6th November 2023
Listen
Listen
The following essay was a submission for Selden’s Sister’s annual essay competition for undergraduates. At a Selden’s Sister book launch in March 2026, at Queen’s College in the University of Cambridge, the essay received the prize for second place. Tasked with writing an essay about women in legal history, I opted to write about a subject that is very close to my heart: climate justice. A recent study found that the pace of global warming has accelerated significantly (with over 98% confidence), raising concerns that the Paris Agreement 1.5°C warming limit could be reached by 2030 (you can read the article here). As that year rapidly approaches, it is abundantly clear that the time for governments to act is NOW. Since the time of writing in October 2025, it appears that the climate change discourse has become more important than ever before!
Ahead of COP301, the Secretary General of the United Nations António Guterres warned that humanity has failed to limit global warming to 1.5C, thus calling for an immediate change of course2. This statement was made mere weeks after climate scientists confirmed that the first major tipping point had been reached3. According to Professor Tim Lenton of the University of Exeter, “the first tipping of widespread dieback of warm water coral reefs is already under way”4. However, the climate crisis is not only wreaking havoc in ecological spheres; for a truly effective response, the recognition that climate change is a profoundly gendered phenomenon is vital. As observed by UN Women, myriad studies show that climate change disproportionately affects women, magnified by pre-existing social inequalities5. The link between gender inequality and climate vulnerability therefore goes to the root of the concept of climate justice.
The Mary Robinson Foundation places the principles of climate justice at the heart of responding to the impacts of climate change already manifesting. Champions of climate justice adopt a “human-centred approach, safeguarding the rights of the most vulnerable people”, ensuring that the benefits and burdens associated with climate change are shared “equitably and fairly”6. A crucial part of carrying out that vision is the acknowledgment that women, who comprise the majority of the world’s impoverished, bear the brunt of the climate crisis7. In spite of this, there is much evidence to indicate that women are leading the fight against climate injustice. With that, it is necessary to turn back the clock to the 1960s: to the genesis of modern environmentalism. During a period when female participation in science was severely limited, Rachel Carson’s voice sent shockwaves with the publication of Silent Spring. Her book challenged the ‘control over nature’ ethos that prevailed in society, thus laying the groundwork for the environmental movements that followed. Carson’s work still carries weight in the 21st century, given that the institutions responsible for implementing climate policy both maintain a reputation for androcentrism and continue to make slow progress, much to the chagrin of scientific experts and climate activists.
In 1962, marine biologist and writer Rachel Carson released her book Silent Spring. Published in the wake of the post-war industrialisation of agriculture, the book opens with an allegory to the adverse consequences of anthropogenic interference with nature8. Instrumental to the birth of the climate movement we are familiar with today, the impact of this book is unprecedented. With fifty-five pages of references, Rachel Carson eloquently exposed the ecological costs of chemical pollution to the world, sparking widespread debate about pesticides9. Although Carson experienced pushback, given the chemical industry’s ferocious attempts to discredit her through a ‘barrage of sexist attacks’10, she is nevertheless praised for spurring the creation of landmark legislation in the United States. The Clean Air Act was passed in 1963, followed by the National Environmental Policy Act in 1969, the latter of which led to the formation of the Council of Environmental Quality, tasked with ‘coordinating federal efforts on environmental issues’11.
The direct legislative aspect of Carson’s legacy is most apparent in the United States, but echoes of her harsh critiques of environmental exploitation have since transcended borders. As noted by the Council on Foreign Relations, the publication of Silent Spring ‘galvanised conservation movements’12. Carson’s warnings reshaped how people ought to understand the relationship between people and nature, conceptualised in terms of interconnectedness rather than dominion. Now, Silent Spring marks one of many contemporary examples of women bringing this close relationship to public attention, fostering a movement towards environmental accountability.
However, whilst Silent Spring is predominantly credited for giving nature a voice, Rachel Carson inadvertently sparked the dawn of ecofeminism. Carson insisted that the “whole stream of life”13 be considered in the contemplation of development, reflecting a holistic vision in opposition to the prevailing views of the time14. Her insistence that we look at the costs of human activities through an ecocritical lens inspired the emergence of an environmental consciousness that persists in the minds of climate scientists and activists today, a consciousness that recognises that social and environmental challenges go hand-in-hand. Therefore, the principle of the interconnectedness of all life that Carson maintains throughout Silent Spring strikes at the heart of present-day climate risks. As will be discussed later, climate change is not a gender-neutral issue. Therefore, Carson’s holistic approach to environmentalism aligns with ecofeminist thought.
