The summer of 2023 featured some of the hottest days ever recorded. Feminists should be alarmed. 

Climate change may not seem like a feminist issue on its face. A warming planet poses a cross-cutting and common threat. But the perception that climate impacts result in uniform harm produces partial solutions that neglect the world’s most vulnerable populations. This alone makes environmental justice a gender justice issue as well.

Extreme heat exposure has profound effects on human security that impact everything from power-based violence to agricultural practices. And how we experience the consequences of that heat exposure will be intimately related to systemic power. In other words, one’s position in larger systems (shaped by identities including gender, race, documentation status, ability status, and class) will change our interactions with temperature.

Using a feminist lens to prepare for a warming world allows us to address the systemic discrepancies caused by the intersectional impacts of heat exposure.

Heat, Violence, and Gender

It is well-established that the impacts of climate change will be felt first by societies prone to greater weather extremes. These states frequently lack adaptive climate infrastructure and are vulnerable to flooding—like Pakistan—or droughts—like Syria. The paradox that low-emitting states are often the first to experience the brunt of climate change is encapsulated in the axiom of common but differentiated responsibility. Simply put, while all states must help solve the climate crisis, a nation’s contribution to the solution is unique to its role as a historic emitter (or non-emitter).

This notion of common but differentiated responsibility also applies to gender. Humans will commonly experience the phenomenon of climate change, yet its impacts will be differentiated based on gender.

One such impact has been dubbed the “heat hypothesis.” Researchers contend that heat makes humans more violent. The mechanism is simple; when people experience prolonged heat exposure, they often become frustrated or easily prone to bursts of anger. This heightened sense of physical discomfort renders humans far more reactive.

The most palpable manifestation of the gendered harm created by excessive heat occurs in power-based violence. Using an ecological, longitudinal time series study, researchers tracked increased rates of femicide, intimate partner violence reporting, and telephone help line calls during Madrid summers between 2008 and 2016. They found that three days after a heat wave, there was a 40% increase in the risk of femicide. Furthermore, the study found that police reports significantly increased one day after heat waves, and helpline calls significantly increased five days after a heat wave. A surge in domestic violence was also reported during COVID-19, affirming that periods of crisis promote interpersonal harm.

In both of these instances, the violence created is not neutral. Rather, they are expressions of power that exacerbate underlying inequalities. And beyond promoting violence, heat can also harm reproductive and child health. For instance, one study found that for every 1°C increase in temperature greater than the 90^th percentile during the week prior to delivery created an increase of approximately 4 additional stillbirths per 10,000 births.

These risks to infant and maternal health will also likely be magnified for black women, who are already three times more likely than white women to die from a pregnancy-related complication. This best exemplifies the concept of intersectionality, as the combination of multiple marginalized identities renders individuals vulnerable to increased harm.

Another dimension of heat’s increased risks for parental and child health is the expansion of mosquito habitat. The widespread growth of habitable land for mosquitoes, attributable to rising temperatures, increases susceptibility to vector-borne diseases. The most dangerous diseases—malaria, dengue fever, and zika—pose a unique risk to parental and child health as they have demonstrated adverse neo-natal outcomes.

An International Perspective

Climate change is commonly referred to as a threat multiplier or a phenomenon that worsens existing social inequalities, diminishes access to resources, and drives conflict. Threat multiplication can also be understood in the context of intersectionality: international and intra-national positions inform how an individual receives state assistance or compensation during periods of extreme heat. Evaluating the gendered impacts of climate change necessitates a cross-sectional lens that considers how diverse actors across the globe will be affected.

Agriculture is the most important industry for women in low- and middle-income economies. This is particularly salient in backyard farm systems in Southeast Asia, where poultry functions as a primary source of income and as a barrier against child malnutrition. A WHO report found that backyard farms are responsible for 98% of poultry produced in Thailand, and poultry functions as a relatively inexpensive form of nutrition for vulnerable families.

Extreme heat threatens the practice of backyard farming in three ways. First, heat increases the unpredictability of livestock feed supplies, which jeopardizes animal health. Second, heat can harm poultry fertility by diminishing the supply of eggs and reducing potential offspring. Third, climate change is expected to decrease the raw quality of water, which can result in disease transmission. Combined, these factors reduce the efficacy of poultry as a secondary source of familial income—often the sole form of income women control.

In times of disaster, women and girls are also at increased risk for human trafficking. The United Nations reports that 70%–80% of those trafficked are female, with about 50% being girls. Climate disasters, like drought, drive chaos, migration, and economic vulnerability. Such environments produce exploitative conditions that increase trafficking risks. Similar increases in human trafficking occurred after Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Harvey in the United States.

Women may also be more vulnerable to death as a result of climate change and disaster events. The UNDP finds that women are 14 times more likely to die than men during a disaster. This discrepancy can be attributed to a lack of early warning systems, the provision of care for vulnerable family members (i.e., the elderly and children), and an absence of skills training (i.e., having never been trained to swim). In the 2006 European heatwave, elderly women died at disproportionate rates in France.

These differentiated effects of extreme heat are a byproduct of systemic norms and institutions that exacerbate social power differentials. In the context of climate resiliency, an intersectional feminist analysis can reveal how conventional norms and roles render certain individuals more vulnerable to the effects of a changing climate.

Responding to the Crisis

As extreme heat increases in frequency, feminism—much like government, policy, and civil society—must adapt to address key climate issues.

Undereducation on the risks of heat exposure remains rampant, for instance. Few people understand just how catastrophic heat can be to human well-being. Through safety programs modeled on California’s Extreme Heat Action Plan and their #BeatTheHeat campaign, the federal government must ensure that the public understands the threat temperature rise poses to livelihood, health, and safety.

Beyond educational campaigns, governments should also expand the practice of early warning systems, like the national EAS system, to alert the public to extreme heat waves. Moreover, state governments must provide public cooling centers, like those in California, that are accessible to all, especially those with underlying health conditions. Social workers and community outreach teams need to engage in community outreach to assist vulnerable populations, such as those experiencing mental illness, during times of extreme heat.

Furthermore, the federal government must financially assist power-based violence shelters and support hotlines during the summer months to enable widespread access to resources while preventing burnout amongst care providers. Lastly, doctors and those who are pregnant must receive parental education about the risk of heat exposure throughout the pregnancy. These resources, already compiled by organizations like National Partnerships for Women and Families, must be widely disseminated.

Innovative solutions are already being championed by marginalized genders around the globe. From the Rural Agency for Social and Technological Advancement’s implementation of solar panel technology by indigenous women in India to the YAKKUM water management unit in the Gemawang, Kaloran, and Temmangung districts in Indonesia, women are at the forefront of climate action. Many women in low-and middle-income countries act as pioneers in the agricultural industry by opposing monoculture approaches of commercial farming and embracing “agroecology, agroforestry, the diversification of production systems, conservation agriculture, and ecosystem-based approaches to agriculture.” This work lends itself as hope for a future that champions marginalized voices and innovatively addresses community needs.

These recommendations offer potential harm reduction strategies to increase community resilience. However, all the aforementioned suggestions are rooted in adaptation rather than mitigation. Until we address the root issue behind climate impacts—global greenhouse gas emissions—feminists will be compelled to play catch-up. A comprehensive strategy to tackle heat-related harm also demands proactive mitigation efforts to reverse damage already done to the environment by limiting the effects of warming.

From gender-based violence to food insecurity, there are very real social consequences of rising temperatures. Perhaps climate change will force the next feminist generation to be climate aware and usher in—not the fourth or fifth wave—but, rather, a heat wave.