Women’s Rights

Technology and medicine have pushed the boundaries of innovation since the beginning of the 21st century, but women’s reproductive health remains one of the least publically discussed global health issues. Although the topic of contraception is controversial, it has become increasingly important that women’s reproductive health be prioritized, funded, and freely discussed in an age where world population is exponentially rising. Through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the United States have funded programs like the Ouagadougou conference, allowing progressive reproductive health and family planning programs to be implemented worldwide. However, on January 23, 2017, within his first week of office, Donald Trump reinstated a highly controversial initiative dating back to President Reagan that threatens progress on women’s health both domestically and internationally. Despite the opposition from the Trump administration, the United States must continue to promote global awareness of female contraceptives to allow more women worldwide the opportunity to educate themselves and make decisions about their own bodies.

Over the past 20 years, progress has been made in areas of women’s health like pregnancy-related complications and contraceptive use, but global prioritization requires greater attention. In 2012, the United Nations Foundation created Family Planning 2020, a program designed to support the rights of women who are making their own decisions about the number of children they want to have. In the four years following the initiation of the program, it showed impressive progress in its pledge to improve availability of modern contraception by providing access for over 24 million women. However, on November 2nd, 2016, Family Planning 2020 issued a report confirming that it was “not on track to meet its target of providing 120 million additional women and girls access to contraception.” According to Jane Hobson, senior reproductive health aide at the UK’s Department for International Development, reaching these goals requires “prioritizing family planning, keeping it on the agenda, budgeting for it,…[and] shifting social expectations”. In order for these goals to be reached, there must be greater support and awareness of the benefits of using contraceptives, especially from the government and international funding bodies.

Contraception is a tool for women that gives them more freedom in their life choices. Education about birth control helps avoid unintended pregnancies, and allows women to maintain their jobs, therefore promoting self-sufficiency. Studies have shown that family planning education helps women make informed decisions about their reproductive health and promotes awareness of the risks associated with unsafe sex. Countries like Tunisia and Mauritius have seen fertility rates drop more than threefold after implementing policies that granted women equal rights to education and involvement in their communities. According to a survey performed by the Guttmacher Institute in 2011, a majority of women said that access to contraceptives allowed them to “take better care of…their families, support themselves financially, and get [and] keep a job”. Promoting contraceptive use throughout the world can provide benefits that extend through society.

The US is the leading example for promoting global safe family practices because of its involvement and funding in family planning education programs around the world. Over the last 50 years, USAID has funded and supported voluntary family planning and reproductive health programs in almost 40 countries around the world. In addition to supporting Family Planning 2020’s goal, USAID has made strides in family planning initiatives, supporting adolescent reproductive health and identifying at-risk locations. With this program, the United States has positioned itself as the world’s leading advocate for supporting reproductive health services. However, Donald Trump’s policies and a majority Republican Congress threaten to impede these initiatives and push back social progress.

Donald Trump’s misogynistic initiatives have led to actions threatening modern progress in female reproductive health. Throughout his campaign, Trump voiced strong opposition towards certain women’s issues, especially women’s health care, by cutting funding to Planned Parenthood. While Trump acknowledged the benefits of Planned Parenthood’s services, such as breast and cervical-cancer screenings, he vowed to defund Planned Parenthood on the basis of his pro-life abortion policy. On January 23rd, during his first week in the Oval Office, President Trump reinstated “the global gag rule,” restricting US funds to international organizations that “perform or discuss abortions.”In the National Right to Life march that followed, Vice President Mike Pence promised supporters that the administration would push for a permanent ban of all organizations, like Planned Parenthood, involved in abortions. Women’s health clinics like Planned Parenthood not only provide greater accessibility to contraceptives, but they are a safe haven for women who need the resources and services associated with reproductive health. Yet, these clinics represent more than just their services; rather, they are a symbol of the right for women to choose to be educated and have access to birth control.

