IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/indqtr/v81y2025i3p268-287.html

How Does Green Patriarchy Shape Climate Action? A Critical Analysis on Gendered Inequities in Climate Solutions

Author

Listed:
  • Naveen Kolloju
  • Srinivas Junuguru
  • Aabha Pandit
  • Maitreyi Jagannathan

Abstract

Women, particularly in the Global South, are more vulnerable to the impacts of climate change due to their social, economic, and cultural responsibilities. However, their knowledge and contributions are often overlooked in mainstream climate policies and discussions. This exclusion highlights deep-rooted gender power structures commonly referred to as ‘green patriarchy’. This critical review explores how green patriarchy influences climate action and sustains gender inequities in climate solutions. It addresses three research questions: (a) How does green patriarchy appear in climate governance? (b) What barriers prevent women from participating in climate decision-making? (c) How can gender-focused policies improve climate justice? Using a qualitative, interpretive approach, the study analyses peer-reviewed literature, feminist political ecology theories and reports from organisations such as the UNFCCC, the IPCC and the UN. Through thematic and content analysis, it examines gendered policy design, participation challenges and strategies for equitable climate action. The findings show that green patriarchy, embedded in technocratic and market-based solutions like carbon trading and geoengineering, favours male-dominated perspectives, marginalising women’s knowledge. Examples, such as the Noel Kempff Project in Bolivia and adaptation policies in Aotearoa of New Zealand, highlight how these approaches exclude women, weakening climate resilience. Key barriers include unequal access to resources, low representation in global forums, and cultural norms that limit women’s role, worsening issues like health risks and economic insecurity. The study calls for intersectional and decolonial approaches to reshape climate governance. It recommends increasing women’s representation, ensuring gender-sensitive funding and incorporating indigenous knowledge and care ethics into policies to build stronger, fairer climate responses. In conclusion, overcoming green patriarchy requires more than inclusion, it demands transformative change. By prioritising women’s voices, leadership and grassroots efforts, climate policies can become equitable and sustainable, addressing gender injustices and advancing climate justice while respecting diverse ecological knowledge and lived experiences for a just climate future.

