by Rebecca Pearl and Irene Dankelman

Climate Change is increasingly recognized as a major human security issue that poses serious global threats. Although climate change affects everyone regardless of race, caste, ethnicity, sex and level of income, its impacts are more heavily felt by poor nations, communities and people, and climate change magnifies existing inequalities. For the world's poor the impact will be most severe, disproportionately affecting their livelihoods and security. Women comprise 70% of those living below the poverty line. As a result, they are most likely to bear the heaviest burdens when natural disasters strike. At the same time, women are often overlooked as potential contributors to climate change solutions, and thus to the security of all human beings.

The Hyogo Framework for Action that emerged from the United Nation's 2005 World Conference on Disaster Reduction states that “a gender perspective should be integrated into all disaster risk management policies, plans and decision-making processes, including those  related to risk assessment, early warning, information management, and education and training”. It is, therefore, imperative that governments and other stakeholders build into their policies and programs strong links between gender, human security and climate change.

The consequences of climate change are closely related to the context in which individuals or groups experience the changes. The WEDO study presents a gendered analysis of how climate change impacts on human security. It also assesses whether adequate scope exists for women to participate in improved human security in a scenario of changing climate. Based on this analysis, recommendations are given for enhancing the integration of a gender perspective in climate change and human security policies and programs.

Many of the implications of natural disasters on women and men are documented in existing literature. The Gender and Disaster Network presents lessons learned from the field on their website (www.gdnonline.org).  In many societies, vulnerability to (natural) disasters differs for women and men. Women are often more vulnerable to disasters than men through their socially constructed roles and responsibilities, and because they are more poor.

In general, women have less access to resources that are essential in disaster preparedness, mitigation and rehabilitation. Gendered divisions of labor often result in the over-representation of women in agricultural and informal sectors, which are more vulnerable to disasters. Women, in general, are alsoresponsible for reproductive tasks such as food collection and energy supply for the household as well as many care-giving tasks, such as care for the children, sick, elderly, the home and assets.

Water, sanitation and health challenges put an extra burden on women, adding to the double burden of productive and reproductive labor when there is a disaster and a collapse of livelihood. In many societies, socio-cultural norms and care giving responsibilities prevent women from migrating to look for shelter and work when a disaster hits. Self-sacrifice even hampers women's own rescue efforts in any type of disaster.

Women also face indirect problems when natural disasters strike. They are often less mobile, more likely to be confined to the house and have less decision-making power. All of which contributes to their lack of participation, and lack of access to information regarding potential hazards and possible coping strategies. Besides diminishing their visibility, these realities deprive women of opportunities to look for alternative sources of income, adversely affecting their bargaining power in the household and community.

In a recent study by the London School of Economics, the University of Essex and the Max-Planck Institute of Economics a sample of 141 countries in which natural disasters occurred during the period 1981-2002 was analyzed. The main findings are that: (a)  natural disasters lower the life expectancy of women more than that of men; (b) the stronger the disaster, the stronger this effect on the gender gap in life expectancy , (c) the higher women's socio-economic status, the weaker this effect on the gender gap in life expectancy. The conclusion is that it is the socially constructed gender-specific vulnerability of women built into everyday socio-economic patterns that leads to the relatively higher female disaster mortality rates compared to those of men. For example, the 1991 cyclone in Bangladesh killed 138,000 people, many of which were women older than 40 years.

The disadvantaged position of women means greater difficulty in coping with disasters. For example, in a country like Bangladesh where women are more calorie-deficient than men, women have more problems recovering from the negative effects that flooding has on their health. An increase in the number of female-headed households (because of male out-migration) also amplifies women's responsibilities and vulnerabilities during natural disasters. After a disaster hits there are often inadequate facilities available for women to cope with their household tasks or to get shelter. Disaster relief efforts pay insufficient attention to women's reproductive and sexual health, and as a result women's health suffers disproportionately.

In the aftermath of disasters an increase in domestic and sexual violence often occurs. During or after disasters, such as long periods of drought, more girls drop out of school to reduce household expenses by saving on school fees, or to assist in the household with tasks such as fetching water, or as a result of pregnancy and early marriage. A study in Malawi (2001) showed that girl-children are married off early in times of drought, usually to older men with numerous sexual partners. They were even forced to sell sex for gifts or money, which resulted in the accelerated spread of HIV/AIDs in the country.

Lower levels of education reduce the ability of women and girls to access information-including early warning mechanisms-and resources, or to make their voices heard. This is an extra challenge when women want to innovate their livelihood strategies.

Empirical studies reveal that women and men make decisions differently. Whereas men are more risk-taking, women tend to be more risk averse. Men are more overconfident, thinking that they can predict and handle the future themselves, whereas women are more willing to adapt their strategies and behavior. Women usually listen to external advice, but men will not easily ask for directions. In general, women contribute more to a common good than do men and they are more aware of social bonds, showing greater reciprocity and altruism. However, when social bonds are weak, men can be observed to be more cooperative than women. These findings have major implications for disaster management and could form important underlying motives for women's and men's reactions to hazards.

This also indicates that gender-differentiated roles don't always result in higher losses for women. For example immediate mortality caused by hurricane Mitch in Central America was higher for men, not only because they were engaged in outdoor activities when the disaster struck, but also because they tend to be more overconfident in their behavior toward risk.