In the first weeks of the Trump administration, the US has already faced setbacks to the social progress of women’s health. The reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule not only prevents progress, but also will cause women’s clinic closures, leading to more unintended pregnancies and unsafe abortions. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi issued a statement describing Trump’s actions as “dishonor[ing] American values of free speech and inflict[ing] untold suffering to millions of women around the world.” In 2015, the US provided 27 million women with access to contraceptives, preventing 2 million unsafe abortions and 6 million unintended pregnancies. Yet by pursuing initiatives focused on defunding programs like Planned Parenthood as well as family planning programs around the world, President Trump and the Republican Congress stifle discussion in an area desperately in need of reform and awareness, especially in countries like Tunisia and Mauritius where USAID family planning programs have benefited its society and economy. Over the past several years, countries like Tunisia and Mauritius have benefited economically from promoting social justice or women’s rights. In the next several months, the tone set by the new administration towards women’s health could alter the landscape of family planning around the world.

February 28, 2017 1 comment

Federal Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel and President of France Francois Hollande meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Source

Europe Featured Geopolitics Uncategorized Women's Rights

The Double-Edged Sword of Female Leadership

written by Katie Linder

The 2016 presidential election will no doubt remain a controversial subject in the coming years. Many feminists, excited at the prospect of America’s first female president, must now come to terms with the reality that the “highest and hardest” glass ceiling will remain unbroken for at least four more years. However, the United States is not alone in its continued failure to elect a woman to its highest government office. Despite the progress made around the world to expand the rights of women, a lack of gender parity remains painfully clear in the realm of leadership. Women occupy around 10% of the highest offices in national governments around the world, with 19 women currently serving as head of state/government. One of the most formidable female leaders today is Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel. Merkel’s unconventional rise to power serves as an inspiration to aspiring female leaders and further dismantles society’s male-centric conception of power and leadership. However, her legacy also highlights the many double-edged swords facing women in power that make the glass ceiling so difficult to break through.

As a politician in Germany, Merkel is an outlier. She grew up in East Germany during the Cold War and was originally trained in the sciences. Her origins made her an outsider in German politics, which were dominated by men from the West. Nevertheless, she turned her perceived weaknesses into strengths. She used the patience, intellect and inconspicuousness that she cultivated in the East to propel her political career. Furthermore, her background in science allowed her to grow more comfortable working in a male dominated field, and has influenced many aspects of her political style. She is an unanimated public speaker; her speeches are devoid of the pompousness and inflated rhetoric that are characteristic of many other world leaders. She is notorious for delaying her decisions for as long as possible in order to analyze all the available data, and has developed a political style that is based on pragmatism and facts rather than any ideological convictions. In fact, it has been said her only deep seated conviction is her value for freedom, everything else “is negotiable”.

Merkel’s unique style of leadership has allowed her to cultivate a level of respect among the German people that secured her three consecutive terms as chancellor. However, despite her success, she has faced more than her fair share of obstacles in the form of both overt and subtle sexism. While she has risen above the insults and criticism admirably, her experiences reveal the contradictory attitudes surrounding female leadership, and the fine line women in power must walk. While every country and culture has a unique set of standards for their leadership, many of the challenges faced by Merkel are universal to women seeking power.

Merkel developed an ability to restrain herself and lead from behind through her experience studying alongside primarily male colleagues at Leipzig University. She once joked, “The men in the laboratory always had their hands on all the buttons at the same time. I couldn’t keep up with this, because I was thinking. And then things suddenly went ‘poof,’ and the equipment was destroyed.” Throughout her political career she has stood her ground and dealt with the particularly “macho” male leaders, such as Vladimir Putin, in a similar fashion. Merkel’s tactics can serve as a model for other aspiring female leaders, but her experiences also reveal a troubling truth. Female leaders must remain composed in order to avoid being labeled emotional or abrasive, but if they are too diffident they risk having their voices drowned out. Merkel’s lead from behind style of leadership has allowed her to work around this double-edged sword, but it is not necessarily the most efficient way to lead. Ultimately, placing rigid expectations on women hinders their ability to be effectual leaders.

