Women’s Equality Day marks the passing of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which granted women the right to vote. It honors not just the fight for suffrage, but the equality battles women still face today, including climate solutions. While women and girls are disproportionately affected by climate change, they are underrepresented in climate and environmental policy-making. Closing that gap isn’t a side issue — it’s the next front in the fight for equality.

Natural Disasters and Women

Globally, climate change is fueling more frequent natural disasters like floods, wildfires, and earthquakes – and the strain has fallen disproportionately on women and girls. They are 14 times more likely to die than men in an extreme weather event due to gaps in mobility, resources, and social status. 

Women also face greater exposure to heatwaves, housing insecurity, and rising utility costs, driven in large part by pervasive economic inequalities, such as lower wages and the burden of unpaid childcare and housework. The result is that 4 out of 5 people displaced by the impacts of climate change are women and girls.

These disparities become starkly visible after disasters like the 2010 Haiti earthquake. In the aftermath, women and girls in relief camps fell victim to a dramatic rise in sexual assaults due to a lack of planning and security to protect the displaced. 

When women are included in the traditionally male-dominated spaces, like helping run humanitarian response teams, they’re able to address risks that disproportionately threaten women and children. United Nations recovery camps have embedded women in leadership roles across camp governance, training programs, and livelihood projects to give women direct influence over recovery decisions and offer new paths to income-generating activities.

Women Leading the Charge

When women are given the opportunity to take on leadership positions, there is a greater likelihood that action will be taken to fight climate change. Likewise in the corporate world, climate governance, environmental reporting, and renewable power investment is greater in businesses with more gender diversity.

In politics, studies have also found that countries with higher proportions of women in parliament are more likely to have stricter climate policies, like higher taxes on carbon-heavy activities and more aggressive renewable energy subsidies. They’re also more likely to ratify international environmental treaties, like the 1993 United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, committing nations to protect animal and plant life.

Also consider that women drive 70-80% of consumer purchasing decisions in wealthier countries, and they are more likely to recycle, buy sustainably-labeled products, and save water and energy in the household. Together, this has a measurable impact on consumer behavior and attitudes.

Trailblazing female activists and leaders have paved the way for the modern climate movement. One of the most notable leaders, Jane Goodall, created a lasting legacy of hope and conservation with her groundbreaking research on chimpanzees. Transforming from researcher to advocate, she became a UN Messenger of Peace and founder of the Jane Goodall Institute, pushing for community-led conservation and civic participation until her passing in 2025.

Mia Mottley, the Prime Minister of Barbados, is a leading voice demanding fair climate financing for vulnerable island nations. She has already pioneered sustainable financing models and committed Barbados to transitioning to 100% renewable energy by 2030.

Nemonte Nenquimo, an indigenous Waorani leader from Ecuador, sued the Ecuadorian government in 2019, and in a landmark decision, successfully blocked oil drilling in half a million acres of ancestral Amazon rainforest.

A Data Gap

For decades, public and environmental health research has treated men’s behavior and bodies as the default, leaving critical gaps in data surrounding climate change’s effects on women. The people designing green infrastructure, disaster response, and public health policy are left working with an incomplete picture of who they’re serving when without that information.

Women’s health has historically been undervalued, creating significant gaps in the data we have to treat and protect them in response to growing threats. This fact remains true when talking about female reproductive health and plastics exposure. Humans are now ingesting six times more microplastics than in 1990, stemming from the world’s dependence on fossil fuels and their production of single-use plastics. Microplastics enter a mother’s body through everyday ingestion, inhalation, and skin contact and ultimately cross the placental barrier into a developing fetus.

The particles have been found in breastmilk and newborn’s first stool, and evidence shows that the effects of this exposure include higher risk of heart attack, stroke, cancer, and decreased fertility. Some vocal scientists, like Dr. Shanna Swan, are sounding the alarm on the public health threat this has become, but many products marketed heavily towards women, like cosmetics and perfumes, are still using phthalates, chemicals the leech into the skin and create lasting harm.

Beyond the health risks, this data bias also shapes the infrastructure meant to serve entire communities. Much of the data used to create climate solutions is collected primarily on men and treated as representative of the entire population. 

