Women the global south (which includes central and south America, Africa, and Southeast Asia) face unique environmental issues. On the United Nations website there is a whole page dedicated to the connection between water and women in these countries. Put simply water is life, if water is unclean, or inaccessible, life becomes very difficult if not impossible. Patriarchy across the globe has put the women in charge of household duties which includes gathering water, according to the WHO and UNICEF “Women and girls are responsible for water collection in 8 out of 10 households with water off premises” (https://www.unwater.org/water-facts/gender/) . But of course every living thing (at least that I can think of) requires water, so if there is no water doesn’t the whole family suffer? Yes, but with women being the primary gatherers of water, it eats up a lot of their time. UNICEF found in a ” study of time and water poverty in 25 Sub-Saharan African countries estimated that women spend at least 16 million hours a day collecting drinking water, while men spend 6 million hours, and children 4 million hours on the task.” All that time spent on gathering water means less time spent in a classroom, and less time in the classroom means less education, less education means less opportunities. In Tanzania when the time it takes to obtain water was reduced by 50% UNICEF found that female attendance in school increased by over 10%.
Time is not the only factor though, sanitation or lack there-of is also a major hurdle women face. Over one million deaths a year are associated with unclean births, and about 44 million pregnant women have “sanitation-related hookworm infections”. This again takes not only life but opportunity away from countless women and girls. Having to deal with a death in the family or poor health means again less time in schools, less time for work, and more barriers to progress overall.
Looking at the relationship between water and women in the global south, we can determine that while the environment affects everybody, and we all have a connection to it, it affects everybody around the world differently, especially people in different geographical areas. It is/will be the women in the global south who are/will see the effects of climate change first. Women in Africa are already facing severe droughts, flooding, and high temperatures (this is laid out well in this article from New Internationalist (https://newint.org/features/2019/05/03/how-will-global-south-pay-climate-change-damage). As a result of all this when many western ecofeminists talk about the environment and climate change they are talking about it from a greater distance than women in the east and global south.
Ecofeminism developed in the west but has spread to the east. In particular it has made a lot of noise in India. Indian ecofeminists view capitalism and industrialization as a oppressor of women, especially in east Asia and the global south. As western countries consume goods that harm the Earth, the countries that produce these goods suffer the consequences. Western countries have also commercialized eastern and African cultures into a tourist industry with terms like ethnic food, and world music. Western ecofeminism focuses less on critiques of capitalism (though it is of course still critical) and more on the relationship between women and nature.
To me personally neither form of ecofeminism interests me as much, as I personally agree with and like what has been called capitalism. I think the main oppressor of women and people in general has been government. While I am sure most ecofeminists would argue that governments around the world have been largely patriarchal and have oppressed women. I do not feel as though they focus enough on it as a root cause of the marginalization of women. That being said I personally am more interested in Eastern ecofeminism, as I am more ignorant of it and could probably benefit more from it.
Hi Nick.
You brought up something I didn’t think about regarding climate change. In relation to women in the Global South they WILL experience climate change sooner than any of us in the Global North. It’s incredible to think that our actions of environmental degradation, although affects women here also, have even more detrimental effects to others in the global South. I think Dr. Vandana Shiva has an intersectional approach to environmental feminism in her establishment of Diverse Women for Diversity. I commend her for her global approach as I think feminism needs to address issues for all women to be successful in creating equality. While I understand your interest in capitalism, I don’t think it addresses the specific gender issues related to eco feminism and that leaves out certain and important aspect of equality among women and men around the world such as cultural aspects. Not to be underestimated is the patriarchal institution of corporations, big business, and governments because they play a large role in oppression of the environment and women but it is also rethinking our relationships with nature and the environment that is a crucial piece of eco feminism.
You make such excellent points. The countries that produce the mass product (or heavily industrialized) are the countries that suffer the most in the name of women and environmental rights.
I didn’t delve deeply into the global south water crisis in my own post, but from reading several others I realize water is the new scarce commodity and, even more scarce is the clean water commodity. I’ve heard the media speak about the lack of water throughout the globe over the past decade. I honestly didn’t make the connection until now.