Contradictions between expectations of Merkel’s femininity and masculinity also came into play during her rise to power. The now popular and affectionate nickname “Mutti” (German word for mother), was originally thrown at her as an insult. She has since gracefully reclaimed the name, arguing that it implies her responsibility to the German people. Her appearance has come under scrutiny as well, particularly at the beginning of her career. She has updated her style over time but has largely ignored the critics and maintained a plain and unassuming wardrobe. In this way she has sent the message that she prioritizes her work over her appearance and wants to keep the focus on her policy. These experiences reveal another double-edged sword: as a woman Merkel is expected to be feminine, matronly and stylish, although these traits are often seen as incompatible with strong leadership. After centuries of primarily male leaders, our notions of masculinity and leadership are intimately intertwined. In order to be taken seriously, a woman must adopt more traditionally masculine traits such as resoluteness and aggression. However, acting too masculine often makes a woman less likeable to a broad audience.

Merkel has also received criticism at the other end of the spectrum from feminists who are dismayed by her failure to adequately address women’s issues in Germany. Merkel herself has said she doesn’t consider herself a feminist. Although she has made efforts throughout her career to advance women’s rights, such as adding gender equality in the workplace to the G7 summit agenda in 2015, women’s issues have remained largely on the periphery of her policy goals. The harsh criticism Merkel has received from feminists is fueled in part by the idea that women understand the challenges posed by gender barriers, and thus have an obligation to help each other whenever possible; as Secretary of State Madeleine Albright once said, “There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other”. Merkel’s actions reveal another troubling double-edged sword: those with the most power to advance women’s rights—women in the highest offices of government—often adopt passive stances, perhaps because acting otherwise could amount to political suicide. When a woman seeking a high leadership role champions women’s rights and runs on a feminist platform, it is seen with suspicion by many and cast as self-serving. Thus, it is very difficult for an outspoken feminist to get elected to a high office. There is no doubt that having more female leaders is a positive step towards gender equality. However, their power would be much more consequential if it were wielded to directly advance women’s issues.

While more active advocacy for women’s issues from Merkel is necessary, her contributions to the women’s movement must still be recognized and appreciated. She garnered respect in boardrooms dominated by men as she led Europe through the Eurozone Crisis and continues to tackle the Refugee Crisis; thus she has expanded respect for female voices in important international policy discussions. Ultimately, Merkel can serve as both an inspiration and a sobering lesson to other aspiring female leaders. She is an example to women everywhere of strong female leadership that has risen above sexist criticism and “macho men”. However, her legacy is riddled with the double-edged swords that have prevented many other women from achieving the same success. Hopefully, America’s aspiring first-female-presidents will learn a lesson from Merkel and shatter the highest glass ceiling once and for all.

February 9, 2017 0 comment

Wall art against FGM. Source

Featured Global Health Society and Culture Women's Rights

Cutting Them Close: Female Genital Mutilation Today

written by Pallabi Chakraborty

A few months ago, I read the heartbreaking story of Mariya Karimjee, an American girl of South Asian origin who underwent a female genital mutilation (FGM) procedure when she was four years of age. She had very faint memories of being pinned down with her legs apart while a group of ladies hovered around her. She remembered the pain, and the special treatment she received for a while, as if it made up for this heinous crime. Only years later, upon reaching sexual maturity, did she actually understand the magnitude of the events of that day, and the fact that her body and life had been irreversibly damaged.

FGM is defined by the United Nations Population Fund as the “partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons”. Its inception is rooted in gender inequality, as it marks an attempt to curb a woman’s sexual desire and ensure she remains pure, modest, faithful and loyal. A cut woman’s genitalia is also seen as aesthetically pleasing by the men in the communities where cutting is the norm. Modifications to the female genitalia are often carried out by midwives–women with some medical experience who have taken on the role of cutter–or male barbers who lack medical expertise entirely. Their tools are varied and range from knives, razors, scissors, sharpened rocks, and glass to fingernails. These tools are often reused on multiple girls, tremendously increasing the chances of disease transmittance. If the hole left behind is too large according to the girl’s family, the procedure might have to be repeated. Usually, the hole is just big enough to allow the passage of urine or menstrual blood. Sometimes general anesthesia is used, sometimes local, sometimes none at all.