Suggested Citation

  • Naveen Kolloju & Srinivas Junuguru & Aabha Pandit & Maitreyi Jagannathan, 2025. "How Does Green Patriarchy Shape Climate Action? A Critical Analysis on Gendered Inequities in Climate Solutions," India Quarterly: A Journal of International Affairs, , vol. 81(3), pages 268-287, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:indqtr:v:81:y:2025:i:3:p:268-287
    DOI: 10.1177/09749284251348532
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09749284251348532
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/09749284251348532?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rebecca Pearse, 2017. "Gender and climate change," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), March.
    2. World Bank, 2022. "World Development Report 2022 [Informe sobre el desarrollo mundial 2022]," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 36883, April.
    3. Agarwal, Bina, 2001. "Participatory Exclusions, Community Forestry, and Gender: An Analysis for South Asia and a Conceptual Framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1623-1648, October.
    4. Bauhardt, Christine, 2014. "Solutions to the crisis? The Green New Deal, Degrowth, and the Solidarity Economy: Alternatives to the capitalist growth economy from an ecofeminist economics perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 60-68.
    5. Marty, E. & Segnon, A. C. & Tui, S. H.-K. & Trautman, S. & Huyer, S. & Cramer, L. & Mapedza, Everisto, 2023. "Enabling gender and social inclusion in climate and agriculture policy and planning through foresight processes: assessing challenges and leverage points," Papers published in Journals (Open Access), International Water Management Institute, pages 1-17.().
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lauren Pandolfelli & Ruth Meinzen-Dick & Stephan Dohrn, 2008. "Gender and collective action: motivations, effectiveness and impact," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 1-11.
    2. Alastair Greig & Mark Turner, 2024. "Policy and hope: The millennium development goals," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(1), pages 66-77, February.
    3. Pandit, Ram & Bevilacqua, Eddie, 2011. "Forest users and environmental impacts of community forestry in the hills of Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 345-352, June.
    4. Astrid Agenjo‐Calderón & Lina Gálvez‐Muñoz, 2019. "Feminist Economics: Theoretical and Political Dimensions," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 78(1), pages 137-166, January.
    5. Cheng, Lu & Walshe, Nicola & Mi, Zhifu, 2025. "Reducing gender inequalities in education helps mitigate climate change," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    6. Annemarie Westendorp & Leontine Visser, 2015. "Farmer Field Schools: Unexpected Outcomes of Gendered Empowerment in Wartime Nepal," Journal of Asian Development, Macrothink Institute, vol. 1(1), pages 1-22, October.
    7. Nandigama, Sailaja, 2020. "Performance of success and failure in grassroots conservation and development interventions: Gender dynamics in participatory forest management in India," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    8. Hao, J., 2018. "Cooperative member commitment, trust and social pressure -- the role of members’ participation in the decision-making," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275881, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Prakash Kashwan, 2016. "Integrating power in institutional analysis: A micro-foundation perspective," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(1), pages 5-26, January.
    10. repec:plo:pone00:0223044 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Mirko Hirschmann & Christian Fisch & Steffen Farny, 2025. "An attention-based perspective on how climate impact affects opportunity entrepreneurship," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 65(4), pages 2217-2257, December.
    12. Catherine Ragasa & Cristina Alvarez-Mingote & Paul McNamara, 2024. "Bottom-Up Approaches and Decentralized Extension Structures for Improving Access to and Quality of Extension Services and Technology Adoption: Multi-level Analysis from Malawi," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 36(5), pages 1093-1146, October.
    13. Salazar, César A. & Jaime, Mónica M., 2009. "Participación en Organizaciones de la Sociedad Civil en Chile. ¿Una Alternativa para Mejorar el Bienestar Económico? [Participation in Civil Society Organizations in Chile. Is it an Alternative to Improve Economic Welfare?]," MPRA Paper 12797, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Swati Narayan, 2022. "Fifteen Years of India’s NREGA: Employer of the Last Resort?," The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, Springer;The Indian Society of Labour Economics (ISLE), vol. 65(3), pages 779-799, September.
    15. Ana F. Ferreira & Heike Zimmermann & Rui Santos & Henrik Von Wehrden, 2018. "A Social–Ecological Systems Framework as a Tool for Understanding the Effectiveness of Biosphere Reserve Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-26, October.
    16. Nieto-Romero, M. & Parra, C. & Bock, B., 2021. "Re-building historical commons: How formal institutions affect participation in community forests in Galicia, Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    17. Achille Augustin DIENDERE & Abdoul Hadirou YODA, 2023. "Understanding the effects of migrant remittances on agricultural production in West African countries," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 43(1), pages 398-412.
    18. Njagi, T. & Kinyumu, N. & Kirimi, L., 2018. "farm household’s participation in governance: lessons from devolved systems in kenya," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 276006, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Sirisha C. Naidu, 2005. "Heterogeneity and Common Pool Resources: Collective Management of Forests in Himachal Pradesh, India," Working Papers 2005-8, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
    20. Ana María Ibáñez & Maria Adelaida Ortega & Gauthier Marchais & Patricia Justino & Teresita Narvaez & Manuel de Vera & Ryan Tangalin & Benjamin Crost & Jorge Maldonado, 2024. "Armed group taxation, municipal fishing, and environmental preservation in the Zamboanga Peninsula, Philippines," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2024-67, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    21. Saito-Jensen, Moeko, 6. "Who gains or who loses from Joint Forest Management? Lessons from two case study areas from Andhra Pradesh, India," Scandinavian Forest Economics: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics, Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics, issue 42, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:indqtr:v:81:y:2025:i:3:p:268-287. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.