Due to its unyielding critique of the human “conquest of nature”15, regarded by the author as a symptom of the male-centred institutional structures of the time, the views of Rachel Carson, whilst not explicitly feminist, are regarded as consistent with the principles of ecofeminism that arose in the subsequent decade. The term ‘ecofeminism’ was coined by French feminist Françoise d’Eaubonne in the 1974 book Le Féminisme ou la Mort (translating to ‘feminism or death’) in an effort to conceptualise the link between the oppression of women and nature16. Thus, ecofeminism posits that “the same forces that oppress women also contribute to ecological crises”17. By the same token, freeing nature from the burdens of anthropogenic climate change requires a degree of intersectionality; achieving climate justice will not be possible without close examination of the male-coded models by which the resource-intensive capitalist system operates. Suffice to say, climate justice requires a radical reformation of the system responsible for the coinciding oppression of women and the environment. The following paragraphs detail the notable contributions of ecofeminists who have risen to the task of confronting the dual issues of gender inequality and environmental destruction.
Also known as the “Ghandhi of grain” for her contributions toward the anti-GMO (genetically modified organisms) movement, Vandana Shiva is another example of a woman who channelled her deep care for ecology into real change18. A leading voice of ecofeminism in the Global South, Shiva challenged the corporate assault on biodiversity, claiming that the knowledge and participation of rural women form a key part of sustainable agriculture19. Central to Vandana Shiva’s philosophy is the notion that female leadership in relation to environmental management is essential for the restoration of ecosystems, underscoring the synergistic nature of gender equality and environmental conservation20.
Wangari Maathai embodies the essence of African ecofeminism. The first African woman to ever receive the Nobel Peace Prize, Wangari Maathai was a Kenyan activist known for founding the Green Belt Movement, a grassroots NGO that has since planted over 51 million trees in Kenya21. Thanks to the efforts of women like Maathai, the voices of the marginalised – in this case, indigenous women – are amplified in the global climate discourse. This grassroots movement is just one of many mobilisations of indigenous women that has championed ecofeminism, connecting environmental restoration and the empowerment of women. The road to effective climate action is parallel to the one that leads to gender equality.
The effects of climate change are beginning to materialise at exceeding pace, driving new waves of climate activists to challenge governments’ meagre efforts to address climate change22. In recent years, there is no doubt that young Swedish activist Greta Thunberg now stands as an emblematic figure of climate justice. In contrast to the grassroots movements of the Global South, which serve to reshape policy from the bottom-up, Greta Thunberg is known for pressuring governments, demanding action from the highest levels of government. Although Thunberg, like Carson, isn’t a self-proclaimed ecofeminist, her defiance exemplifies the modern evolution of ecofeminism23. To confront the institutions that continue to fail, Thunberg’s powerful rhetoric, rooted in principles of morality and intergenerational justice, echoes Rachel Carson’s voice half a century after the publication of Silent Spring.
In accordance with research conducted by Mintel, an eco-gender gap exists, which may explain gender differences in engagement with environmental issues. Studies consistently show that women express greater concern for environmental issues than men. In the same vein, women are 71% more likely to engage in eco-conscious behaviours24. Thus, the prominence of women in climate discourse should come as no surprise.
The eco-gender gap also has considerable ramifications for climate governance. Studies show that higher female representation has a positive correlation with the stringency of policies adopted25. For example, consider the career achievements of Christiana Figueres26, whose “stubborn optimism” has played an instrumental role in the development of climate policy on the international stage27. The underutilisation of women in decision-making bodies may explain the persistent lack of political commitment to meeting objectives28. This may, in part, be due to the unique perspectives that women bring to the table29.
Nevertheless, policymaking procedures have long reflected a gender imbalance. Although women have gradually moved to the forefront of climate diplomacy in recent decades, female contributions are still marginal and hardly commended. The underrepresentation of women in leadership roles was a source of contention in the leadup to COP2930. Furthermore, consider the jarring gender disparity in the recently released TIME100 Climate 2025 list, wherein less than one third of the individuals listed were women31.