FGM causes permanent damage to the female sex organ. Apart from excruciating pain during intercourse, childbirth, and menstruation, it can be responsible for chronic complications to women’s sexual and reproductive health. Also, it is important to note that the whole purpose of FGM is based on the status of women as second class citizens. It revolves around their subjugation, ensuring that pleasure is removed from a woman’s sexual activity, thus keeping her desires ‘in control’. Female chastity is the goal, while the negative physical and mental outcomes are overlooked. For the purpose of sexual intercourse after marriage, typically a midwife cuts the opening with a knife, or the work is left to the husband. To be able to fully make the opening through the latter process may take up to days, the hole opening up little at a time, causing tremendous pain to the woman throughout. There are no known health benefits of FGM.

The number of women who are at risk of undergoing FGM procedures in the United States has doubled in the last ten years. Part of this could be attributed to increased immigration from countries where FGM is widely practiced. It is estimated that over 300,000 women and girls in the US have undergone the procedure or are at risk. Some parents take their daughters out of the country for “vacation cutting” to complete the procedure in their home countries before coming back to the US. Vacation cutting is illegal in the US at the federal level, but many states do not have any laws that criminalize it. There have been attempts by politicians trying to push for stricter regulations, and adopt some policies commonly used in other countries. One example of such a country is the United Kingdom, where law enforcement agencies at airports are constantly on the lookout for parents trying to send or take their daughters abroad for cutting. Travellers to certain countries are given passport inserts informing them that cutting British citizens, even if they are abroad, is illegal. In the US, things are quite different. For instance, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services website has a page detailing what FGM is, and advises anyone at risk to call a hotline number listed there. However, this hotline number is that of the Office of Women’s Health, within the Department of Health and Human Services. It is not a line dedicated to FGM. This is important because a girl will typically call this number when she is tremendously fearful of what might be coming, and is in imminent danger. Also, if the victim happens to be abroad at the time of the incident, the US State Department can help in transporting her back to the US, but would have to seek help from local law enforcement.

It is clear that having laws is not enough to stop FGM. An enormous amount of change in thoughts and ideologies is required. Victims are almost always shamed into silence. The thought of going to the police against your own parents’ wishes can loom heavy on a child. Also, it is difficult to charge the perpetrator in the absence of a witness, as it is possible that the crime may have been committed by relatives and against the wishes of the parents. Also, many teachers, healthcare providers and social workers do not always understand the enormity of the crime, especially because it is coupled with foreign cultural beliefs. Besides, parents, the perpetrators in this case, are otherwise extremely caring, in all other aspects just like how parents should be. These are usually the only exceptions to their behaviour, steeped in their inability to break through the shackles of blind traditions forced upon them.

While legislative action is welcome, countries showing the fastest progress have seen tremendous initiative from community leaders and organizations, such as in Burkina Faso and Senegal. In Tanzania, traditional cutters stopped practicing this trade after being educated in the dangers of FGM and the impact it has on women. To ensure they had another source of income, they were trained in other vocations, for example, batik making. Social grassroot movements have had the strongest impact on cultural beliefs and traditions, primarily because activists are most aware of how these communities think and which arguments are most effective. Sensitivity towards local cultures and traditions is important. Emphasis should be on educating people about the harm caused by FGM, as opposed to attacking it as a cultural malpractice. Bringing in powerful figures well known in the community to advocate against these practices will be helpful. Since there is often a belief that not getting circumcised is haram (religiously immoral), community outreach and advocacy by religious leaders and community elders would be especially beneficial.

Dahabo Musa, a Somalian poet, beautifully articulates the emotional trauma of FGM in a poem called Feminine Pains, part of which is presented below:

As the birth bursts, I cry for help, when the battered flesh tears.

No mercy, push! They say.

It is only feminine pain!

And now I appeal:

I appeal for love lost, for dreams broken,

For the right to live as a whole human being.

If anything, this poignant piece of writing should be reason enough to stop this practice.

