Women, The Government and Environmentalism

This week’s reading by Kari Norgaard and Richard York, introduced us to the concept of environmentalism, the government, and gender equality. It was a concept I never really put together until now. The environment is a hot topic around the world, especially in political arenas. Many world leaders are ultra focused on climate policies and how to implement the best plans to help cut back their total emissions and reduce their carbon footprint. According to Norgaard and York, women who hold political office tend to be more proactive about environmental issues. I found this claim to be true as I began doing my own independent research.

Jacinda Ardern New Zealand’s Prime Minister

Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister for New Zealand is very passionate about climate control issues. Ardern has called the climate emergency her generation’s “nuclear free moment” and made tackling it a priority for her coalition government.”(AingeRoy) The New Zealand government is taking large steps toward reducing their emissions drastically by 2050. They have committed to planting a billion trees, implemented strict policies for farmers to reduce their emissions or face extremely high taxes, and putting a cap on the number of cows that dairy’s can have. New Zealand’ Environmental Performance Index (EPI) is currently ranked number 17 in the world by the UN. Ardern is pushing for net zero emissions by 2050, from watching her speak, it appears as though she is passionate about seeing that come to fruition.  https://youtu.be/Dp5Ue9v2v7g

The information about New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern falls in line with York and Norgaard’s findings. Their research suggests that “nations with greater gender equality may be more prone to protecting the environment.” We see this with New Zealand, Denmark, Germany and Norway. “Women tend to take environmental risks like nuclear power or toxic substances more serious than men do.” (Norgaard & York 508). It’s not surprising that women tend to think more along the lines of environmental protection. Women have been conditioned by society to be nurturers and caregivers. Given that it would be natural that women would be more concerned about the air they breathe or the water their children drink and so on.  

Denmark’s prime minister Mette Fredriksen

     The Prime Minister of Denmark Mette Frederiksen, is another woman who is leading her country on the road to reducing their emissions. Her pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 70% by 2050 is laid out in an 18 page agreement titled “a fair direction for Denmark.” In this agreement she pledges to cut the sale of new diesel and petrol cars by 2030. “As it is, Denmark reached an emissions reduction of 35% in 2018” (Stam June 2019). Denmark’s EPI score is 3rd in the world according to 2018 data by the Environmental Performance Index.

     In 1990, the “UN estimated that in order for women to influence key outcomes and be taken seriously, a threshold of 30% of women in parliament was required. As of 1999, only 8 of the 130 nations met this threshold.” Those nations included Denmark, Finland, Netherlands, South Africa, Germany, Iceland, Norway and Sweden (Norgaard & York 514). These numbers have increased since 1999. Below is a graph showing the number of seats held by women in across various national Parliaments. In 2018, Sweden had the leading number of women in its Parliament reporting at 47%.  Sweden ranks number 5 in the world on their EPI. Despite the fact that their leader is a male, they have a large number of female members in their Parliament. 

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/EDN-20190306-2 (click on graph to view)

 

 

 

 

Norgaard and York posits that “gender equality and environmental concern are linked to the relationship between gender and the environment. ” Their study suggests that “societies that are less sexist are more environmentally responsible.” They mention further that a country like Singapore for example has a very low number of women in Parliament. As such, their environmental record is poor, ” holding one of the 10 worst environmental records in the world” (Norgaard & York).

     It’s a shame that the United States still has a disproportionate numbers of women in high ranking government positions. Women make up only 26% in the Senate and 23% in the House. The United States has an EPI score of 27 as of 2018. That number is not likely to rise with Trump in office. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is very vocal about climate change and is trying to come up with ways to cut emissions in the U.S. You can view her speech here; https://youtu.be/Whrwt5m9jHw This is further proof that women take on the challenge of environmental issues in a big way. “The youngest woman to be ever elected to congress, and an example of a millennial in power, AOC has been using her political position to draw attention to social and environmental issues as well as women’s rights and equality. Her work on and in promoting the Green New Deal in the U.S. has made her the voice of climate change concern in a political environment heavily criticised for climate change denial” (Wyns, A). AOC has moxy, she isn’t afraid to fight for what she believes in. With more women like her in the American government, we may have a chance for equality. 

It’s important that nations begin to equal out the number of men and women in high ranking government offices. It’s imperative for gender equality. It’s not only important for equality, but for our planet.  We need an equal balance for equality. When one class has more power than another, oppression occurs. Environmental organizations like WEDO can help create awareness and empowerment among women to join the environmental fight. The more empowered women feel the more apt they are to get involved in government, to enact policy change. We saw this happen in congress in 2018 Trump’s election.

Annotated Bibliography  Eleanor AingeRoy is a journalist for the Guardian. She graduated from the University or Technology in Sydney. She was a freelance journalist prior to becoming a full-time writer for the Guardian. She is only 25, but tackles some very heavy story lines including covering the current Covid-19 outbreak in New Zealand.

Sources; 

Ainge, E., Climate change to steer all New Zealand government decisions from now on, 12/2019, accessed 3/22/2020. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/04/climate-change-to-steer-all-new-zealand-government-decisions-from-now-on

Davidson, J. AOC Reads the Green New Deal Into the Congressional Record 2/27/20, accessed 3/21/2020 https://www.ecowatch.com/aoc-green-new-deal-2645318946.html

EPI https://epi.envirocenter.yale.edu/2018/report/category/hlt

EU Stats, Women in EU parliament and governments https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/EDN-20190306-2

HerStory https://wedo.org/about-us-2/

Norgaard, Kari and Richard York. “Gender Equality and State Environmentalism.” Gender and Society August 2005: 506-522.