Take public transit, for example. Traditional transit networks use hub-and-spoke patterns, meant to easily transport employees to business districts and back to their residential suburbs. While there is a substantial portion of the population who primarily use the system in this way, women are more likely to engage in “trip-changing.” This means making multiple small stops like getting groceries, dropping on children at school, and picking up dry cleaning. The system’s design forces women’s travel to become slower, more expensive, and, at times, more dangerous, due to many bus and train stops’ distance from women’s intended destinations.

Representation Matters

Designing equitable, effective green infrastructure, and creating a world less reliant on fossil fuels and plastics requires an intentional effort. This means using climate data that shows how issues like energy access and public transport can impact women differently. It also means ensuring that climate disaster response plans and funding meet the distinct needs of women, from protections against gender-based violence to specialized healthcare for pregnant and nursing mothers.

When provided the opportunity, women and girls act as agents of change in their roles as business and political leaders, consumers, and members of our shared environment. There is immense value in looking back and seeing how past actions have created a world that has made women more vulnerable to global warming, but recognizing their critical role in the fight for a more sustainable future creates a better world for us all.

For Women’s Equality Day, we will continue our role mobilizing the environmental movement, and hope you join us in fighting for our future.

Learn more about Chemicals, Fertility, and Our Future by watching our 22 Minutes With Dr. Shanna Swan.

The post Women’s Equality Day: Counting Women In Climate Solutions appeared first on Earth Day.

This Women’s Equality Day, let’s  talk about something that deserves way more attention than it gets: what’s really in our period products. Yep, we’re going there because it turns out that those everyday pads, tampons, and even period underwear we rely on every month might be doing more than just soaking up flow. 

Recent studies have uncovered something pretty unsettling: many feminine hygiene products contain harmful plastic chemicals, including a group called PFAS; short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. These are notoriously called “forever chemicals” because once they’re in your body, they stick around for a long time. Testing revealed that 48% of pads, 22% of tampons, and a whopping 65% of period underwear contained PFAS. These chemicals have been linked to hormonal disruptions, fertility issues, immune system suppression, and even certain cancers. 

So the question is: why are corporations allowed to put chemicals like these into our bodies with ​​little oversight– and why does the FDA turn its head? 

Invisible Ingredients, Real Risk

The global feminine hygiene market is valued at over $4.5 billion in the US alone, making pads and tampons not just necessities, but big business. With big business comes big secrets. Despite their massive market stake, most companies disclose little to nothing about what’s inside their products. 

Independent testing has revealed what’s hiding in them: carcinogens, endocrine disruptors, reproductive toxins, and allergens. Vaginal and vulvar tissue is far more absorbent than skin, meaning chemicals in period products can enter the bloodstream quickly. The very products designed for intimate health may actually compromise it. 

The kicker is; the FDA regulates these items as medical devices, not consumer goods. That classification exempts them from the labeling requirements we expect from everyday items like cereal boxes, shampoo bottles, and over the counter drugs. Companies can voluntarily disclose ingredients, but most do not. Consumers are left in the dark about what they are putting into their bodies. 

The Additives No One Asked For

Pads and tampons aren’t just cotton anymore. The market thrives on engineering products with advanced polymers, nonwovens, adhesives, and fragrances – none of which are there for your health. Fragrances, for instance, contain dozens of disclosed chemicals designed to “mask odor”, but in reality, they disrupt pH levels, upset bacterial balance, and can lead to infection, and then more stink. It creates a mean cycle. 

And then there’s microplastics – tiny fragments that don’t biodegrade and accumulate in the body over time. Studies suggest that they may disrupt hormones and contribute to long-term health problems as well. When you use an “Ultra-thin” pad or “super-absorbant” tampon, think about the cocktail of synthetic fibers and plastic that stick around in you long after you toss them out. 

What’s marketed as comfort and innovation comes at the expense of transparency and safety. 

Pads Outlive People 

The same plastics and chemicals don’t just vanish after we’re done with them. The average person who menstruates will use up to 17,000 tampons or pads in their lifetime. With most pads made of nearly 90% plastic and tampons often wrapped in plastic applicators and packaging, the waste adds up. A single pad can take 500–800 years to decompose, meaning one person’s lifetime of period product waste will outlast them for centuries. Tampon applicators and wrappers disposed improperly pollute oceans and beaches, while microplastics leach toxins into soil and waterways. In short: the very products meant to manage a natural cycle are helping fuel an unnatural environmental crisis.

The Cost of Bleeding

Here’s the other piece of the puzzle: not everyone has the luxury of choice. While some people can debate whether to buy organic cotton tampons, 500 million people lack access to basic menstrual products altogether. This lack doesn’t just affect hygiene, but it ripples into education, work, and health.

Missing school or work because of a period reinforces cycles of poverty and stigma. And when low-income communities do have access, it’s often to the cheapest, disposable products ,that not only generate mountains of waste, but also tend to have more toxic chemicals, fragrances, and plastics than higher-quality or reusable alternatives. Health inequality becomes environmental inequity. 

Some governments are stepping up. Scotland now provides free products for all, and Kenya eliminated the tampon tax altogether back in 2004. Most of the world, unfortunately, has not caught up. Even fewer governments actively encourage sustainable, non-toxic menstrual product options.

Breaking the Cycle 

Period products shouldn’t come with hidden risks, toxic chemicals, and a side of climate destruction. Yet here we are, operating in a market that prioritizes profit over health. 

The good news? Change is possible. Stronger federal laws, like New York’s disclosure act, could pull back the curtain on what’s really in these products. Transparency would put pressure on companies to clean up their act. 

In the meantime, don’t panic: just get picky. Look for brands that are transparent about their ingredients and free of synthetic fragrances, dyes, and chlorine bleaching. Explore reusable or organic options where possible. Bonus: many of these choices are also more eco-friendly and budget-friendly in the long run.

Periods are already enough to deal with. Toxic chemicals, corporate secrecy, and environmental destruction shouldn’t be part of the package. Period.

You can help make a difference – sign EARTHDAY.ORG’s petition for the Global Plastics Treaty. Help stop plastic pollution and protect both people and the planet. 

It’s not just our bodies under attack, it is the Environmental Protection Agency too. If you care about the environment, and are in the U.S., we need your voice. Add your name to our public comments on the EPA’s intentions to gut the agency’s ability to regulate pollution due to climate change, also known as the Endangerment Finding. 

This article is available for republishing on your website, newsletter, magazine, newspaper, or blog. The accompanying imagery is also cleared for use. Please ensure that the author’s name and their affiliation with EARTHDAY.ORG are credited. Kindly inform us if you republish so we can acknowledge, tag, or repost your content. You may notify us via email at davies@earthday.org or fielder@earthday.org. Want more articles? Follow us on substack.

The post The Problem with Period Products appeared first on Earth Day.

Women’s Equality Day commemorates the passing of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution 105 years ago, giving millions of U.S. women the right to vote. But the holiday isn’t just about looking back on this historic win. It’s about looking forward and recognizing where the fight for equality is still unfolding.

The battle we face today is a daunting one: climate change. And just like the suffrage movement, the fight for climate justice is all about representation, survival and having a voice. As the crisis grows, it is clear that those most impacted and those with a voice in its solutions remain unequal.

A Fight for Representation 

The women’s suffrage movement wasn’t only about gaining access to the ballot box, but, like most women’s rights movements throughout history, was a fight for access and inclusion into spaces where decisions are being made, whether it’s a voting booth or a meeting room. 

The same questions of power and who has access to it define the climate crisis today. Humans are facing a crisis that affects all of us. Still, just like in the 20th century, women — especially those in marginalized communities — are excluded from making decisions about their futures, and the stakes of exclusion are higher than ever as climate change becomes more and more dangerous. 

Climate change Affects As All: But Not Equally

Instead, it hits those who are already marginalized much harder. Worldwide, women and children are 14 times more likely than men to die from extreme weather disasters, which global warming makes stronger and more frequent.

An estimated four out of every five people displaced by the impacts of climate change are women and girls. U.S. women are more likely to live in poverty, earn less money, and spend more time doing household work and caring for children than men, and are therefore far more vulnerable to the disasters climate change brings, including increased utility costs, heatwaves, or housing insecurity after hurricanes or floods. 

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, for example, women, particularly low-income mothers, were the hardest hit in terms of being displaced and accessing aid. Before the storm, women represented the majority of the residents in New Orleans’ public housing, and over 83 percent of the city’s low-income single women were displaced and unable to return home after the storm.

Disparities like this were not unique to Hurricane Katrina. They were echoed in climate disasters like the 2025 Los Angeles Wildfires, where, similar to other wildfires, women were more likely to suffer from post-disaster poverty, were at greater risk when evacuation orders were issued, and pregnant women faced heightened health risks from smoke exposure. 

However, wildfire responses tend to broadly focus on infrastructure and resource distribution instead of addressing the specific needs of women, and the 2025 L.A. fire was no exception. 

Despite bearing the brunt of its impacts, women, who make up over half of the U.S. population, remain underrepresented in every major sector of climate decision-making. Women only make up 28 percent of the 119th U.S. Congress. In the energy industry, a sector which is highly relevant to the climate crisis, women make up just 25 percent of the workforce and 13 percent of senior leadership roles. 

Representation Matters

Research shows a clear correlation between women in leadership positions and positive climate action. For example, studies have found that countries with higher proportions of women in government are more likely to have more stringent climate policies and ratify international environmental treaties, and in the business sector, gender-diverse firms invest more in climate policies and tend to have better climate reporting.

Who is represented in positions of power has a significant impact on the actions taken, shaping which communities are protected and invested in, how disaster relief is distributed, and whether current policies meet the needs of vulnerable people. Women’s exclusion from climate policy-making limits the possibility of new, innovative solutions, and can lead to gender-blind policies that either don’t address the unique impact of climate change on women, or that even exacerbate that impact and worsen its effects. 

Conversely, climate policies crafted by women or shaped with gender in mind tend to be more equitable. Shaping climate plans through the lens of gender by incorporating disaggregated gender data, ensuring women participate in planning, and tailoring responses to climate disasters to meet the unique needs of women leads to more effective solutions. Leaving women out of these conversations leads to entire communities being that much more vulnerable. 

Women Leading the Way

Ensuring women are on the front lines in the fight against climate change isn’t just an important step for gender equality, but could be the key to environmental action. 

Across the country and the world, women are already spearheading the cause. From young climate activists and grassroots organizers to scientists, farmers, and legislators, women are fighting for a more just and sustainable future. 

Take Laurene Allen, the woman who protected thousands of families from a toxic chemical crisis in New England and campaigned so hard that she spearheaded the effort that led to New Hampshire becoming a frontrunner in state PFAS regulations. Or Nalleli Cobo, who, at 19, successfully led a coalition to shut down a toxic oil-drilling site in her community. 

Their leadership, like that of U.S. suffragists over 100 years ago, is an act of resistance. 

Recognizing that the fight for the climate and the fight for women’s rights are intrinsically interlinked is a crucial step for women and the planet: justice in one area reinforces justice in the other. 

This Women’s Equality Day, we remember the past while continuing to mobilize for our future. Get started by joining the movement today. 

If you care about the environment, and are in the U.S., we need your voice. Add your name to our public comments on the EPA’s intentions to gut the agency’s ability to regulate pollution due to climate change, also known as the Endangerment Finding.

This article is available for republishing on your website, newsletter, magazine, newspaper, or blog. The accompanying imagery is also cleared for use with attribution. Please ensure that the author’s name and their affiliation with EARTHDAY.ORG are credited. Kindly inform us if you republish so we can acknowledge, tag, or repost your content. You may notify us via email at davies@earthday.org or fielder@earthday.org. Want more articles? Follow us on substack.

The post Why Women Matter In A Warming World  appeared first on Earth Day.

Mother Nature’s wrath spares no one: man, woman, government, or corporation, the climate crisis is everyone’s business. We all play a role in alleviating or exacerbating the planet’s decline. Yet despite this shared responsibility, why are women in many parts of the world more invested in the climate crisis than men?

In high-income countries, studies consistently show that women are more likely to express alarm or concern about environmental degradation and support policies that combat climate change. Women often lead the way and live more sustainably, from reducing waste to embracing ethical consumption. Meanwhile, men tend to lag behind, showing less concern and fewer efforts to adopt sustainable practices.

This disparity is not just a social issue; it’s a costly setback that hinders our collective ability to address the climate crisis. When half the population is less likely to engage or act on environmental issues, we lose invaluable support for tackling one of the greatest challenges of our time.

The Numbers Behind the Divide

In February 2025, a study on U.S. registered voters revealed that women are significantly more likely to be climate voters who name climate change or environmental issues as their top political priorities. 62% of climate voters are women, compared to only 37% of men– an astonishing 25-point gap. 

