What is the Connection Between Women, Government and the Environment?
According to research having a women in power yields better results for the environment and ecosystem. Why is this you ask? The theory is that women are more concerned with environmental issues (1) because they have more pro-environmental values (2) they are more risk averse (3) are more likely to participate in social movements (4) typically suffer disproportionately from environmental degradation (5) and finally sexism and environmental degradation can be a mutually reinforcing process (NorGaard and York 519). Kari NorGaard and Richard York conducted research to prove this theory. 
Based on findings from two countries Norway and Singapore, the conclusion they came to, was that societies with more female representation in government were more likely to have better environmental policies and subsequently healthier environments. In other words societies that value gender equality are more likely to protect the environment. So why are women more concerned with environmental issues than men? Norgaard and York suggest this is because women have been socialized to be family nurturers and caregivers (NorGaard and York 508). Therefore women are more likely to view caring for and nurturing the environment as a priority.
Conventionally men run our government and subsequently influence our laws and policies almost predominantly.
Due to capitalism and patriarchal ideals men have dominated law decisions and policymaking. Therefore, the contributions of women are seen as invisible in a capitalistic society because any work that does not produce a profit or capital is viewed as non-productive. 
Ecofeminist argue that women and nature have been dominated by these factors described as ”logic of domination” where women are oppressed and nature is exploited (NorGaard and York 509). Ecofeminist assert that class and race as well as gender intersect and are built into the social system affecting gender equality and state environmentalism. Norgaard and York found that gender equality positively impacts state environmentalism however; states that appear to be environmentally responsible are actually the greatest contributors to environmental degradation most likely due to capitalistic and modernized society.
In order for women to make a difference in influencing state policy they would need to make up 30% of government leaders.
Many countries do not meet those requirements including ours. During the time of the study conducted by Norgaard and York, Norway had one of the highest percentages of women in government in the world at 36.4% in sharp contrast to women in Singapore who made up only 4.3% (NorGaard and York 515). The major factor that contributed to these numbers was gender. Norway’s key political leader at the time was a woman, Gro Harlem Bruntland who valued issues such as women’s rights, human health, children, the environment, and future generations. In contrast Singapore had an overall lack of interest in gender equality and state environmentalism. This is due in part to women’s limited participation in government policy making and the lack of environmental programs. The results of Norgaard and York’s analysis support ecofeminist theory that gender equality specifically in government positively influences state environmentalism.
Norgaard and York discuss that women are more concerned than men with environmental issues for many reasons including their tendency to be family nurturers and caregivers. An example that demonstrates Norgaard and York’s theory comes from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. The Massachusetts DEP leaders consist of primarily males including the commissioner Martin Suuberg. Of the seven members that make up the political leaders of the DEP only one of them are women. This directly correlates with Norgaard and York’s analysis that there are more men identified as political leaders and this case directly impacting environmental decisions. The possible result is men more than women will influence the policies implemented by the Massachusetts DEP. (https://www.mass.gov/service-details/about-massdep) Interestingly enough when looking at how Massachusetts compares with other states when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions, “Massachusetts is starting to fall behind other states which have passed aggressive carbon emissions standards” (LeBlanc).
Below is a quote and statistic from the Pew Research Center that shows Norgaard and York’s general thesis:
“There are areas where the public sees female leaders as having an advantage. In both business and politics, majorities say women are better than men when it comes to being compassionate and empathetic, and substantial shares say women are better at working out compromises and standing up for what they believe in. Similarly, more adults say female political leaders do a better job of serving as role models for children (41%) and maintaining a tone of civility and respect (34%) than say the same about men”
(https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/09/20/women-and-leadership-2018/)
This statistic reiterates the results of analysis NorGaard and York conducted that women have a tendency to be more compassionate than men because of their traditional role of being caretakers and nurturers therefore paying more attention to issues such as environmentalism.
Bibliography
LeBlanc, Steve. Massachusetts Senate approves ‘net zero’ environmental bills. 30 January 2020. 18 March 2020 <https://www.gazettenet.com/Massachusetts-Senate-approves-net-zero-environmental-bills-32367325>.
Norgaard, Kari and Richard York. “Gender Equality and State Environmentalism.” Gender and Society August 2005: 506-522.