McDonald, J. New Zealand Takes the Lead on Climate Change, The Diplomat, 11/2019, accessed 3/22/2020. https://thediplomat.com/2019/11/new-zealand-takes-the-lead-on-climate-change/

Stay, C. New Danish government puts climate change centre stage, 6/2019, accessed 3/21/2020 https://www.euractiv.com/section/climate-environment/news/new-danish-government-puts-climate-change-centre-stage/

 

 

 

5 Replies to “Women, The Government and Environmentalism”

  1. Hello Tonya, fantastic and insightful post as always. I think you picked 2 (3 if you count AOC) great examples of Norgaard and Yorks theories. As I’m sure at this point everybody in this class is aware I’m a libertarian which often puts me at odds with environmentalists who feel that it is the governments duty to intervene in business, and the rights of individuals for the sake of the environment (I can also understand why this is a frustrating argument for collectivists and progressives to hear). In my blog I mentioned that female politicians seem to be more inclined to spend in general but also to spend more on the environment, which is why Norgaard and York use the term state environmentalism as opposed to just environmentalism. Obviously all the women that you mention favor state environmentalism, and I think Norgaard and Yorks work correctly shows that women favor state environmentalism more than men do. However do you think when it comes to environmentalism in general women care more than men? I would love to hear some of your thoughts on this.

    1. Hi Nick,
      Thanks for the comment. I think speaking in generalities among American men and women, it could be that women care slightly more than men. However, I think in younger people, that may not be the case. For example, my daughters fiancé is very environmentally conscious… even more so than my daughter is. He is always correcting her “wasteful” behavior. Having said that, I’d have to say that among men and women my age group, those over 40, women are likely more conscious of environmental issues than men. I’m much more conscious than my husband. Even before I ever went back to school. I was the one separating/cleaning plastic, aluminum, glass for recycling in the proper bins, and my husband is still quite wasteful when I’m not looking. Haha.

  2. Hi Tonya,
    I found it very informative to learn about women in positions of political power, such as the Prime Ministers you shared, that have a stance that places importance on environmentalism. I found this blog very interesting because we learned about differences in political policies and stances in the politics class we are both enrolled in this semester. Norgaard and York’s theories reminded me very much of the information that can be found in the “Women and Politics” textbook we use for that class, specifically the chapter detailing the political gender gaps among different issues. With environmentalism, the text is fairly similar to the findings of Norgaard and York. “There are also some gender differences on environmental issues. Because women are more risk averse than men, a gender gap emerges on environmental regulations related to reducing risks such as health risks (Dolan et. al 70).” As you stated, women are characterized as nurturing which would connect to the fact that they have a deeper sense of risk aversion when it comes to the welfare of others. In the cases of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Prime Minister Mette Frederikson, I feel their environmental politics align with this aversion to risks that their respective populations could be facing due to the issues they primarily combat. Both have an inclined sense of combatting emissions for their nations, which is a great benefit to the lives and health of the citizens of New Zealand and Denmark. As for AOC, I also wrote about her in my response due to the fact that she is a political advocate for state environmentalism and her introduction of the Green New Deal stuck in my mind through reading Norgaard and York’s writings. Especially since Norgaard and York identified that nations with less female representation often have less policies in place for the environment, it makes more sense as the USA, as you stated, ranked 27 for an EPI score. Hopefully with the potential addition of female representation in future elections will present for the US to turn out more policies in favor of the environment.

    Source:
    Dolan, Julie, et al. Women and Politics: Paths to Power and Political Influence. Rowman and Littlefield Publishing, 2020.

  3. Hello Tonya,

    I liked your blog. Something that wasn’t mentioned in the readings, but that I think is important, is that women reproduce patriarchy. I mention this because we complain that we don’t have gender equality, but many times women oppress other women. There are women who don’t vote for other women during elections, instead they vote for the male candidates. This is because this thought of men in power has been so internalized that even women can’t let go of it. My point is that if we want gender equality, we have to educate women as well because like I said, we reproduce patriarchy too, so if we don’t support each other, there is not way that we are going to get to that point. Again, this is not something that was part of the topic, but it’s just something that I learned about in my other WGS classes and that really opened my eyes about gender inequality.

  4. Hi Tonya,
    First, I would like to say how much I really enjoyed your blog. I was already familiar with AOC but, I had no knowledge of Mette Fredriksen or Jacinda Ardern. It was really fascinating to learn more about them. I found Mette Fredriksen to be an incredibly inspiring women. Her pledge to cut emissions down seventy percent is a very admirable goal but, the fact that Denmark already achieved a reduction of thirty-five percent is astounding.
    I believe these women as perfect examples of Norgaard and Yorks thesis. Personally, I believe that women typically only hold power in office in progressive nations or even certain states in our country. I still hear to this day men say ‘women can’t be in power because they are too emotional’. There is still a blockade in the political empowerment of women.
    So it only makes sense, and in accordance with Norgaard and York, that when women do hold power they are progressive and firm in their desires to aid the environment. I also wrote about AOC but, if you aren’t familiar with Hilda Heine you should look into her. She is quite an impressive authority figure as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *