Gender Equality

Abstract
Gender equality is the all-time problem in India irrespective of many companies against inequality.
India is the youngest country with more than 50 percentage of population below 25 years, but
gender inequality and some other issues laid India at 131st rank in Human Index development
Index. Gender inequality can be considered as one of the reasons for India being still a developing
country. In the past decade, while Indian GDP has grown by around 6%, there has been a large
decline in female labour force participation from 34% to 27%. The male-female wage gap has been
stagnant at 50% (a recent survey finds 27% gender pay gap in white-collar jobs). This paper mainly
concentrates on taking women concern about gender equality because gender equality is also a
precondition for advanced development and reducing poverty as empowered women contribute to
the wealth, wealth and productivity of whole families and communities, and they improve prospects
of next generations.

Gender equality, also known as sexual equality, is the state of equal ease of access to resources
and opportunities regardless of gender, including economic participation and decision-making; and
the state of valuing different behaviors, aspirations and needs equally, regardless of gender.

Gender equality, equality between men and women, entails the concept that all human beings, both
men and women, are free to develop their personal abilities and make choices without the limitations
set by stereotypes, rigid gender roles and prejudices. Gender equality means that the different
behaviour, aspirations and needs of women and men are considered, valued and favoured equally.
It does not mean that women and men have to become the same, but that their rights,
responsibilities and opportunities will not depend on whether they are born male or female. Gender
equity means fairness of treatment for women and men, according to their respective needs. This
may include equal treatment or treatment that is different but which is considered equivalent in terms
of rights, benefits, obligations and opportunities.

Efforts to fight inequality

In 2010, the European Union opened the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE)
in Vilnius, Lithuania to promote gender equality and to fight sex discrimination.
Gender equality is part of the national curriculum in Great Britain and many other European
countries. By presidential decree, the Republic of Kazakhstan created a Strategy for Gender
Equality 2006–2016 to chart the subsequent decade of gender equality efforts.[39]
A large and growing body of research has shown how gender inequality undermines health and
development. To overcome gender inequality the United Nations Population Fundstates that,
"Women's empowerment and gender equality requires strategic interventions at all levels of
programming and policy-making. These levels include reproductive health, economic empowerment,
educational empowerment and political empowerment."[40]
Health and safety
Social constructs of gender (that is, cultural ideals of socially acceptable masculinity and femininity)
often have a negative effect on health. The World Health Organization cites the example of women
not being allowed to travel alone outside the home (to go to the hospital), and women being
prevented by cultural norms to ask their husbands to use a condom, in cultures which
simultaneously encourage male promiscuity, as social norms that harm women's health. Teenage
boys suffering accidents due to social expectations of impressing their peers through risk taking, and
men dying at much higher rate from lung cancer due to smoking, in cultures which link smoking to
masculinity, are cited by the WHO as examples of gender norms negatively affecting men's
health.[41] The World Health Organization has also stated that there is a strong connection between
gender socialization and transmission and lack of adequate management of HIV/AIDS.[42]

Harmful traditional practices

"Harmful traditional practices" refer to forms of violence which are committed in certain communities
often enough to become cultural practice, and accepted for that reason. Young women are the main
victims of such acts, although men can be affected.[66] They occur in an environment where women
and girls have unequal rights and opportunities.[67] These practices include forced feeding of women;
early marriage; the various taboos or practices which prevent women from controlling their own
fertility; nutritional taboos and traditional birth practices; son preference and its implications for the
status of the girl child; female infanticide; early pregnancy; and dowry price
Son preference refers to a cultural preference for sons over daughters, and manifests itself through
practices such as sex selective abortion; female infanticide; or abandonment, neglect or abuse of
girl-children.[67]
Abuses regarding nutrition are taboos in regard to certain foods, which result in poor nutrition of
women, and may endanger their health, especially if pregnant.[67]
The caste system in India which leads to untouchability (the practice of ostracizing a group by
segregating them from the mainstream society) often interacts with gender discrimination, leading to
a double discrimination faced by Dalit women.[68] In a 2014 survey, 27% of Indians admitted to
practicing untouchability.[69]
Traditional customs regarding birth sometimes endanger the mothers. Births in parts of Africa are
often attended by traditional birth attendants (TBAs), who sometimes perform rituals that are
dangerous to the health of the mother. In many societies, a difficult labour is believed to be a divine
punishment for marital infidelity, and such women face abuse and are pressured to "confess" to the
infidelity.[67]
FORCED Marriage:
Early marriage, child marriage or forced marriage is prevalent in parts of Asia and Africa. The
majority of victims seeking advice are female and aged between 18 and 23.[66] Such marriages can
have harmful effects on a girl's education and development, and may expose girls to social isolation
or abuse.[67][77][78]
The 2013 UN Resolution on Child, Early and Forced Marriage calls for an end to the practice, and
states that "Recognizing that child, early and forced marriage is a harmful practice that violates
abuses, or impairs human rights and is linked to and perpetuates other harmful practices and human
rights violations, that these violations have a disproportionately negative impact on women and girls
[...]".[79] Despite a near-universal commitment by governments to end child marriage, "one in three
girls in developing countries (excluding China) will probably be married before they are
18."[80] UNFPA states that, "over 67 million women 20–24 year old in 2010 had been married as girls.
Half were in Asia, one-fifth in Africa. In the next decade 14.2 million girls under 18 will be married
every year; this translates into 39,000 girls married each day. This will rise to an average of 15.1
million girls a year, starting in 2021 until 2030, if present trends continue."[80]

Economy and public policy

Economic empowerment of women
Promoting gender equality is seen as an encouragement to greater economic
prosperity.[18][xxviii] Female economic activity is a common measure of gender equality in an
economy.[xxix]
Gender discrimination often results in women obtaining low-wage jobs and being disproportionately
affected by poverty, discrimination and exploitation.[86][xxx] A growing body of research documents
what works to economically empower women, from providing access to formal financial services to
training on agricultural and business management practices, though more research is needed
across a variety of contexts to confirm the effectiveness of these interventions.[87]
Gender biases also exist in product and service provision.[88] The term "Women's Tax", also known
as "Pink Tax", refers to gendered pricing in which products or services marketed to women are more
expensive than similar products marketed to men. Gender-based price discrimination involves
companies selling almost identical units of the same product or service at comparatively different
prices, as determined by the target market. Studies have found that women pay about $1,400 a year
more than men due to gendered discriminatory pricing. Although the "pink tax" of different goods and
services is not uniform, overall women pay more for commodities that result in visual evidence of
feminine body image.[89][xxxi]
Freedom of movement
The degree to which women can participate (in law and in practice) in public life varies by culture
and socioeconomic characteristics. Seclusion of women within the home was a common practice
among the upper classes of many societies, and this still remains the case today in some societies.
Before the 20th century it was also common in parts of Southern Europe, such as much of Spain.[99]
Women's freedom of movement continues to be legally restricted in some parts of the world. This
restriction is often due to marriage laws.[xxxix] In some countries, women must legally be accompanied
by their male guardians (such as the husband or male relative) when they leave home.[100]
The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) states at
Article 15 (4) that:
4. States Parties shall accord to men and women the same rights with regard to the law relating to
the movement of persons and the freedom to choose their residence and domicile.[101]
In addition to laws, women's freedom of movement is also restricted by social and religious
norms.[xl] Restrictions on freedom of movement also exist due to traditional practices such
as baad, swara, or vani.[xli]
Girls' access to education
School girls in Gaza Strip

Female education and Gender and education

In many parts of the world, girls' access to education is very restricted. In developing parts of the
world women are often denied opportunities for education as girls and women face many obstacles.
These include: early and forced marriages; early pregnancy; prejudice based on gender stereotypes
at home, at school and in the community; violence on the way to school, or in and around schools;
long distances to schools; vulnerability to the HIV epidemic; school fees, which often lead to parents
sending only their sons to school; lack of gender sensitive approaches and materials in
classrooms.[103][104][105] According to OHCHR, there have been multiple attacks on schools worldwide
during the period 2009–2014 with "a number of these attacks being specifically directed at girls,
parents and teachers advocating for gender equality in education".[106] The United Nations Population
Fund says:[107]
About two thirds of the world's illiterate adults are women. Lack of an education severely restricts a
woman's access to information and opportunities. Conversely, increasing women's and girls'
educational attainment benefits both individuals and future generations. Higher levels of women's
education are strongly associated with lower infant mortality and lower fertility, as well as better
outcomes for their children.
Political participation of women
Women are underrepresented in most countries' National Parliaments.[108] The 2011 UN General
Assembly resolution on women’s political participation called for female participation in politics, and
expressed concern about the fact that "women in every part of the world continue to be largely
marginalized from the political sphere".[109][xlii] Only 22 percent of parliamentarians globally are women
and therefore, men continue to occupy most positions of political and legal authority.[2] As of
November 2014, women accounted for 28% of members of the single or lower houses of
parliaments in the European Union member states.[XLVII]
Marriage, divorce and property laws and regulations
Equal rights for women in marriage, divorce, and property/land ownership and inheritance are
essential for gender equality. The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination
Against Women (CEDAW) has called for the end of discriminatory family laws.[112] In 2013, UN
Women stated that "While at least 115 countries recognize equal land rights for women and men,
effective implementation remains a major challenge".[113]
The legal and social treatment of married women has been often discussed as a political issue from
the 19th century onwards.[xliv][xlv]Until the 1970s, legal subordination of married women was common
across European countries, through marriage laws giving legal authority to the husband, as well as
through marriage bars.[xlvi][xlvii] In 1978, the Council of Europe passed the Resolution (78) 37 on
equality of spouses in civil law.[114] Switzerland was one of the last countries in Europe to establish
gender equality in marriage, in this country married women's rights were severely restricted until
1988, when legal reforms providing for gender equality in marriage, abolishing the legal authority of
the husband, come into force (these reforms had been approved in 1985 by voters in a referendum,
who narrowly voted in favor with 54.7% of voters approving).[115][116][117][25] In the Netherlands, it was
only in 1984 that full legal equality between husband and wife was achieved: prior to 1984 the law
stipulated that the husband's opinion prevailed over the wife's regarding issues such as decisions on
children's education and the domicile of the family.[118][119][120]
In the United States, a wife's legal subordination to her husband was fully ended by the case
of Kirchberg v. Feenstra, 450 U.S. 455 (1981), a United States Supreme Court case in which the
Court held a Louisiana Head and Master law, which gave sole control of marital property to the
husband, unconstitutional.[121]
There have been and sometimes continue to be unequal treatment of married women in various
aspects of everyday life. For example, in Australia, until 1983 a husband had to authorize an
application for an Australian passport for a married woman.[122] Other practices have included, and in
many countries continue to include, a requirement for a husband's consent for an application for
bank loans and credit cards by a married woman, as well as restrictions on the wife's reproductive
rights, such as a requirement that the husband consents to the wife's acquiring contraception or
having an abortion.[123][124] In some places, although the law itself no longer requires the consent of
the husband for various actions taken by the wife, the practice continues de facto, with the
authorization of the husband being asked in practice.[125]
Although dowry is today mainly associated with South Asia, the practice has been common until the
mid-20th century in parts of Southeast Europe.[xlviii]
Laws regulating marriage and divorce continue to discriminate against women in many
countries.[xlix] In Iraq husbands have a legal right to "punish" their wives, with paragraph 41 of the
criminal code stating that there is no crime if an act is committed while exercising a legal right.[l] In
the 1990s and the 21st century there has been progress in many countries in Africa: for instance in
Namibia the marital power of the husband was abolished in 1996 by the Married Persons Equality
Act; in Botswana it was abolished in 2004 by the Abolition of Marital Power Act; and in Lesotho it
was abolished in 2006 by the Married Persons Equality Act.[126] Violence against a wife continues to
be seen as legally acceptable in some countries; for instance in 2010, the United Arab
Emirates Supreme Court ruled that a man has the right to physically discipline his wife and children
as long as he does not leave physical marks.[127] The criminalization of adultery has been criticized as
being a prohibition, which, in law or in practice, is used primarily against women; and incites violence
against women (crimes of passion, honor killings).[li]

Gender Equality:

While the world has achieved progress towards gender equality and women’s empowerment under
the Millennium Development Goals (including equal access to primary education between girls and
boys), women and girls continue to suffer discrimination and violence in every part of the world.

Gender equality is not only a fundamental human right, but a necessary foundation for a peaceful,
prosperous and sustainable world. Unfortunately, at the current time, 1 in 5 women and girls
between the ages of 15-49 have reported experiencing physical or sexual violence by an intimate
partner within a 12-month period and 49 countries currently have no laws protecting women from
domestic violence. Progress is occurring regarding harmful practices such as child marriage and
FGM (Female Genital Mutilation), which has declined by 30% in the past decade, but there is still
much work to be done to complete eliminate such practices.

Providing women and girls with equal access to education, health care, decent work, and
representation in political and economic decision-making processes will fuel sustainable economies
and benefit societies and humanity at large. Implementing new legal frameworks regarding female
equality in the workplace and the eradication of harmful practices targeted at women is crucial to
ending the gender-based discrimination prevalent in many countries around the world.

GENDER EQUALITY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT:

The centrality of gender equality, women’s empowerment and the realization of women’s rights in
achieving sustainable development has been increasingly recognized in recent decades. This recognition
is evident in a number of international norms and agreements, including principle 20 of the Rio
Declaration on Environment and Development,1 adopted in 1992, in its statement regarding the full
participation of women being essential to achieving sustainable development. In the Beijing Declaration
and Platform for Action,2 adopted by Member States in 1995, governments were called upon to
integrate gender concerns and perspectives into policies and programmes for sustainable development.
The centrality of gender equality has also been articulated in the outcome document of the United
Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, entitled “The future we want”, adopted in 2012,
which included recognition of the importance of gender equality and women’s empowerment across
the three pillars of sustainable development, economic, social and environmental, and resolve to
promote gender equality and women’s full participation in sustainable development policies,
programmes and decision-making at all levels. Linking gender equality and sustainable development is
important for several reasons. First, it is a moral and ethical imperative: achieving gender equality and
realizing the human rights, dignity and capabilities of diverse groups of women is a central requirement
of a just and sustainable world. Second, it is critical to redress the disproportionate impact of economic,
social and environmental shocks and stresses on women and girls, which undermine the enjoyment of
their human rights and their vital roles in sustaining their families and communities. Third, and most
significantly, it is important to build up women’s agency and capabilities to create better synergies
between gender equality and sustainable development outcomes. There is growing evidence of the
synergies between gender equality, on the one hand, and economic, social and environmental
sustainability, on the other. For example, when women have greater voice and participation in public
administration, public resources are more likely to be allocated towards investments in human
development priorities, including child health, nutrition and access to employment. Ensuring women’s
access to and control over agricultural assets and productive resources is important for achieving food
security and sustainable livelihoods (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO),
2011). Women’s knowledge, agency and collective action are central to finding, demonstrating and
building more economically, socially and environmentally sustainable pathways to manage local
landscapes; adapt to climate change; produce and access food; and secure sustainable water, sanitation
and energy services. premised on maintaining gender inequalities, such as through maintaining gender
wage gaps and entrenching gender discriminatory norms, values and institutions. Further, as
governments and donor agencies increasingly target women as critical agents for community adaptation
to climate change; in their role as small holders as the mainstay of sustainable food production; and
through limiting their reproductive rights as the answer to population-environment problems; there is a
danger of entrenching gender stereotypes and inequalities.

Achieving gender equality and realizing the human rights, dignity and
capabilities of diverse groups of women is a central requirement of a
just and sustainable world
Increasingly, women’s full participation is recognized as central to policy making. For example, their
decisive involvement in community forest management bodies yields positive outcomes for both forest
sustainability and gender equality (Agarwal, 2010). Further, certain aspects of gender equality, such as
female education and women’s share of employment, can have a positive impact on economic growth,
although this impact is dependent on the nature of growth strategies, the structure of the economy, the
sectoral composition of women’s employment and labour market segregation, among other factors
(Kabeer and Natali, 2013). However, while gender equality can have a catalytic effect on achieving
economic, social and environmental sustainability, the reverse does not always hold true. Hence, a
simple “win-win” relationship between gender equality and sustainability cannot be assumed. Indeed,
some patterns of economic growth are Policy responses that view women as “sustainability saviours”
draw upon and reinforce stereotypes regarding women’s roles in relation to the family, the community
and the environment. Such responses often add to women’s already heavy unpaid work burdens
without conferring rights, resources and benefits. Power imbalances in gender relations determine
whether women’s actions and work translate into the realization of their rights and capabilities. While
the participation of women is vital, their involvement in policy interventions aimed at sustainability does
not automatically mean greater gender equality, particularly when the structural foundations of gender
inequality remain unchanged. There are, however, alternative approaches that move towards
sustainability and gender equality synergistically. Some are rooted in the everyday practices through
which women and men access, control, use and manage natural resources in ways that sustain
livelihoods and well-being. Joint initiatives between the State and the community in the Amazon Basin,
for example, have the potential to conserve forest biodiversity and address climate change mitigation
while providing for local sustainable livelihoods of women and men (Rival, 2012). Others are evident in
movements and collectivities, many of them led by women, to build food and resource sovereignty and
sustainable communities and cities. For example, in South Asia, a network of grass-roots women leaders
are working to scale up capacity to reduce risks and vulnerabilities to climate change in their
communities and build a culture of resilience.

Policies should ensure women’s effective participation in and equal benefit from
sustainable development projects and actively address entrenched discriminatory
stereotypes and inequalities
A number of useful lessons emerge from this history for policymaking. First, policymakers should avoid
making broad and stereotypical assumptions about women’s and men’s relationships with the
environment. Rather, policies should respond to the specific social context and gender power relations.
For instance, women’s close involvement in gathering wild foods and other forest products might reflect
labour and land tenure relations and their lack of access to income with which to purchase food, rather
than reflecting their closeness to nature (Rocheleau, 1988; Agarwal, 1992). Second, policies should be
responsive to differences in how diverse groups of women and men engage with land, trees, water and
other resources. Third, policies should pay special attention to women’s rights in regard to tenure and
property, as well as control over labour, resources, products and decisions within both the household
and the community. Finally, policies should ensure women’s effective participation in and equal benefit
from sustainable development projects and actively address entrenched discriminatory stereotypes and
inequalities. United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development: three important policy debates In
the run-up to the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, held in 2012, the potential
pathways to sustainable development were the subject of deliberation in the context of climate, food
and finance crises. In that context, many policy and business actors embraced positive alignments
between economic growth and environmental concerns through such notions as the green economy, in
the name of sustainable development. Social movements, on the other hand, proposed alternative
perspectives on issues such as climate change, water privatization, genetically modified organisms,
biodiversity and “land grabbing”, and advocated pathways that link sustainable development firmly with
questions of social justice. In this context, debates have continued between key actors on the topics of
climate change, planetary boundaries and the green economy, which are elaborated upon below, with a
focus on their gender dimensions. Since the 1990s, climate change has become one of the defining
challenges of the modern world. The relative successes and setbacks of global climate change
frameworks and negotiations, difficulties in implementing the principle of common but differentiated
responsibilities in mitigating far-reaching threats, and the plight and coping strategies of people who
must adapt to climate-related shocks and stresses have galvanized public reaction.12 This has taken the
form of renewed and globalized social and environmental movements and campaigns, stretching across
local and global scales. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was weak on
gender equality, and despite the sustained engagement and efforts of gender equality advocates,
subsequent efforts to mainstream gender issues into climate change debates have been piecemeal (UN-
Women and Mary Robinson Foundation — Climate Justice, 2013).

Responses to climate change that address gender issues tend to view women as victims of climate
impacts, or entrench stereotypes and roles of women as natural carers keeping their communities
resilient or adopting lowcarbon options. Yet gender and class relations, rights and inequalities shape
differences in women’s and men’s vulnerabilities to climate change and their opportunities to be agents
in mitigation and adaptation (Agarwal, 2002). In contexts of entrenched discrimination, where women’s
active participation and decisionmaking power is constrained, women’s formal inclusion in technical
committees for lowcarbon technologies can be a first step, but women’s participation can only be
effective and meaningful when underlying gender power relations are transformed and when attention
and support are given to women’s specific knowledge and capacities (Wong, 2009; Otzelberger, 2011).
Much of the debate on gender and climate change has focused on adaptation and local-level
vulnerabilities. Only recently, more limited attention has been given to gender perspectives in
discussions involving largescale technology, market initiatives and climate finance (Schalatek, 2013;
World Bank, 2011). Commitments to achieve gender equality, such as those contained in the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, are insufficiently reflected in national
adaptation or low-carbon development plans (Otzelberger, 2011). This poor integration is a reflection of
and in turn, reinforces, the tendency for policy to focus on simplistic solutions, rather than the more
structural political and economic changes needed to redirect pathways of climate unsustainability and
gender inequality. A second contemporary debate centres on notions of planetary boundaries. A series
of nine planetary boundaries has been identified, referring to the biophysical processes in the Earth’s
system on which human life depends (Rockström and others, 2009). These boundaries, together, serve
to keep the planet within a so-called “safe operating space” for humanity. Influential scientific analyses
suggest that the world has entered the Anthropocene, a new epoch in which human activities have
become the dominant driver of many earth system processes including the climate, biogeochemical
cycles, ecosystems and biodiversity. Potentially catastrophic thresholds are in prospect, it is argued,
providing a new urgency and authority to arguments that growth and development pathways must
reconnect with the biosphere’s capacity to sustain them (Folke and others, 2011). While the science is
still developing, the concept of planetary boundaries has become influential within policy debates. But
the concept is also critiqued, with some actors interpreting it as anti-growth and development, while
others suggest that “planetary boundaries” thinking privileges universal global environmental concerns
over diverse local ones, justifying topdown interventions that protect the environment at the expense of
people and their livelihoods. The renewed visions of impending scarcity and catastrophe implied by
some interpretations of planetary boundaries could justify policies that limit people’s rights and
freedoms, as the present World Survey shows in relation to population. Steering development within
planetary boundaries should not compromise inclusive development that respects humanrights, as
proposed by Raworth (2012).

Women’s participation can only be effective and meaningful when

underlying gender power relations are transformed and when attention
and support are given to women’s specific knowledge and capacities
whose “doughnut” concept takes the circle of planetary boundaries and adds an inner “social
foundation”. In between these is a “safe and just operating space” for humanity, within which
sustainable development pathways should steer (International Social Science Council, and United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 2013). Raworth notably introduces
gender equality as one dimension of this social foundation, but other discussion and advocacy arising
from the planetary boundaries concept has largely been gender-blind.

Mainstream approaches to defining and developing green economies

have paid little attention to their differentiated implications for women
and men
Finally, green economies are now being vigorously discussed by governments, businesses and non-
governmental organizations alike. According to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP),
which launched its Green Economy Initiative in 2008, a green economy is one that results in improved
human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological
scarcities; it is low-carbon, resource-efficient and socially inclusive (UNEP, 2011). This general definition
integrates economic, social and environmental concerns in ways akin to sustainable development. Yet in
practice, as the World Survey shows, there are many versions of green economy thinking. Dominant
versions assume continued, even enhanced, market-led economic growth, through green business
investments and innovations that enhance energy and resource efficiency and prevent the loss of
ecosystem services. It is argued that the emerging green technology economy will be worth $4.2 trillion
annually by 2020.13 Other strands emphasize market-based approaches to environmental protection
through financial valuation of natural capital, payments for ecosystem services and schemes for trading
carbon and biodiversity credits and offsets. Others argue that environmental constraints require
rethinking growth and market strategies. The concept of decoupling proposed by UNEP and others
(Fischer-Kowalski and others, 2011) suggests that economic growth should be delinked from the
increasing consumption of material resources such as construction minerals, fossil fuels and biomass.
Jackson (2011) argues for a shift in focus towards prosperity and well-being with reduced or no growth,
in which investments in services and care, as well as in green action in the areas of sustainable food
production and clean energy, are key. Mainstream approaches to defining and developing green
economies have paid little attention to their differentiated implications for women and men (Guerrero
and Stock, 2012; Cela, Dankelman and Stern, 2013). Many gender analysts and activists criticize the
United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development for having missed a chance to break with the
business-as-usual global economic model, which produces environmental destruction, social
exploitation and inequalities (Schalatek, 2013; Wichterich, 2012; Unmüßig, Sachs and Fatheuer, 2012).
They see the green economy as a market-based approach that justifies the commodification of
resources and commons, which undermines livelihoods and dispossesses local peoples, especially
women food producers. Gender equality advocates call instead for green development that respects
commons and livelihoods (Agarwal, 2012); and for recognition and value of care in green economy
debates (Vaughan, 2007; Mellor, 2009)