Annotated Bibliography: In this article Steve LeBlanc reports what Massachusetts is lacking in environmental laws and policies and what bills the senate can pass to rectify Massachusetts failure to comply with environmental laws . The article explains that several bills are waiting to be passed by congress with the goal to for a statewide “net zero” emissions greenhouse gas by the year 2050.
I have always been a firm believer in the kindness of women over men, in general. Women tend to talk things out, to have compassion for one another, to support and lift other women up in all aspects of our lives. I know that I have some really supportive, loyal friends that I’ve had for over 30 years. We can have disagreements and issues that we will never agree on, but there is a love and caring toward each other that beats a relationship with a man anytime.
Don’t get me wrong – I am a man loving heterosexual and may always be, although in my college years I took a Gerontology class where the professor, a gay man, suggested women become lesbian in their later years as most of their men will be dead. Ha! I still think about that 30 years later. Not a bad idea. The other option is to live in a community sort of living, with other women my age where each person has a private space to call their own along with a community area for all.
I write all this to clarify my stand. I believe, wholeheartedly, that women could run government so much more efficiently and effectively and equally. We’ve had years and years to perfect budgets, home care, scheduling, rule making and the like. Give women the positions that old white men are in today and watch how our nation revolutionizes.
Look at Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Elise Stephanik, Anna Valencia, Beth Fukumoto and more (https://www.businessinsider.com/the-8-most-influential-young-women-in-american-politics-2018-11#beth-fukumoto-a-republican-turned-democrat-in-the-hawaii-state-house-4). These women are young, powerful voices who will not be silenced. They work for the women, children and men, not for themselves. AOC will be President one day – I can feel it. And it’s what we need more than ever. A clear truth-telling voice in this age of lies and deceit. George Orwell wrote in his prescient novel 1984, “In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act”. Truth is what we need. A leader who cares is what we need. Women in power is what we need.
Hi Holly,
Great post. I found the information focused on Norgaard and York concerning Norway a little bit perplexing. Norway is one of the largest producers of oil and gas, their rank is at number 15 in the world, more on that here. https://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?v=88. According to statista, Norway produces a total of 1,844,000 barrels of oil per day. https://www.statista.com/statistics/265186/oil-production-in-norway-in-barrels-per-day/. “It is worth asking how a nation built on—and defined by—oil can portray itself as green, as Norway does” (Tiegen, P.). https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/09/19/norways-green-delusions-oil-gas-drilling/. It seems to me that calling Norway green is a contradictory terms given the statistical information about their oil and gas production. Norway drills offshore for oil which is not exactly a green activity. Offshore drilling causes a disruption to natural habitats. Oil spills kill sea life and their environments. It creates air pollution which affects its air quality. Norway has been criticized by several environmental groups for claiming their green status but continues to engage in environmentally harmful drilling. There’s an article in the Guardian that talks about that. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/12/norway-flaunts-green-credentials-drilling-more-oils-wells. Norway’s usage is over 200,000 barrels per day. They produce 1.8 million, their net export is over 1.6 million barrels that they put out into the world daily. This is a case of cognitive dissonance if I’ve ever seen one. It’s one thing to produce what they need to run their country, but it’s another all together to produce it for profit at the risk of the environment.
Hello,
I too mentioned in my blog about men in a political position in relation to capitalism. I agree that women in politics aren’t as supported as men because as you said majority of the time, they aren’t looking to capitalize, they’re looking to create better surroundings for everyone around them. In this article ihttps://www.ecowatch.com/why-we-need-more-women-involved-in-creating-environmental-policy-2593948717.html t is discussed that a balanced political team could be the answer to a lot of our issues around the globe. As our Earth is harmed day in and out by careless decisions we all have the power to participate in the change we all would like to see. Although women are fit to this caring/nurturing stereotype they are also able to roll with the wolves and lead the pack, but the pack (all men and women) have to be willing to be lead and eager to follow.
Hello,
Your article is very well written. I have heard the same conjectures about women. Women make better role models because they are more civilized etc. It is ironic to me because I always hear men (even the men in my life) say that we could never have a female president because, women are ‘just too emotional’. I’m not sure about you but, the politics game in the last two years has seemed to be a bunch of grown men cattily throwing insults back and forth or outright screaming at one another. You said that women have to make up 30% of government leaders in order to influence legislature. I’m not sure why until this moment that it made me realize still how male-driven our society is.