CHAPTER 2: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATURE REVIEW
2.2 Conceptual frameworks
2.2.2 Ecofeminist Framework
Feminism is a response to exploitative and oppressive man-women relationships, which are intertwined with all other social relations (Muthuki, 2006). “Feminist theories hope to develop effective ways to improve women’s conditions, sometimes by making women more similar to men as they are now.
Sometimes by making men more similar to women as they are now, sometimes by validating women’s traditional characteristics, sometimes by working toward the abolition or minimizing of the categories of gender altogether, but all simultaneously transforming ideologies and institutions, including the family, religion, corporations, and the state” (Gardiner, 2005:35). Feminism is not based on hatred for men but love for humanity as a whole (Perry, 2015). Ecofeminism is founded on feminism in particular, radical and/or cultural feminism (Schmonsky, 2012; Shrivastav, 2013). “Which hold that identifying the dynamics behind the dominance of male over female is the key to comprehending every expression of patriarchal culture with it hierarchical, militaristic, mechanistic and industrial form” (Shrivastav, 2013:3).
2.2.2.1 Ecofeminism defined
The term ecofeminism also known as ecological feminism was coined by the French author Francoise d’Eaubonne in 1974 (Pla Julián and Guevara de Molina, 2013; Rao, 2012). Ecofeminism is a response to the perception that women and nature are dominated and exploited by western capitalist patriarchy (Muthuki, 2006). As they are evaluated in regards to their usefulness as male resources (Paton, 2013).
Women have been ‘naturalized’ (and described for example as chicks) while nature has been ‘feminized’
(for example, she is conquered, and controlled by men) (Muthuki, 2006). Feminization of nature and naturalization of women has led to the oppression of both (Muthuki, 2006).
Although no single definition of ecofeminism exists, the study adopts Birkeland’s (1993:18) definition, which defines ecofeminism as a “value system, a social movement, and a practice (which) also offers a political analysis that explores the links between androcentrism and environmental destruction. It is an
‘awareness’ that begins with the realization that the exploitation of nature is intimately linked to Western Man’s attitude toward women and tribal cultures…”.
19 Ecofeminism combines insights from environmentalism, ecology, feminist movements and philosophy to get rid of the domination and oppression of women, which leads to the abuse of nature by men (Chircop, 2008). Ecofeminism draws from ecology and environmentalism based on its focus on the preservation of ecosystems and is feminist based on its recognition of male favoritism (Tøllefsen, 2011).
In addition, ecofeminism as a philosophy holds that all forms of domination are based on patriarchy (Chircop, 2008).
There are several forms of feminism and accordingly there are a number of ecofeminism forms (Banford and Froude, 2015). Shrivastav (2013) categorizes these forms into radical, socialist, liberal and cultural ecofeminism. A complete look at the various ecofeminism forms is beyond the scope of this study. This study does not align with one particular form of ecofeminism, but draws from a number of forms in an effort to make visible social categories that oppress women during climate change impacts. According to Warren (2000:57) as cited by Seçkin (2016:12) “ecofeminist philosophy, in general, agrees on three main claims. The first one is that there are connections between the domination of women and nonhuman nature. The second one is that it is crucial for ecofeminism to raise awareness in environmental philosophy about these interconnections between women and nature. The last one is that ecofeminism tries to replace unfair domination over women and nature with justified structure in the environmental philosophy. Thus, ecofeminism tries to make visible this unfair dualism by proposing interconnections between women and nature”.
Ecofeminist postulate that women are closer to nature than men are and consequently are more caring towards the environment (Roy, 2015). Women’s connection with nature is attributed to several factors:
firstly, because of their biological features, they are both fertile and are providers of life (Roy, 2015;
Seçkin, 2016). Secondly, social features are cited, women are closer to nature because of traditional gender roles such as water and firewood collection (Seçkin, 2016). Thirdly, culture (Roy, 2015) and fourthly their shared history of oppression by a patriarchal society (Roy, 2015; Seçkin, 2016). Women are linked to nature and the realm of the physical while men are identified with the ‘human’ and the realm of the mental (Chircop, 2008). Whatever is connected to the former is inferior to whatever is identified with the latter (Chircop, 2008).
