kalkandrakas' photostream (creative commons)

Reproductive rights and gender equality are topics that aren’t typically raised when discussing climate change, however, a growing number of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) argue that women and their reproductive choices are at the heart of reducing global emissions.  I must admit that I failed to see the important connection myself, despite understanding that population plays a huge role rising greenhouse gas emissions, and Barbara Crosette’s article in The Nation argues that the connection might not be the best approach to take when fighting for women’s rights.

Earlier this month at the NGO Forum on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Development in Berlin, groups from around the world insisted that leaders of developing countries accept that:

rising population and climate change need to be considered together in an integrated policy

The United Nations seems to agree as Helen Clark, the new administrator of the UN Development Program, who attended the Berlin forum, explained the virtuous circle of:

educating women and families in the developing world on the number of children they actually wish to have, improving the health of women and promoting gender equality, reducing poverty and hunger, and mitigating climate change

There are also opponents of including family planning and sexual education in the climate discussion, as you might guess, and chief among them is India’s environment minister Jairam Ramesh, who claims the topic of population raised by Western countries should remain off the table.  Ultimately, Crosette pretty convincingly argues that discussions that see family planning as a population control tool to fix the climate crisis gets the issue backwards:

Reproductive choice is an end in itself, to make women healthier and happier in their sexual lives. If that means they choose to have fewer children, or just protected sex, the long-term impact may be positive for the environment as well as the family and community, but that is a side effect of the primary goal.

While I agree that reproductive choice should be a goal unto itself, I don’t think it should be entirely left out of the equation when considering the variety of approaches to combating climate change.  What do you think?  Let us know in the comments section below and use the action link to get involved with supporting sexual and reproductive health care around the world.