By Marlies Hesselman, University of Groningen Faculty of Law, PhD Candidate, m.m.e.hesselman@rug.nl

On  16 October 2017, GHLG member Marlies Hesselman participated in an event on  the new CEDAW General Recommendation on Gender and Disaster Risk Reduction in a Changing Climate . This two-part post is based on her commentary in response to the presentation of the Draft General Recommendation by CEDAW Committee member Hilary Gbedemah, and is published on the occasion of COP23 in Bonn.

From 6 to 17 November 2017,  government delegations from all over the world, along with UN agencies and thousands civil society actors, are gathering in Bonn to discuss the implementation of the 2015 Paris Climate Change Agreement at the 23rdConference of Parties (COP23) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Through the Paris Agreement, States committed themselves to reducing greenhouse gas emissions with the purpose of keeping global warming “well below 2 degrees Celsius” – and preferably below 1,5 degrees. Unfortunately, it has been repeatedly calculated that current mitigation pledges fall short considerably. Moreover, even if the Paris goals are attained, it will still be necessary to also engage in extensive climate adaptation measures to be prepared for climate impacts that can no longer be averted. In fact, climate change adaption, which includes the practice of natural disaster risk reduction (DRR), is an intimate part of the Paris Agreement.

It is generally acknowledged in  international legal instruments, literature and practice that there are close links between gender, climate change, health and human rights protection. The UNFCCC for example works on a dedicated Gender and Climate Action Plan, while the WHO has reported extensively on health, gender and climate change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change  commented in-depth on the health implications of climate change in its Fiftt Assessment Report (AR5) in 2014, including those implications as related to disasters. The IPCC encourages ‘vulnerability mapping’ while also noting complex interplays between gender and vulnerability, e.g. as intersecting with age, occupation or poverty (see also this (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2688544) GHLG research paper for a general discussion of the ‘The Right to Health and Climate Change (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2688544)’, including practice of CEDAW). Importantly, recent relevant UN instruments, such as the 2015 UN Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction(SFDRR), the 2016 New Urban Agenda of UN Habitat III, or the UN Sustainable Development Goals (Goal 13b) all underscore the links between gender, climate, disasters, health and human rights, including by express reference to the applicability of human rights law to their implementation (e.g. SFDRR Principle 19c). The Paris Agreements’ preamble even singles out “the right to health” especially.

The first document to consolidate the various threads – thereby providing extensive guidance on this topic – is a new draft “General Recommendation on ‘the Gender-Related Dimensions of Disaster Risk Reduction in a Changing Climate” by the UN CEDAW-committee. It is planned to be adopted in February 2018. This post (which consists of two parts) includes a further commentary on draft General Recommendation 36 (GR36) through the lens of (the right to) health, as ‘a specific area of concern’. Why climate change and disaster risk reduction are a women’s rights concern is discussed below as well.

Climate change, women rights, health and disaster management: what’s at stake?

As previously discussed in this GHLG report on the “Right to Health and Climate Change” (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2688544), the human right to health is relevant to climate change in various ways, since it protects both the availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality of relevant health care services and the underlying determinants of health – including food and nutrition, housing, access to safe and potable water and adequate sanitation, safe and healthy working conditions and a healthy living environment. The human right to health is protected through various international human rights treaties, including the ICESCR and the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Froms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and is also central to the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Constitution.

The health impacts of climate change are widely acknowledged, including by the WHO, the IPCC and the Paris Agreement, with one concrete threat being changes in weather patterns and increased frequency and intensity of slow and sudden-onset natural disasters. Such disasters include floods and droughts, storms, hurricanes, cyclones, wild fires or extreme heats and colds. Natural disasters, as exacerbated or affected by climate change, can cause both  direct  and  indirect  (additional) health impacts.

Direct and indirect negative health impacts of climate change and disasters

Direct negative health impacts may, for example, occur when hospitals and health clinics are destroyed, closed or flooded, or when loss of lives and limbs occur through emergency events. Weeks after Hurricane Maria, the Puerto Rican hospital system is still under severe stress, while US hospitals face health supply shortages to due to supply chain disruptions. Direct impacts can also include severe physical and mental stress, resulting from evacuation and displacement and an inability to access essential (emergency) goods and services – such as clean water, food, hygiene products and essential health care services.