Both American men and women think global warming is happening and is caused by human beings, and they believe it at similar levels. Women, however, consistently have higher risk perceptions that global warming will harm them personally, other people in the U.S., future generations, plants, and animals. They also support certain climate change mitigation policies at higher rates than men.

This isn’t seen everywhere, though; the climate gender gap doesn’t exist in poorer countries and is highly correlated with economic development. Men’s and women’s concerns about global warming are roughly equal in low-income, low per-capita emissions countries and territories. 

Knowing the statistics isn’t enough. To unite people across all economic classes, countries, and genders against climate change, we need to understand the root causes of the gap and identify actionable steps to close it.

When Green Becomes Gendered

One popular theory for the gender gap is that environmentalism is considered feminine, discouraging men from joining the movement because both men and women align “greenness” with femininity. 

In the U.S., researchers found men disinclined to engage in any environmentally friendly activity labeled as feminine out of fear of being perceived as being ‘soft’, which included using reusable bags, recycling, and adopting vegetarian or vegan diets. Men may even avoid or actively oppose these green behaviors to protect their gender identity and sense of masculinity. 

Compared to men, women generally purchase eco-friendly products more frequently, consume less carbon, are more likely to recycle, minimize waste, and save more water and energy. They are also more likely to volunteer for and donate to environmental causes. Harmful stereotypes that equate environmentalism with femininity could discourage some men from embracing these eco-friendly practices.

Some research also suggests that while men are raised to be more independent and competitive, women are socialized to be more caring, cooperative, and helpful. This may make women worry more about the environment and, therefore, more willing to adopt eco-friendly behaviors.

Women’s higher levels of empathy, altruism, and personal responsibility may make them more interested in environmentalism as a means to protect themselves and others. For example, in a large study in the U.S., women became more concerned about the impact of climate change and supportive of mitigation policies when asked to consider future generations; men, meanwhile, experienced no such change. 

Climate in the Classroom

Some suggest that women are more environmentally friendly because they’re better educated.  It’s often observed that more highly educated people tend to be more environmentally friendly, and women make up the majority of higher education students in 114 countries, compared to only 57 countries with male majorities. In the U.S., nearly 60% of all undergraduate students are female, while men comprise only 42%. 

However, women are still grossly underrepresented in STEM education and the professions. Furthermore, scientists lack the evidence to identify a causal relationship between higher education and environmentalism in general, and even less to support that the gender gap is a result of their education.

Researchers are still divided on a definite cause, and multiple causes may work in tandem. However, integrating climate education across subjects and schools has the potential to shift entrenched behaviors and foster greater awareness and environmentalism regardless of students’ gender identity. 

One thing is for certain: getting men to care as much as women do is key to saving the planet. Regardless of the gap, at EARTHDAY.ORG, everyone is encouraged to act. You are perfect for the movement as you are, no matter your gender, sexuality, experience level, and more. 

We may not know for certain how to close the gap. However, all genders can improve their climate education to consume more sustainably, conserve resources, and support the best environmental policies. Take your action to the next level by signing up to volunteer with us and signing petitions for tripling renewable energy generation and a Global Plastic Treaty. 

It’s never too late to get involved. We need a united front to save our planet, so join and spread the movement today.

This article is available for republishing on your website, newsletter, magazine, newspaper, or blog. The accompanying imagery is also cleared for use. Please ensure that the author’s name and their affiliation with EARTHDAY.ORG are credited. Kindly inform us if you republish so we can acknowledge, tag, or repost your content. You may notify us via email at davies@earthday.org or fielder@earthday.org. Want more articles? Follow us on substack.

The post Conserve Like A Girl appeared first on Earth Day.

“Destroy the patriarchy, not the planet.”

I saw this phrase on a bumper sticker last year. My first thought was “Where can I get one for myself?!” Willfully ignoring the fact that the sticker would be dripping with irony as it sat above the exhaust pipe on my ten-year old gas-powered car, I really began to question whether I actually knew how patriarchy and climate change were connected. I knew that both phenomena were adversely affecting the wellbeing of most people in the world, but beyond that, I couldn’t really analyze the explicit connection between them.  

