Gender justice and planetary health

Abstract

Dive into the critical intersection of gender justice and planetary health with our latest report. As Earth’s natural systems deteriorate, marginalised communities bear the brunt, often excluded from solutions. Our report delves into how gender considerations shape global responses to planetary health crises. Daily, communities worldwide grapple with planetary health disasters—from East Africa’s famines to Europe's wildfires. Gender differences expose individuals to varying risks, from air pollution to violence. Marginalised groups, including LGBTQ+ communities, face compounded risks due to discrimination and socioeconomic factors, emphasising the need for an intersectional approach in addressing planetary health crises. Gender justice in planetary health means equal opportunities to shape policies and decisions affecting everyone's lives. Our analysis of 114 organisations reveals gaps in gender integration in planetary health efforts. While some recognise gender inequalities' structural roots, many overlook gender entirely. Transformative gender justice demands inclusive leadership. While progress has been made in gender parity, disparities persist—particularly in representation from low- and middle-income countries. This report complements our annual Global Health 50/50 Report, highlighting organisations’ commitments to gender equality in global health. Key findings: 24% of non-profit organisations recognised structural causes of gender inequalities in their planetary health activities 37% of organisations did not mention gender in their planetary health activities. 38% of organisations focused solely on addressing the needs of women and girls. None of the organisations specifically addressed the gender roles of men/boys. 38% of CEOs in non-profit organisations were women. 48% of board chairs and 50% of board members were women. Inequalities were most evident in the representation of individuals from low- and middle-income countries on governing bodies. Only 4.5% of board members were nationals of low-income countries, while high-income country nationals held 68% of board seats. There was a lack of representation from Small Island Developing States and the 10 countries most affected by extreme weather events.