the vulnerability of women and ignore the vulnerability of men? This approach has reinforced a woman-victim vision to justify their exclusion from decision-making processes and sharpen their post-disaster trauma. These behaviours also deprive society of efficient female support in the post-disaster period, when women have the capacity to organise refugee camps and collaborate in reconstruction processes. This lack of equity not only occurs in disaster management, but is imbued in all social processes of the present global patriarchal system.

References

  1. Anttila-Hughes, Jesse, Solomon Hsiang (2013). “Destruction, Disinvestment, and Death: Economic and Human Losses Following Environmental Disaster”, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2220501.
  2. Ariyabandu, Madhavi M., Dilrukshi Fonseka (2009). “Do Disasters Discriminate? A Human Security Analysis of the Tsunami Impacts in India, Sri Lanka and Kashmir Earthquake”, in Brauch et al. (Eds.), Facing Global Environmental Change, Berlin - Heidelberg, Springer, pp. 1223–1236.Google Scholar
  3. Burin, Mabel, Irene Meler (2000). Varones: género y subjetividad masculina, Buenos Aires, Editorial Paidós.Google Scholar
  4. Cenapred (2016). Atlas Nacional de Riesgos. Indicadores Municipales de Peligro, Exposición y Vulnerabilidad, Mexico, D.F., CENAPRED.Google Scholar
  5. Cheng, Lijing, Kevin E. Trenberth, John Fasullo, Tim Boyer, John Abraham, Jiang Zhu (2017). Improved estimates of ocean heat content from 1960 to 2015, Sci. Adv., Vol. 3, No. 3 (March), pp. e1601545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. CSW60 [Commission on the Status of Women] (2016). “Concluding Session, Women’s Commission Agrees on Approach for Gender-Responsive Implementation of Sustainable Development Agenda”, http://www.un.org/press/en/highlights/CSW60.
  7. FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN] (2013). Climate smart agriculture. Sourcebook, http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3325e.pdf.
  8. FAO (2015). Pérdidas y desperdicios de alimentos en ALC, Rome, FAO.Google Scholar
  9. FAO (2016). Status of World’s Soil Resources, Rome, FAO.Google Scholar
  10. Feras Ziadat, Sally B., Eddy De Pauw (2017). Land resource planning for sustainable land management, Rome, FAO.Google Scholar
  11. Flores Palacio, Fátima (2014). “Senderos de vulnerabilidad de género y sus representaciones sociales en contextos situados”, in Oswald Spring et al. (Eds.), Vulnerabilidad social y género entre migrantes ambientales, Cuernavaca, CRIM-UNAM, pp. 275–292.Google Scholar
  12. Forbes (2014). ¿Cuánto aportan las mujeres a la economía nacional? [How much women contribute to the national economy], Forbes, 6th of March, https://www.forbes.com.mx/cuanto-aportan-las-mujeres-la-economia-nacional/.
  13. Gonzales, Christian, Sonali Jain-Chandra, Kalpana Kochhar, Monique Newiak, Tlek Zeinullayev (2015). Catalyst for Change: Empowering Women and Tackling Income Inequality, www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2015/sdn1520.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Imaz Mirella, Blazquez Norma, Chao Veana, Castañeda Itza, Berinstain Ana (Eds.) (2014). Cambio climático. Miradas de género, Mexico, D.F., PUMA, CEIICH, PINCC-UNAM.Google Scholar
  15. IMF (2016). Annual Meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank Group, Washington, IMF.Google Scholar
  16. INEGI (2017). “En México somos 123.5 millones de habitantes”, July 2017, INEGI, Aguascalientes.Google Scholar
  17. INEGI (2011–2015). Encuesta Nacional de Ingresos y Gastos de los Hogares (ENIGH), Aguascalientes, Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas y Geografía.Google Scholar
  18. INEGI (2012). Encuesta Nacional de Empleo (ENE), Aguascalientes, Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas y Geografía.Google Scholar
  19. IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] (2012). Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] (2013). Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] (2014a). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] (2014b). Climate Change 2014. Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Jiménez Guzmán, M. Lucero, Roxana Bosos (2016). Juventud precarizada. De la formación al trabajo una transición riesgosa, Cuernavaca, CRIM-UNAM.Google Scholar
