How can behavioural science be used to understand gender for inclusive water security and adaptation?
Researchers from the Grantham Research Institute are applying new approaches from behavioural science and psychology to gain a deeper understanding of climate change adaptation and water security in low-income households in Sub-Saharan Africa through the collaborative BASIN project. Dorice Agol underscores the importance of embedding gender equity and social inclusion into BASIN’s design.
Human mental biases and capabilities can influence responses to climate change. BASIN researchers are exploring how this might manifest among women and men in Tanzania, Malawi and Burkina Faso, focusing particularly on the role of gender.
Gender can influence responses to climate risks
Gender can influence how vulnerable people react and respond to risks in communities that are repeatedly exposed to extreme floods, prolonged drought and high temperatures. Often, the level of preparedness of these communities to deal with such risks is low, even where early warning systems exist.
Experiences from Sub-Saharan Africa suggest that in some contexts, gender can shape community exposure to water insecurities and climate risks. At times, women are more exposed than men to water and climate hazards although the nature of such exposure varies widely depending on the context. For example, women in rural areas who are commonly primarily responsible for fetching water are likely to experience water scarcity firsthand more often than men. The immediate need for clean water for household use may introduce a range of additional burdens on their time and security. Meanwhile water insecurity affects women in urban areas who are running small hospitality or service industry businesses such as restaurants or guest houses, and who require a reliable piped water supply to prepare food and maintain the cleanliness of premises.
Gender can also influence access to resources that people need to prepare for and adapt to climate shocks. For example, local agro-pastoralist and fishing communities living in the flood-prone areas of Lake Baringo in the Kenyan Rift Valley did not prepare for the extreme flooding events that occurred in 2020. These communities failed to respond to the early warning systems issued by both state and non-state actors, which ultimately affected women and girls more than men. This was partly due to the wide and persistent gaps in education experienced by women, which can make it harder for them to interpret – and access – early warnings. People had misjudged the severity of the flood risk partly because floods were considered as ordinary events, but the floods destroyed settlements, completely submerging many homes, forcing hundreds of households to migrate to safer areas and temporary camps. More women, girls and children than men settled in these temporary settlements due to their limited ability to negotiate access to safer and more desirable living environments. Women and girls paid a high price in this situation, including experiencing sexual assault and violence, teenage pregnancies, theft, malnutrition and school drop-out. This example demonstrates that women are often faced with a range of additional barriers to coping with extreme floods.
As well as the education gap, women in Sub-Saharan Africa are also hampered by their more limited access to resources, and their often-restricted ability to make adaptation decisions only at the household and community levels. Such factors make it harder for women to respond to events like floods and water scarcity. In addition, economic factors can influence women’s access to water even where it is available. For example, improved boreholes implemented in dryland areas of Kenya such as Turkana, Pokot and Samburu might not always lead to water security for all. This is because poor households unable to afford buying the water are often socially excluded, meaning women within those households become even more vulnerable. Therefore, while it is often assumed that improving water supply systems is of benefit to all women, this does not always hold true in all settings.
Societal gender roles and responsibilities shape perceptions of climate risks
Just as gender conditions vulnerability and adaptive capacity, behavioural science recognises that gender can also shape perceptions of climate change and water insecurity risk. This can influence how individuals assess, respond to and prioritise these risks based on their socially constructed roles and responsibilities. Part of this variation in risk perception is attributed to women occupying different social roles, as well as their general differential experiences of work compared with men. Women are often associated with homemaking and care giving, while men are portrayed as household heads and income earners. However, in reality, gendered social roles vary widely across Sub-Saharan Africa, reflecting diverse cultural, economic and social contexts. Women’s experience and perceptions of water insecurity are likely to vary very strongly too.
Studies in behavioural science have nevertheless suggested that overall, women tend to have a more precautionary approach to risk management compared with men, meaning that they are more cautious about potential risks even when the consequences of such risks are uncertain. For example, in contrast to men, women are portrayed as good environmental stewards who often take action to prevent harm to natural resources even when risks are unknown. Such narratives are common in WEIRD – Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich and Democratic – countries, where studies strongly suggest that gender differences in how people take risks can vary significantly based on culture.
While it is risky to assume that these narratives and findings apply in different cultural or contextual settings, it is important to appreciate and recognise gender differences in individual and social risk-taking behaviours and varying perceptions of climate change. It seems likely that addressing this research gap is crucial for developing culturally relevant strategies that effectively incorporate gender dynamics into climate change adaptation and risk management policies.
Considering gender in the BASIN project to deepen knowledge
Using behavioural science and psychology approaches, BASIN is exploring qualitative gender differences in the perception of climate risks among men and women and what implications this has for adaptation practices. As BASIN tackles diverse questions about community responses to water insecurity under a changing climate, questions about gender roles and their influence on risk perception and prioritisation of climate adaptation strategies are being explored in different case studies.
The author would like to thank Kate Gannon for her contributions to this commentary and Georgina Kyriacou for editing. For more information about the BASIN collaborative research programme, which is funded by the FCDO and managed by multiple partners from the UK and Sub-Saharan Africa, visit www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/basin/.