Campaña 3

We combine social vulnerability (Blaikie et al., 1994; Bohle et al., 1994; Adger and Kelly, 1999; Cutter et al., 2003; Cutter, 2005) and feminist political ecology theories (Rocheleau et al., 1996) to develop dense and rich information about the material, social, and discursive realities of women’s experiences in both normal and disaster periods.

Vulnerability to disaster is a function of both physical and social factors. The former includes exposure to risks such as floods and storms surges. The latter involves social and political arrangements that limit or enhance the capacity of individuals or social groups to cope with and adapt to hazard or external stress placed on their livelihood and wellbeing (Adger and Kelly, 1999). Scholars who draw on social vulnerability theory argue that vulnerability is determined by social inequalities rooted in gender,

1

Nwokoro and Agbola (2011) designed an income group classification of local government wards in Lagos using socio- economic characteristics of neighbourhoods including type of accommodation (wooden shacks, bungalow, duplex, mansion etc.), population density and monthly income of households

2

Adaptive capacity is defined as the ability to adjust to actual or expected climate impacts (including variability and extremes) to moderate potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences (Yohe and Tol, 2002).

122

class, culture, race, age, and other power structures, together with situational factors such as where people live, their physical and mental health, literacy status, household size and composition, and resources available to them to cope with crises (Mustafa, 1998; Cutter et al., 2003; Cannon, 2010).

In societies that are more inequitable, women tend to be at higher risks of disaster because of pre- existing disadvantages in social, economic, political, legal, and cultural status and opportunities (Mak, 2005; Deere and Doss, 2006; Seager, 2006; Terry, 2009). This problem is particularly evident in developing countries where a higher proportion of the poor and those who lack access to resources and decision-making in information, finance, personal health, education, training, and rights, are women and girls (Vlassoff, 1994; UNDP 1995, 2007; UNESCO, 2012). Women’s lack of training and education, for example, means that they are forced to work in low-wage informal sectors and earn lower income which may limit their ability to diversify their livelihood capabilities, or increase their resilience against climate- related shocks such as floods or drought (FAO, 2011). Women, for example, constitute a majority (over 70%) of the workforce in the low wage agricultural sector in rural Africa (Babugura, 2010). In India, nearly 90 per cent of women employed outside the agricultural sector are in informal employment with over 70 per cent working as street vendors, garment makers, and construction workers (United Nations, 2010 p. 89). Employment in such low wage sectors tend to increase women’s poverty and vulnerability to climatic shocks (Omari, 2010). Studies from Bangladesh have shown that in addition to poverty, social marginalisation and the lack of potentially life-saving skills such as swimming can also increase women’s vulnerability to climatic disasters (Rowshan, 1992; Alim, 2009). To build women’s resilience against climate-related hazards, social vulnerability theorists argue that attention must be paid to the socially constructed sources of vulnerability in the household and society, and particularly to the gender

differentiated vulnerabilities and opportunities that men and women have in daily life. Used uncritically, this approach can lead to unproductive generalisations about women as a social category and can overemphasize women’s dependency and need (Fordham, 2004; Enarson et al., 2006).

123

To avoid criticisms about generalizations, we turn to feminist political ecology. Feminist political ecology rejects the notion that women are a single autonomous group: instead, attention is drawn to the various axes of power and context in which gender interacts with class, ethnicity, race, culture, and national identity to shape people’s experience of and interests in the environment (Rocheleau et al., 1996; Schroeder, 1997). The analytical framework offered by this approach seeks to understand and interpret local experiences in the context of global processes of environmental and economic change. Feminist political ecology integrate ideas about gender relations in specific environmental contexts with an emphasis on women’s practical environmental knowledge with issues of gender inequalities,

environmental degradation, and disaster vulnerability (Enarson et al., 2006). Gendered rights to property, resources, space, and decision making and women’s roles and responsibilities in the household and community are central concerns under this framework.

Enarson et al. (2006) noted that apart from poverty, women’s susceptibility to disaster is also influenced by their gendered roles as mothers and caregivers; their ability to seek safety during disaster emergencies is often restricted by their responsibilities to the very young and the very old, both of whom require help and supervision (Babugura, 2010). Additionally, women generally bear the task of finding solutions to the socioeconomic instability and food situation following natural disasters or destroyed harvest (Ariyabandu, 2003; Jungehülsing, 2012). Such gendered responsibilities are historically rooted in cultural practices and power structures in societies. The gendered inequality that women face in normal and disaster times is often reinforced by customary laws, globalization processes, and hyper-urbanization (Enarson and Morrow, 1998). These elements play a significant role in narrowing women’s access to financial and productive assets necessary to cope and recover from extreme weather events. For female- headed households dependent on agriculture, land, for example, is their most productive asset. But statutory or customary laws often restrict women’s land and property rights in many parts of the world (Schroeder, 1997; World Bank, 2001, 2007). Such laws hinder women from using their lands as collateral to enable economic recovery in post-disaster situations.

124

Economic globalization have also been shown to impact communities and populations in gender specific ways, affecting women as consumers, care-givers, social-care users and economic actors

(Enarson, 1998; Mark et al., 2006). For example, structural adjustment policies imposed on poor nations, which required the deregulation of the local economy, privatisation of public services, and reduction in spending on social services, demonstrably affected women directly by reducing their standard of living and general health, and intensifying paid and unpaid workloads (Chipeta, 1993; Sadasivam, 1997; Zack- Williams, 2000; Abouharb and Cingranelli, 2006). Furthermore, more recent free trade policies such as the World Trade Organisation (WTO) agreements on liberalisation in agriculture have undermined local markets and increased pressure on men to migrate for wage work in urban areas thereby leaving women and children impoverished in unsustainable rural environment (Bello, 2004). Such policies have also spurred rapid urbanization and population growth in many cities, thus stimulating the concentration of low-income populations in hazardous urban spaces where floods, storm surges, mudslides, air pollution and other environmental hazards are often inescapable (Cutter, 1995; Hewitt, 1997). While cities present opportunities to women, they also make life an unending struggle for those living in hazardous

settlements without access to water, decent housing, sanitation and other vital basic amenities (Moser, 1996; Sweetman, 1996; Enarson, 1998). These structural disadvantages act together with social and gender inequalities to aggravate urban poor women’s vulnerability to climatic hazards. It is likely that gender inequality and associated vulnerabilities will be exacerbated under conditions of climate change (Adger et al., 2003), especially in societies that fail to address the socially embedded discriminatory laws, roles or biases that make women victims rather than resourceful agents in normal and disaster times. To prevent this, an approach that promotes women’s empowerment and resourcefulness is required.

Researchers in development ethics and feminist science have argued for a human rights-based approach (HRBA) as a practical lens for evaluating the protection and empowerment of women in normal and disaster situations. They try to link women’s human rights to disaster risk theoretically in research, practice, and political work. For example, they ask how social inequalities within and between nations

125

impact the human rights of women or how land-use decisions affect the housing, employment, transportation and risk spreading options for women (Enarson et al., 2006). This approach provides a legal and moral justification for action where social policies and cultural practices discriminate against certain women or heighten their vulnerability in disaster situation. A human rights-based approach in this study offers ways of incorporating fairness and responsibilities while also providing room for engagement rather than just descriptive analysis (Tschakert and Machada, 2010). This approach allows us to unmask pre-existing social inequalities as well as structural and gendered violence that constrain certain groups of women from successfully coping or adapting to climatic and other stressors.

4.3 Study site, design and methods