As I sit and write this, it’s pouring outside in Southern California. We’ve had more rain this year than for several years. We often have a fairly serious drought and are not allowed to use water to wash sidewalks, driveways, decks or patios in residential areas, so this past year has been an anomaly. Or is it signs of the future, what with climate change and extreme weather patterns? “Statewide reservoir water storage is 128% of average, which amounts to about 29.7 million acre-feet of water for California…” (https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-10-02/california-has-more-water-stored-than-it-did-this-time-last-year-officials-say).
In the global south, however, this is not the case. In a 2014 article in Scientific American, one quarter of India is now considered desert . The reasons are:
• Agricultural degradation
• Deforestation
• Over population (India is 2% of overall landmass and 17% total
population)
• Changes in rain patterns due to Climate change
• Use of pesticides, fertilizers contaminating water sources (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-quarter-of-india-s-land-is-turning-into-desert/
Along with not realizing the severity of the water crisis in the third world, hookworm is also a new and alarming health risk that I was also unaware of. The lack of healthcare for women and children is problematic when it comes to treatment and the symptoms can be from mild to severe if not treated early. Hookworms can live up to 15 years in the host if not treated and can lead to significant impaired learning in children and “coughing, chest pain, wheezing, and fever sometimes result from severe infection. Epigastric pains, indigestion, nausea, vomiting, constipation, and diarrhea can occur early or in later stages, as well, although gastrointestinal symptoms tend to improve with time. Signs of advanced severe infection are those of anemia and protein deficiency, including emaciation, cardiac failure, and abdominal distension with ascites”
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hookworm_infection).
There are myriad issues needing redress in the global south, especially the patriarchal indifference to the health and well-being of their women and children.
Hi Nick,
One point that you brought up that I agree with is when you said that environmental degradation is affecting everyone around the world, but in different ways. It could be argued that people living in western societies may not be able to always see and feel the physical affect, but people in the global south can. The lack of access to water and sanitation facilities is making their lives difficult, unhealthy, and unsafe every day. Another argument could be that western societies are causing the environmental degradation while non-western societies are the ones who are suffering the consequences. I wrote a paper last semester on a huge waste facility in Ghana and most of that waste comes from first world countries. Places like the United States ship their waste to this facility in Ghana and never give it a second thought. While the first world countries move on with their lives the people in Ghana are suffering the consequences. Their land is getting destroyed, the air quality is very bad, and the people living there have a lot of serious health concerns. This is a big factor of environmental degradation.
I think you make a great point when you said that Western countries benefit from a lot of goods and production that come from other countries. I think there is a lot of discourse lately on goods being “Made In America.” However, that is basically only for a sense of pride/American spirit or to keep jobs in the country. There isn’t a lot of conversation like, “this is made in America because we don’t want to hurt another country/use cheap labor/harm the environment.” I think it is really easy to become wrapped up in the problems that we are experiencing in our country environmental-wise and not really think about what other countries are going through. That makes total sense, because of course what we experience daily is going to be at the top of our mind. That is why learning about eco-feminism and the situations others are going through is so important. I appreciate you being honest about not really vibing with western ecofeminism or any other kind yet admitting that you have things to learn. I also have a lot to learn when it comes to ecofeminism from any sect of the world. It’s a term I’ve never heard until lately. I wonder if in a few months after reading more about the subject you’ll identify with parts of it more. I don’t think that supporting capitalism automatically means that you can’t support eco-feminism. They don’t have to be exclusive. It seems like ecofeminism itself has a lot of different definitions. Also, capitalism doesn’t always have to be harmful. While I have a lot to learn about that subject too, I feel like it is such an umbrella term. In 2020, we are all consumers of capitalist thought and products, but there are ways to do that that are more eco-friendly. A big trend in caring about the environment is owning reusable products, like straws or takeout containers. However, in order to get these products…they must be produced and we must buy them. My friend and her husband recently got on a big “NO MORE STRAWS!” kick. When I went to visit them, they were offended I was still accepting straws when I was out to eat or ordering an iced coffee. Since then, she’s bought me reusable metal or glass straws for my birthday and Christmas. Now I have about ten, which is nine more than anyone really needs. That’s feeding into capitalism too, right? The intention is good, but it’s still excess and a waste of materials.
Thank you for the well thought out reply. I agree with you 100% on the Made in America obsession that is prevalent in our discourse and society as a whole. Especially when there are so many American products made in prisons (here is a great article about it https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/fashion/prison-labor-fashion-brands.html). I personally don’t think that capitalism, environmental protection, feminism, etc are contradictory at all. But I find nowadays that collectivist economic labels like communism and socialism, often involve social issues and many enviornmentalists and feminists view capitalism as one of the causes of the oppression of nature, and/or women. To me as long as you have a free exchange of goods and respect property rights, you are engaging in capitalism. While big oil companies pollute and destroy, who is buying the oil? And when you look at waste creators like Coca-Cola, who is buying the soda? The answer to both questions is the consumer. So to me no matter what your preferred economic system is, it requires us to be focused, and change our habits.
What I don’t understand is that you mention liking Capitalism despite the Capitalist mindset causing the global destruction that is now occurring. If you go to Agarwhal pages 127 through 131 you can see how she details the destruction growing corporations have brought to the forests of India. Capitalism which greatly increases the divide between the lower class and the high class, allows the rich to take control of the water sources you talk about, leaving the poor without safe drinking water. Despite the Communist party retaining control of China, big business has come to the country and with it has left the air toxic which you can learn about in this TED talk:
https://www.ted.com/talks/lord_nicholas_stern_the_state_of_the_climate_and_what_we_might_do_about_it
Basically what I am saying is that I don’t understand how Capitalism could possibly fix the problems it is causing? Large corporations are the problem, they are the ones not paying taxes and destroying the environment in turn. Even if every human being in America started making more eco-conscious decisions, emissions would still be occurring, because it is not the people who are the problem, it is corporations. And what would capitalism be without it’s corporations?
Hello Kiera, thank you for the response. I personally don’t think there is a singular capitalist mindset, just as I don’t think there is a singular communist or socialist mindset. So I don’t think it has been what caused/is causing global destruction. I see the two main causes of global destruction as being greed, and ignorance, which are not exclusive to any economic system. I don’t dispute the damage that corporations have done to the forests of India. But corporations benefit heavily from what a lot of pro-capitalists, and libertarians call crony-capitalism. Modern corporations benefit from intrusion into the market by the federal government. Look at Amazon as an example. While most Libertarians would argue against taxation, the simple fact is that the US federal government requires individuals and small businesses to pay (sometimes very burdensome) taxes, however Amazon not only has been able to avoid paying any income taxes from 2019, it is often gifted tax cuts by state legislators vying for Amazon to open up warehouses in their districts, for jobs (https://www.businessinsider.com/tech-companies-dont-pay-federal-income-taxes-amazon-gm-2019-11). This creates a system in which corporations are able to become more powerful and not face competition, because smaller businesses face more obstacles.
As for capitalism increasing the divide between the lower and higher class, I am sure many people feel this way (including many intelligent people smarter than I) There is simply (at least to my understanding) no definitive way to prove this. I think personally that people tend to do better in free market systems, but that’s a whole nother subject that goes far beyond the environment. I could list numerous articles (from places like FEE, or the Economists, etc) about capitalism lifting people out of poverty, but the reality is you could counter with articles saying the opposite, and then we would be back where we started so I won’t do so.
You mention China which you correctly call communist, yes big business has been able to go to China but all that shows to me is that again greed and corruption are not exclusive to any economic system. I don’t think capitalism in and of iteself can fix all these problems but I do think personal responsibility and a change in our habits is required in order for the environment to be saved. If every human being in America started to make more eco-conscious decisions, emissions would drop because corporations aren’t just polluting for fun, they are polluting for profit, so if there are less consumers making purchases that damage the environment, corporations will pollute less because less consumers will be interesting in their unclean product.