Women, Gender Norms, and Natural Disasters in Bangladesh

Abstract

Women and men are impacted differently by natural disasters, leading to claims that there exist gendered disaster vulnerabilities and a "gendered terrain of disasters" (Enarson and Morrow 1998). What makes this contention even more academically and practically relevant are recent increases in the number of natural disasters and affectees (Guha-Sapir and others 2004; Paul 2011). The confluence of gender and disaster is particularly clear in Bangladesh, a country challenging twin specters of gender issues and an array of regularly occurring natural disasters. Bangladesh's unique geographic situation of extreme population densities overlaid on a low-lying deltaic and coastal landscape interacts with the nation's range of social and environmental transitions: issues of democracy, government corruption, poverty, rural-urban divides, and gender parity, coupled with problems related to multihazard risk, looming effects of climate change, and issues of environmental justice that predispose certain demographics to heightened levels of risk. Thus, the topic of gender and natural disasters presents a valuable junction for practical and academic exploration, representing a space where these transitions jointly manifest, coexist, and both create and reveal vulnerability. THE VULNERABILITY CALCULUSVulnerability comprises a vast, continually expanding literature. This brief discussion is nonexhaustive, but meant to situate vulnerability as inherently complex and transdisciplinary. Here, vulnerability is characterized as multidimensional and defined as the absence of physical and ecological features, natural and human resources, and social, economic, political, and technological capacities that offer protection from the shocks of natural disaster (Comfort and others 1999;Cutter and Finch 2008).

A geospatial analysis of multi-hazard risk in Dharan, Nepal

“…Vulnerability is primarily controlled by social, economic, and demographic factors that coalesce to influence the capacity of individuals and communities to mitigate, cope with, and reduce disaster risk (Hewitt 1997;Comfort et al 1999;Juran and Trivedi 2015). In general, a population with relatively greater socioeconomic status, access to resources, and built environment attributes is less vulnerable and typically performs better during and after disaster events.…”

An Analysis of Social Vulnerability to Natural Hazards in Nepal Using a Modified Social Vulnerability Index

“…Physical scientists, for example, tend to conceptualize vulnerability in terms of the likelihood of occurrence of a specific process and associated impacts on the built environment (Papathoma-Kohle et al 2011;Fuchs et al 2012). Social scientists tend to define vulnerability as a set of social, economic, and demographic factors that coalesce to determine people's ability to cope with stressors (Wisner et al 2004;Juran and Trivedi 2015). In reality, the biophysical environment interacts with social attributes and systems to reveal vulnerability, meaning that vulnerability is socially constructed.…”

Adapting to Change: People and Policies

“…However, the extent to which policies achieve their intended goals is variable. Cyclone shelters are installed to provide shelter during and after extreme events, yet women and girls are often reluctant to stay in public shelters where they may have to interact with men, to maintain honour and avoid shame and harassment (Rashid and Michaud 2002;Juran and Trivedi 2015). Poverty can constrain household adaptation choice.…”