Mainstream environmentalism, which typically focuses on climate change and protecting habitats, often proposes individual-level solutions, the implication being that if we all drove electric vehicles, became vegan and rejected plastics, our environmental issues would be solved. Although these actions would certainly help, they don’t address the systemic causes of climate change or the resultant problems, such as the issue of displacement among predominantly female, low-income communities who are forced to move due to extreme weather events and dwindling resources.

Climate change exacerbates existing gender, racial, and financial inequities. Systemic gender discrimination means that women, especially in developing countries, face harsh working conditions, low wages, and a higher risk of gender-based violence as a result of more frequent climate disasters.

At the same time, ironically, it is women who are the leaders in the environmental movement, from growing most of the world’s food to shifting corporations towards more environmentally-conscious decision making. 

We really need to adopt an environmental philosophy that critically analyzes the overlap between social inequality and the overexploitation of natural resources, which is where the environmental philosophy of ecofeminism comes into play. But what is ecofeminism? And how can it help us solve environmental issues?

Women as Environmental Stewards

Women, particularly those living in so-called developing countries, tend to assume prominent roles in outdoor work, making them deeply familiar with the consequences of a changing climate. Common jobs for women include agricultural work and/or collecting water and fuel for their families. As a result of frequent severe weather events, women have to travel farther than usual from their homes to find adequate resources for their families. These long days of walking also increase women’s susceptibility to gender-based violence.

Women’s strenuous work outdoors yields tremendous benefits for the rest of the world, as women are responsible for producing half of the world’s food – a statistic that rises to 80% when focusing on the developing world alone. 

Given these invaluable talents, one would think that supporting female workers would be at the forefront of the environmental movement. Unfortunately, this is not the case, as women in developing countries are victims of discriminatory laws that prevent them from owning land. This, in turn, prevents women from benefiting from climate financing opportunities and other government subsidies, as they have no collateral to offer when applying for loans.

Indigenous women also don’t receive the support and respect they deserve for their agricultural innovations. The valuable ancestral knowledge harnessed by indigenous women includes novel forms of natural pest control, such as applying ashes and manure to crops, as well as uncovering underground water sources through the identification of certain plant species, which can be of great use during severe droughts.

As a result of systemic gender and racial discrimination, however,Indigenous women’s voices are often not listened to in the agricultural world , culminating in only male agricultural workers routinely gaining access to meaningful technology and education that women are just as worthy of receiving. 

Based on a 2023 estimate, if female farmers were given access to the same agricultural education, technology, and funding received by men, the UN Food and Agricultural Organization projected that globally we could feed an additional 45 million people. While 43 countries around the world have alarming or serious levels of on-going hunger, according to the Global Hunger Index, society continues to exclude some of the most promising people in the agricultural world: women.

Unquestionably leaders in environmental stewardship, women’s ideas and concerns regarding climate change ought to be amplified. Yet, mainstream environmentalism overlooks women’s concerns and chooses to align with an economic structure lauded by male-dominated industries. However, an alternative environmental philosophy exists that prioritizes the liberation of women and the environment. 

Ecofeminism: What Is It?

Originally coined by Francoise d’Eaubonne, a bold French feminist who published prolific pieces on the ideology in the ‘70s, ecofeminism asserts that gender inequalities and environmental injustices are both the result of patriarchy and capitalism. Therefore, in order to make real progress in creating a more just society, we need to reject the patriarchal structure and the oppression it promotes. 

But what does the patriarchy have to do with the economy? Dominance is inherent within the concept of the patriarchy, which depicts a society where men harness a disproportionate amount of power in political, economic, and social spheres. Ecofeminist scholars acknowledge that within a male-dominated society, women and the environment are undermined because of the prevalence of traditional gender roles.

For example, in the developing world, women are perceived as caretakers of the land, which makes sense given the previously mentioned statistics surrounding women and food harvesting. Despite their profound familiarity with agriculture, women are not given the opportunity to make land/natural resource management decisions – a blatant instance of sexism. 

Similar to how men demonstrate their dominance over women by assuming the role of a decision-maker, men evoke a similar sense of power over nature. The oil industry is a timeless example of the patriarchy in action, as the industry is predominantly male and has a lengthy history of racism and sexism, in addition to the fact that oil drilling has essentially become synonymous with environmental degradation. In a patriarchal society, it is unsurprising that a male dominated industry willingly exploits the land for profit, even if they know the detrimental environmental consequences that arise from their work. 