2.2.2.2 Ecofeminism critiques
Ecofeminism lacks clarity as a theory because of its several forms however, some scholars see this diversity as a positive aspect of ecofeminism (Manion, 2002). Manion (2002) further notes that it would be a mistake to assume that all women are working towards the same goal, and as such, it would also be false to assume the same amongst ecofeminism scholars. In fact, amongst ecofeminist, there is no consensus on how to forge progressive social change and cultural transformation (Nogueira-Godsey,
20 2013). Ecofeminism is said to be ethnocentric and essentialist (Hackfort and Burchardt, 2016; Rao, 2012), essentialist because it presents women as a homogenous group (Rao, 2012). Thus, neglecting the diversity among women based on social categories (Manion, 2002; Muthuki, 2006). The researcher departs from this form of essentialism by identifying a group of women and focusing on them and further extrapolates this analysis from gender to marital status, thereby encompassing a broad group of marginalized people. Another form of essentialism is the assumption that women have an innate deeper connection to nature, this assumption is a mere reduplication of the patriarchal fallacy (Fröhlich and Gioli, 2015; Muthuki, 2006). Furthermore, the linkage between women and nature assumes that women will always protect the environment, which may not be true, women may be responsible for environmental degradation due to the nature of their multiple and competing roles (Muthuki, 2006).
Ecofeminism is also criticized for being sexist and incoherent (Seçkin, 2016). It excludes men, glorifies women, and encourages biological and socially constructed differences between men and women (Seçkin, 2016). Ecofeminism is also considered to be spiritualist (MacGregor, 2010; Manion, 2002). The earth is potrayed as female and this is thought to be anti-intellectual (Brianson, 2016). Ecofeminism criticisms also include: blindness to socio-economic class, ethnicity, and other social stratifications, and is ahistorical and neglects the material sphere (Rao, 2012). Mee (2016) claims that ecofeminism is selective and detached from the actual practice of it supporters. Despite the above-mentioned criticisms, ecofeminism has a strong basis in democratic development and environmental issues are very important in the theory (Manion, 2002).
2.2.2.3 The significance of ecofeminism in climate change adaptation
The domination of women and nature by men is a social construct and therefore has the potential to change (Schmonsky, 2012). The liberation of women requires the liberation of nature, and vice versa (Chircop, 2008) because they are under the same domination (Seçkin, 2016). Ecofeminism may overcome this domination (Chircop, 2008; Schmonsky, 2012) by prioritizing progressive social change (Brianson, 2016; Nhanenge, 2007). The linkage between women and nature is seen as a source of women’s empowerment and environmental liberation (Muthuki, 2006). Ecofeminists believe that women work together to protect the environment. An example of ecofeminism at play, occurred during the mid- 1970’s in Uttarakhand, India when deforestation was practiced to make way for reforestation of commercial trees (pine and eucalyptus) thus destroying women’s ability to provide forest goods and services for their livelihoods. In response, women protested by hugging trees in an attempt to influence the government to stop deforestation. This act led to the prevention of soil erosion and biodiversity loss (Manion, 2002).
21 Ecofeminism relevance is beyond a gender-nature connection to include all oppressions based on social categories such as class, race, religion and sexual identity among others (Chircop, 2008). Furthermore, Banford and Froude (2015) aptly note that ecofeminism recognizes women’s voices, differentiated by social categories and therefore invites an extension to include intersectional analysis (discussed in section 2.4.2.1). Ecofeminists call “upon women and men to reconceptualize themselves, and their relationships to one another and to the nonhuman world, in non-hierarchical ways” (Agarwal, 1992:120).
This will allow men and women to work together in the future, in the management and control of ecosystems (Agarwal, 1992).
Due to their roles as carers and provisioners, women are the first to suffer when access to sustainable livelihoods is compromised (MacGregor, 2010; Manion, 2002). For example, when water is in an unusable form, food stores are dry, trees have disappeared and the climate has changed, women are often the ones who need to walk longer distances and dedicate more time to labour to ensure their families survival (Manion, 2002). Additionally, due to their subordinate role in decision-making related to environmental programmes they suffer more (Muthuki, 2006). Therefore, environmental degradation affects women’s survival activities disproportionally (MacGregor, 2010; Nogueira-Godsey, 2013; Roy, 2015). Under such conditions, ecofeminism becomes highly relevant (Bhalla, 2012).
Ecofeminism reveals the causes of humanity’s current social and ecological problems. Moreover, ecofeminism promises solidarity among women and all others who suffer from oppression, as well as sympathizers (Schmonsky, 2012). The purpose of this study, seen from an ecofeminists’ perspective is to analyze rural women’s climate change adaptation strategies. An ecofeminists’ perspective addresses climate change impacts, including an analysis of how women are adapting to these changes.
2.3 Background to climate change