Shortly before the publication of Silent Spring, Rachel Carson delivered a speech, titled ‘Of Man and the Stream of Time’, in Scripps College, California. In that speech, she said the following:
“His war against nature is inevitably a war against himself. His heedless and destructive acts enter into the vast cycles of the earth, and in time return to him.”32
When considered in the context of the climate emergency, this quote is an assertion that the highly-pollutive acts that have caused anthropogenic climate change is not only a declaration of war on nature, but also on humanity itself. For the sake of humanity’s survival, it can no longer separate itself from nature – it must overcome the illusion of anthropocentricism. Carson is warning that, in destroying the natural environment, humanity is ultimately destroying itself by destroying the resources it relies upon. She is fundamentally speaking to the social dimensions of climate change; there is a broad consensus that those who contribute most to the climate crisis will be relatively insulated from the consequences. Likewise, as articulated by the UN on the topic of climate justice, “the impacts of climate change will not be borne equally or fairly, between rich and poor, women and men, and older and younger generations”33.
Women rarely enjoy equal participation in climate governance despite being those more likely to bear the costs of climate change34. It is an unfortunate reality that women, particularly in developing countries, face heightened exposure to the risks stemming from global warming. In 2021, UNICEF reported that 80% of people displaced by the climate crisis are women and girls35. The fact that women make up the majority of the world’s poor also puts livelihoods, which are highly dependent on natural resources, under significant strain in the face of the threats of drought and flooding, both of which are attributable to the disrupted water cycle. Moreover, the disproportionate impacts on women are compounded by gender-based disparities, not limited to insufficient access to education.
The differential impacts experienced by men and women is primarily caused by entrenched societal expectations and systemic biases, serving to limit opportunities available to women and constraining their decision-making powers. For instance, hidden (or invisible) labour disproportionately falls on women36. Tasked with sustaining their communities, women are more vulnerable due to their roles as primary food producers and resource gatherers in many low-income regions37. For the reasons listed above, the burden of this deeply undervalued labour is magnified by climate change. Hence, it is paramount that future policies address the unique challenges women face.
According to the United Nations Development Programme, “there can be no genuine sustainable human development without gender equality”38. This sentiment is reflected in the UN Sustainable Development Goals39 and the Paris Agreement. Although the latter treaty is largely gender-blind, the preamble plus Articles 7 and 11 encourage parties to implement gender-responsive measures40. However, progress in the pursuit of total gender equality has been painstakingly slow, as illustrated by the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report 202441; at this rate, it could take 134 years to bridge all gender gaps, which casts major doubts on the meaningful incorporation of gender considerations into climate frameworks. The absence of female voices in policymaking is not only a symptom of social injustice, but it will also significantly weaken the effectiveness of climate policy. Conversely, the effects of climate change threaten to jeopardise the progress made toward achieving gender equality, trapping women in a vicious cycle.
If Rachel Carson was alive today, how would she respond to the current state of the planet? She may look upon the generations of women who have translated her ethos into action with pride. Her legacy endures not only through the adoption of sustainable policies, but also through the generations of women who tirelessly advocate for the rights of all living beings. However, she would undoubtably be alarmed at the slow pace of action in addressing the defining problem of our time: climate change.
“We stand now where two roads diverge. But unlike the roads in Robert Frost’s familiar poem, they are not equally fair… the other fork of the road—the one ‘less travelled by’— offers our last, our only chance to reach a destination that assures the preservation of our earth.”
Rachel Carson, Silent Spring (Chapter 17: The Other Road)42
Rachel Carson’s prophetic words in the closing pages of Silent Spring must resonate strongly with readers in 2025. Reminiscent of the recent statement made by the UN Secretary General, Carson’s warning about humanity’s position at the fork of a metaphorical crossroads remains hauntingly relevant over sixty years later43. The need for environmental stewardship has never been more urgent as the world teeters on the threshold of irreversible climate change44. We stand, as Carson poignantly put, at ‘a fork in the road’; if we continue down this destructive road, the prospect of an ecological catastrophe on par with the Big Five extinction events appears inevitable45. It may be time for humanity to pursue an alternative course, i.e. the road “less travelled by”. Drawing on the principles of climate justice, this path would unite efforts to advance gender equality and climate justice in tandem, in acknowledgment that these goals are mutually reinforcing. As Helen Pankhurst (descendant of suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst) told Euronews in March 2025, “climate and gender justice go hand in hand; you can’t have one without the other”46. In the years ahead, the choices we make as a species will ultimately dictate which of the two roads we follow, with major ramifications for the future of all life. One thing is certain: time is of the essence.
For more opinion pieces, please click here: https://www.liverpoolguildstudentmedia.co.uk/category/opinion/
