环境部门注重性别的双边援助

IF 1.3 Q3 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
J. Sommer, Samia Tasmim, John M. Shandra
{"title":"环境部门注重性别的双边援助","authors":"J. Sommer, Samia Tasmim, John M. Shandra","doi":"10.1525/sod.2020.0028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to feminist political ecology, women are uniquely and disproportionately affected by forest loss in many low- or middle-income countries (LMICs) because of gender divisions with regard to labor, land access, and forest resources. However, most macro-comparative theories of development (including economic dependency, ecological modernization, treadmill of production, world society, and neo-Malthusian theories) tend to ignore gender. We draw on ideas from feminist political ecology to examine how gender-focused bilateral aid in the environmental sector impacts forest loss from 2001 to 2015. To do so, we analyze data for 79 LMICs using ordinary least squares regression. We find that more gender-focused bilateral aid in the environmental sector is related to less forest loss. We also find support for economic dependency theory (more agricultural and forestry exports are related to more forest loss) and neo-Malthusian theory (more population growth is related to more forest loss). The main finding on bilateral financing supports the idea that gender should receive more attention in cross-national research, especially the integration of gender-related measures into analyses to refine and expand conventional macro-theories of development.","PeriodicalId":36869,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gender-Focused Bilateral Aid in the Environmental Sector\",\"authors\":\"J. Sommer, Samia Tasmim, John M. Shandra\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/sod.2020.0028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"According to feminist political ecology, women are uniquely and disproportionately affected by forest loss in many low- or middle-income countries (LMICs) because of gender divisions with regard to labor, land access, and forest resources. However, most macro-comparative theories of development (including economic dependency, ecological modernization, treadmill of production, world society, and neo-Malthusian theories) tend to ignore gender. We draw on ideas from feminist political ecology to examine how gender-focused bilateral aid in the environmental sector impacts forest loss from 2001 to 2015. To do so, we analyze data for 79 LMICs using ordinary least squares regression. We find that more gender-focused bilateral aid in the environmental sector is related to less forest loss. We also find support for economic dependency theory (more agricultural and forestry exports are related to more forest loss) and neo-Malthusian theory (more population growth is related to more forest loss). The main finding on bilateral financing supports the idea that gender should receive more attention in cross-national research, especially the integration of gender-related measures into analyses to refine and expand conventional macro-theories of development.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociology of Development\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociology of Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2020.0028\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology of Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2020.0028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

根据女权主义政治生态学,在许多低收入或中等收入国家(LMICs),由于在劳动、土地获取和森林资源方面的性别分工,妇女受到森林损失的独特和不成比例的影响。然而,大多数关于发展的宏观比较理论(包括经济依赖、生态现代化、生产跑步机、世界社会和新马尔萨斯理论)往往忽略了性别。我们借鉴女权主义政治生态学的观点,研究了2001年至2015年期间环境部门以性别为重点的双边援助如何影响森林损失。为此,我们使用普通最小二乘回归分析了79个低收入国家的数据。我们发现,环境部门更加注重性别的双边援助与减少森林损失有关。我们还发现了经济依赖理论(更多的农业和林业出口与更多的森林损失有关)和新马尔萨斯理论(更多的人口增长与更多的森林损失有关)的支持。关于双边筹资的主要发现支持这样一种观点,即在跨国研究中应更多地注意性别问题,特别是将与性别有关的措施纳入分析,以完善和扩大传统的宏观发展理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Gender-Focused Bilateral Aid in the Environmental Sector
According to feminist political ecology, women are uniquely and disproportionately affected by forest loss in many low- or middle-income countries (LMICs) because of gender divisions with regard to labor, land access, and forest resources. However, most macro-comparative theories of development (including economic dependency, ecological modernization, treadmill of production, world society, and neo-Malthusian theories) tend to ignore gender. We draw on ideas from feminist political ecology to examine how gender-focused bilateral aid in the environmental sector impacts forest loss from 2001 to 2015. To do so, we analyze data for 79 LMICs using ordinary least squares regression. We find that more gender-focused bilateral aid in the environmental sector is related to less forest loss. We also find support for economic dependency theory (more agricultural and forestry exports are related to more forest loss) and neo-Malthusian theory (more population growth is related to more forest loss). The main finding on bilateral financing supports the idea that gender should receive more attention in cross-national research, especially the integration of gender-related measures into analyses to refine and expand conventional macro-theories of development.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sociology of Development
Sociology of Development Social Sciences-Development
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信