Giving women the opportunity to make decisions on matters relating to the environment would allow for more progress in the environmental movement, since female leaders, especially in the corporate world, have made more environmentally-friendly decisions than men, according to a study from the European Corporate Governance Institute. 

Rejecting Mainstream Environmentalism

At one of the first women-led international environmental conferences, the Women’s Congress for a Healthy Planet in 1991, thousands of women came together to declare a new climate agenda. One of their agenda items, which was noticeably missing from the UN’s 1992 Conference on Environment and Development agenda, was to spread awareness that environmental degradation is the result of the military/industrial/capitalist economy.

Unfortunately, the UN’s “Our Common Future” report decided to adopt a green growth paradigm, which has largely shaped climate change rhetoric to this day. Green growth capitalizes on the idea that technological innovations, that enable energy efficiency, are ultimately what will lead to sustainable economic growth,creating a sustainable society. However, such a report does not acknowledge that the “developed” world’s economic growth is only serving to exacerbate inequalities in the first world, as the gap between the ultra-wealthy and the poor continues to increase. 

Ecofeminism is in conflict with mainstream environmentalism because it does not promote uninhibited economic growth, even if it is done in a supposedly sustainable way. Instead, it favors an approach to environmentalism that acknowledges that the wealthiest countries in the world are responsible for climate change, yet it is some of the most impoverished countries, and the women living and working within those countries, that are suffering the most from the impacts of climate change. 

Ecofeminism champions compassion and empathy, fundamentally changing the way that we relate to one another and the environment. By challenging the assumed superiority of humans over nature, ecofeminism seeks to remind humanity that we are not separate from nature but rather form one large global community. This change in framing could effectively shift our society’s ease in earning record profits at the expense of the natural world. 

The post Are Women the Green Leaders We Need? appeared first on Earth Day.

When one conjures up images of witches, pointy hats, witch trials, cackling and cauldrons come to mind. Throughout history, witches have been viewed  with more than a touch of hostility, linked to mysterious deaths, powers that defy the laws of nature and often an allegiance to Lucifer. In fact, so called witches have a far more interesting and important part in human history. Very little of it is evil and most of it is organically environmental.   

While practitioners of Pagan witchcraft encompass a diverse array of teachings and methods they were, at their core, repositories of invaluable knowledge. They had a deep understanding of herbs, plants, and their medicinal properties. Not surprisingly, they emerged as powerful  figures in their communities and were most frequently found working as midwives. In a historical context, witches were earthly environmentalists, living in harmony with nature and utilizing their expertise to help sustain life. 

Yet, beyond any botanical and medical expertise, witches cultivated a profound spiritual and philosophical connection with the environment. They viewed the natural world as a manifestation of the divine’s creative force, and believed that all life was interdependent. The environment was viewed not just as a resource, but as a companion that was deserving of respect. This holistic approach to the world seems almost modern, but these wise women had a deep-rooted sense of cause and effect. 

Unfortunately, their innate understanding of the world could not explain the changes in weather patterns and climate back in the 1400’s. Now known as The Little Ice Age, this period of history saw the Northern Hemisphere experience extreme winters, which took a catastrophic toll on harvests across Europe. An especially cold period in the 1500’s was so severe that it would take 180 years for grain harvests to return to their former levels.

Not surprisingly a scape-goat for this dire situation was needed, and during the medieval period, in Europe especially, witches took the brunt of the blame. The idea that witches could make weather and steal milk took hold and witches took a significant downgrade in popularity. No longer midwives and wise women to be turned to in times of need, they were instead in cahoots with the Devil and dancing till dawn around campfires.

Some might argue that witches are a lesson from history, blamed for something they didn’t cause just as fossil fuels are being scape-goated for climate change. Isn’t it much more believable that witches were the victims of a rampant misinformation campaign? Just like the campaign climate change deniers are embarking on at every turn, somehow our climate crisis is just cyclical nature at work. 

Thankfully we have something the witches and their haters never had – access to cutting edge science. We know what is perpetuating climate change and the story of witches is a reminder to stop hiding behind scape-goats and fight the very real enemy of the fossil fuel industry and their constant efforts to spread disinformation and doubt.

EARTHDAY.ORG’s Faith and the Environment unites believers of all denominations in the fight for the planet.

The post What All of Us Can Learn From Witches appeared first on Earth Day.