Indirect health impacts can include water- and vector-borne diseases (e.g. mosquito infestations) a result of still-standing water or extremely unhygienic circumstances after floods resulting from poor sewage systems, poor waste disposal and mold in housing – as for example reported after Hurricane Irma and Harvey. Another key challenge is the general disruption of essential infrastructures, such as electricity, roads or communication lines, or the slow-onset disruption of water and food availability in case of droughts, soil salinization, or repeated flooding.

Immediate impacts of disasters, as well as indirect impacts are recognized as a human rights issue in the human rights framework, for example, through General Comment 14 on the Right to Health by the ICESCR-committee. Yet, the applicability of human rights to disaster management, including DRR, was also recently recognized through the UN’s ILC Draft Articles on the Protection of Persons in Event of Disasters.

How are women affected differently?

Women are affected differently to men for various reasons and in various circumstances (e.g.  WHO report on Gender, Health and Climate). Key differences directly linked to ‘womanhood’ include poor access to sexual and reproductive health services after disasters, including pregnancy related assistance, access to contraception or abortion services (e.g. women missing essential appointments).

A good example is the UN’s Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) recent “Gender Alert” after Hurricane Irma, observing that Caribbean women were at risk of gender-based violence and struggling with specific health needs. Action points for the health care system identified by IASC included women’s access to dignity kits, reproductive health kits, free family planning supplies, including emergency contraception, confidential care for survivors of sexual violence, post-rape treatment kits (and training for those using them), skilled birth attendants for delivery, emergency obstetric care, protocols for blood safety, free condoms for prevention of transmission of HIV, as well as anti-retrovirals to prevent mother to child transmission. Other aspects include distribution of menstrual hygiene products, soap and clean underwear. The importance of trained midwives and availability of essential child-birth supplies is also detailed in this account from Puerto Rico.

In respect of the underlying determinants of health, the IASC’s Gender Alert also raises risks related to access to sufficient(ly nutritious) food, loss of agricultural expertise in the family, safe access to food rations and safe sanitation facilities. Regarding access to food, there is considerable evidence that women and girls often bear the brunt of malnutrition after disasters and that pre-existing vulnerabilities of women and (female) children are exacerbated through disasters.

From a more theoretical perspective, the links between gender, health and climate change can be conceptualized in various ways. ‘Gender and development’ approaches for example consider that women’s discrimination and inequality are structurally (re)enforced through existing gendered divisions of labour, access to resources, and lack of participation in decision-making. Discrimination between men and women is borne out of entrenched processes of subordination and negotiation in which men’s voices dominate. Instead, ‘women in development’ perspectives mostly try to understand how women are affected through their day-to-day management of natural resources as related to agriculture, cooking, fuel collection or water collection. Because these tasks may often fall on women, the burden of environmental changes affecting tasks will fall on women differently and disproportionally. Finally, eco-feminists (controversially) suggest that women have a different, natural connection to nature or the environment altogether, endowing them with a different mind-set and (better) ability to care for the environment.

Traces of the first two perspectives may certainly be found in CEDAW’s GR36, as the Committee recognizes that ‘vulnerability of women and girls to risks and hazards linked to disasters is economically, socially and culturally constructed and can therefore be changed’ (para 6). At the same time, the CEDAW-Committee is also adamant in affirming that categorizing “women as a ‘passive vulnerable group’ in need of protection from the impact of disasters is a negative gender stereotype that fails the recognize the important contributions of DRR, post-disaster management and climate change adaptation” (para 7). The UN Commission on the Status of Women adopted a resolution in 2012 on Gender Equality and Empowerment in Natural Disasters, noting that:

natural disasters often have different impacts on men and women in regards to the associated risks and vulnerabilities, due to gender inequality, gender stereotypes and discrimination against women, including the lack of equal access to  adequate information, economic opportunities, and poverty and social exclusion, safety and different family responsibilities…

Part two of this blog post will proceed with further comments regarding the content of the new CEDAW General Recommendation in the area of health, which is considered a ‘specific area of concern’. It will focus in particular on transformative health care systems reforms, aimed at better climate resilience, through DRR activity.

Please feel free to leave you thoughts on this topic below.