  24. Kim, Jim Yong (2015). “World Bank Group to Seek Key Certification on Workplace Equality”, http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2015/03/11/world-bank-group-to-seek-key-certification-on-workplace-equality.
  25. Mendoza, Blanca, Juan Manuel Espíndola (2015). “Lecciones para México del Quinto Reporte del IPCC y forzadores naturales del cambio climático”, in Xochitl Cruz Núñez, Gian Carlo Delgado, Úrsula Oswald Spring (Eds.). México ante la urgencia climática: ciencia, política y sociedad, Mexico, D.F., CEIICH-CRIM-PINCC-UNAM, pp. 57–70.Google Scholar
  26. Moscovici, Serge (1973). “Prefacio”, in C. Herzlich, D. Graham (Eds.). Health and illness. A social psychological analysis, London, Academic Press.Google Scholar
  27. Mulyani Indrawati, Sri (2015). “The Transformation of the Indonesian Economy in Challenging Times”, http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/speech/2015/11/30/transformational-indonesian-economy-challenging-times.
  28. Mulyani Indrawati, Sri (2016). “Why We Have to #Get2Equal”, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/sri-mulyani-indrawati/why-we-have-to-get2equal_b_6803552.html.
  29. NOAA NCDC (2014). Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, Washington, D.C., NOAA.Google Scholar
  30. Oswald Spring, Úrsula (2008). Gender and Disasters. Human, Gender and Environmental Security: A HUGE Challenge, Source, Bonn, UNU-EHS.Google Scholar
  31. Oswald Spring, Úrsula (2012). “Vulnerabilidad social en eventos hidrometeorológicos extremos: una comparación entre los huracanes Stan y Wilma en Octubre 2005 en La Península de Yucatán”, Revista SocioTam, Vol. 22, No. 2 (Jul.–Dec.), pp. 125–145.Google Scholar
  32. Oswald Spring, Úrsula (2013). “Dual vulnerability among female household heads”, Acta Colombiana de Psicología, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 19–30.Google Scholar
  33. Oswald Spring, Úrsula, S. Eréndira Serrano Oswald, Adriana Estrada Álvarez, Fátima Flores Palacios, Maribel Ríos Everardo, Hans Günter Brauch, Teresita E. Ruiz Pantoja, Carlos Lemus Ramírez, Ariana Estrada Villanueva, MT Mónica Cruz Rivera (2014). Vulnerabilidad social y género entre migrantes ambientales, Cuernavaca, CRIM-UNAM.Google Scholar
  34. Oxfam (2016). An economy for the 1%. How privilege and power in the economy drive extreme inequality and how this can be stopped, https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp210-economy-one-percent-tax-havens-180116-en_0.pdf.
  35. Pedrero, Mercedes (2011). Valor Económico del Trabajo Doméstico en México. Aportaciones de Mujeres y Hombres, 2009, México. D.F., INMUJERES-CRIM-UNAM.Google Scholar
  36. REN21 (2017). Renewable Energies, Paris, REN21.Google Scholar
  37. UNDOC (2015). “Human trafficking”, https://www.unodc.org/toc/en/crimes/human-trafficking.html.
  38. UNGA (2015). Sustainable Development Goals, New York, UNGA.Google Scholar
  39. UNISDR (2016). Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience, https://www.preventionweb.net/files/49076_unplanofaction.pdf.
  40. UNISDR (2017). Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction, https://www.preventionweb.net/files/55465_globalplatform2017proceedings.pdf.
  41. Via Campesina (2011). “Peasant agriculture: a real solution to climate change”, https://viacampesina.org/en/peasant-agriculture-a-real-solution-to-climate-change/.
  42. WB [WorldBank] (2017). Climate Smart Agriculture, Washington, D.C., WB.Google Scholar
  43. Wilkinson, Richard y Kate Pickett (2009). The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better, Allen Lane, London.Google Scholar
  44. Zambrano, Eduardo (2016). “El Niño 2015–2016. Evolución y Perspectivas”, Guayaquil, Centro Internacional de Investigación para el Fenómeno el Niño.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Regional Centre for Multidisciplinary Research (CRIM)National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)CuernavacaMexico

Personalised recommendations