IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v6y2014i4p1973-1991d34919.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender and (Un)Sustainability—Can Communication Solve a Conflict of Norms?

Author

Listed:
  • Angela Franz-Balsen

    (Avenue de Tervueren 266 C, 1150 Brussels, Belgium)

Abstract

In theory, and even more in the practice of sustainability communications, the gender dimension of sustainability has been neglected relative to other fields of the science. The aim of this paper is to show the relevance of gender as an analytical category for research and the importance of gender competence as an indispensable skill for professional sustainability communicators. Understanding how gender norms have contributed to inhibiting sustainable development is key to well-targeted means to communicate visions of sustainable ways of life. Traditional norms of masculinity are clearly in tension with the ethical, ecological and social implications of Sustainable Development, whereas the norms of femininity work against empowerment and participation of women. Current changes in gender relations and gender identities in the western world do not automatically solve this conflict of norms. Therefore, sustainability communication must and can contribute to shaping the social construction of gender towards new “sustainable” norms and ideals for the various gender identities in western societies. In order to achieve this, gender mainstreaming (GM) needs to be implemented in the field of sustainability communication, from capacity building for communicators to project design and research. Gender and diversity competence is to become a professional requirement, assuring that traditional “doing gender” is avoided, cultural diversity respected and structural inequalities are made visible. Visions of sustainable societies should include changes in gender relations. The argument is based on sociological studies, gender theories, gender policies, and environmental and sustainability communication studies, empirically supported by biographical studies and media analyses over the last twenty years in Western Europe, mainly Germany.

Suggested Citation

  • Angela Franz-Balsen, 2014. "Gender and (Un)Sustainability—Can Communication Solve a Conflict of Norms?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-19, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:4:p:1973-1991:d:34919
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/4/1973/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/4/1973/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Biesecker, Adelheid & Hofmeister, Sabine, 2010. "Focus: (Re)productivity: Sustainable relations both between society and nature and between the genders," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1703-1711, June.
    2. Thomas Dietz & Linda Kalof & Paul C. Stern, 2002. "Gender, Values, and Environmentalism," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 83(1), pages 353-364, March.
    3. Lori M. Hunter & Alison Hatch & Aaron Johnson, 2004. "Cross‐National Gender Variation in Environmental Behaviors," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 85(3), pages 677-694, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elisabeth Malonda & Anna Llorca & Ana Tur-Porcar & Paula Samper & Mª Vicenta Mestre, 2018. "Sexism and Aggression in Adolescence—How Do They Relate to Perceived Academic Achievement?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-15, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Enzo Loner, 2016. "A new way of looking at old things. An application of Guttman errors analysis to the study of environmental concern," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 823-847, March.
    2. Witkowski, Terrence H. & Reddy, Sabine, 2010. "Antecedents of ethical consumption activities in Germany and the United States," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 8-14.
    3. Kalamas, Maria & Cleveland, Mark & Laroche, Michel, 2014. "Pro-environmental behaviors for thee but not for me: Green giants, green Gods, and external environmental locus of control," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 12-22.
    4. Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Alhusen, Harm, 2019. "On the determinants of pro-environmental behavior: A literature review and guide for the empirical economist," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 350, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, revised 2019.
    5. Halkos, George, 2012. "Assessing the economic value of protecting artificial lakes," MPRA Paper 39557, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Meyer, Andrew, 2016. "Is unemployment good for the environment?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 18-30.
    7. Michael Luchs & Todd Mooradian, 2012. "Sex, Personality, and Sustainable Consumer Behaviour: Elucidating the Gender Effect," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 127-144, March.
    8. Junyi Shen & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2007. "The Socioeconomic Determinants of Individual Environmental Concern: Evidence from Shanghai Data," OSIPP Discussion Paper 07E003, Osaka School of International Public Policy, Osaka University.
    9. Andersson-Hudson, Jessica & Knight, William & Humphrey, Mathew & O’Hara, Sarah, 2016. "Exploring support for shale gas extraction in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 582-589.
    10. Matthias Winfried Kleespies & Paul Wilhelm Dierkes, 2020. "Impact of biological education and gender on students’ connection to nature and relational values," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-18, November.
    11. Anthony Amoah & Thomas Addoah, 2021. "Does environmental knowledge drive pro-environmental behaviour in developing countries? Evidence from households in Ghana," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 2719-2738, February.
    12. Xiaolun Wang & Xinlin Yao, 2020. "Fueling Pro-Environmental Behaviors with Gamification Design: Identifying Key Elements in Ant Forest with the Kano Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-17, March.
    13. De Gobbi, Maria Sabrina., 2012. "Gender and the environment : a survey in the manufacturing of machine- parts sector in Indonesia and China," ILO Working Papers 994692493402676, International Labour Organization.
    14. Janet J. McIntyre-Mills & Mphatheleni Makaulule & Patricia Lethole & E. Pitsoane & Akwasi Arko-Achemfuor & Rudolf Wirawan & Ida Widianingsih, 2023. "Ecocentric Living: A Way Forward Towards Zero Carbon: A Conversation about Indigenous Law and Leadership Based on Custodianship and Praxis," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 275-319, April.
    15. Halliki Kreinin, 2021. "The divergent narratives and strategies of unions in times of social-ecological crises: fracking and the UK energy sector," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 27(4), pages 453-468, November.
    16. Torgler, Benno & Garcã A-Valiã‘As, Marã A A. & Macintyre, Alison, 2011. "Participation in environmental organizations: an empirical analysis," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(5), pages 591-620, October.
    17. Vainio, Annukka & Paloniemi, Riikka, 2014. "The complex role of attitudes toward science in pro-environmental consumption in the Nordic countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 18-27.
    18. Kaori Ando & Junkichi Sugiura & Susumu Ohnuma & Kim-Pong Tam & Gundula Hübner & Nahoko Adachi, 2019. "Persuasion Game: Cross Cultural Comparison," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 50(5), pages 532-555, October.
    19. Laura Calvet-Mir & Hug March & Daniel Corbacho-Monné & Erik Gómez-Baggethun & Victoria Reyes-García, 2016. "Home Garden Ecosystem Services Valuation through a Gender Lens: A Case Study in the Catalan Pyrenees," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-14, July.
    20. Measham, Thomas G. & Zhang, Airong, 2019. "Social licence, gender and mining: Moral conviction and perceived economic importance," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 363-368.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:4:p:1973-1991:d:34919. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.