August 2, 2016 0 comment

Violence Against Women Source

Africa Featured Society and Culture Women's Rights

Domestic Violence in Ghana: Socially Accepted and Judicially Trivialized

written by Tala Ahmadi

The West African country of Ghana’s deeply entrenched patriarchal culture, where the husband’s exclusive rights to his wife trump her own, condones domestic violence. Most Ghanaian women are told that to be successful in life, they must find a husband and serve him adequately by fulfilling gender roles and continuing his lineage. Wives are told to be socially smaller than their husbands, who are their superiors, breadwinners and protectors. Across all the hundreds of ethnic groups in Ghana, women are viewed as inferior to men. One of the many social dimensions arising from this gendered culture includes an acceptance of domestic violence. The few women that legally report their instances of abuse are supposed to be supported by Ghana’s Domestic Violence and Victim Support Unit (DOVVSU), a branch of the Ghana Police Services. However, Ghanaian women still face extreme obstacles in preventing and reporting domestic violence as well as seeking and receiving justice from the Ghanaian criminal system. Despite the normal inefficiencies that plague most of Ghana’s institutions (the DOVVSU does not even have a website), the root of the Unit’s ineffectiveness remains Ghana’s deeply entrenched gendered culture.

Traditionally, when women are born they belong to their fathers. Once married, their cultural property title moves to their husband and his family— a sister-in-law can refer to her husband’s wife as, “my wife.” If a wife is disobedient, which includes failing to fulfill her traditional obligations like cooking, cleaning, taking care of children and being sexually available whenever her husband desires, domestic violence is often socially accepted by both men and women. According to Ghana’s 2003 Demographic and Health Survey,19.8% of men and 34% of women found it socially acceptable for a husband to beat his wife if she went out without telling him. The survey also showed that 10.1% of men and 19.9% of women considered it acceptable for a husband to beat his wife for refusing to have sex with him. These statistics are unfortunately not unique to Ghana and are part of an international and regional epidemic.

Within West Africa, domestic violence is widespread and often legally allowed. Globally, 30% of women experience violence from intimate partners and 36.6% of African women experience lifetime intimate partner violence. Section 55(1)(d) of Nigeria’s Penal Code legally condones an assault by a husband on his wife for, “the purpose of correcting his wife, such husband and wife being subject to any native law or custom in which such correction is recognized as lawful.” Spousal rape is also not criminalized in Togo, Ghana’s neighbor. In Benin, 68.6% of women experience violence at the hands of men, and 69.5% of those perpetrators are spouses or partners. One in four women in Senegal are victims of domestic abuse. These high statistics are the consequence of deeply gendered cultures where domestic abuse is socially accepted and frequently legal.

These embedded cultural norms were challenged in the past four decades by a global wave of women’s rights advocacy. Several international and regional treaties, bills, covenants and conventions geared towards women’s rights were adopted, including the UN’s notable Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. One of Ghana’s responses to this push included establishing the DOVVSU in February 2007. However, women who seek the DOVVSU’s support are often discouraged to report their claims and rarely see their spouses brought to justice. The DOVVSU fails in its mission to provide victims with adequate support services because it remains shackled to Ghana’s patriarchal culture.

Many Ghanaians traditionally believe that domestic abuse should be resolved within the household rather than externally via the justice system. This mindset causes judges to trivialize domestic violence cases or pressure women to drop their claims. Often times, Ghanaian women are too embarrassed, disheartened or discouraged to even report their cases of abuse—95% of Ghanaian women who have been raped do not report the incident. Even when women do pursue criminal charges many of their claims never get sent to court, they experience societal shaming and hardly any cases lead to convictions. A statistic from 2010 found that out of 12,706 cases in the country, only 954 were sent to court and of those only 118 convictions were obtained. These numbers are unacceptable given that the DOVVSU’s intent is to provide victims with the support necessary to seek justice. In actuality, those who are entrusted with the power to help victims find justice convince and encourage women to drop their claims and return to their abusive relationships to avoid disturbing the peace of their communities.

Another traditional belief contributing to the DOVVSU’s ineffectiveness and the prevalence of domestic violence is the cultural mindset that marriage equals consent. A 2007 survey found that 20.6% of Ghanaian women have experienced intimate partner violence in their lifetime and 44.5% have experienced physical and/or sexual abuse from intimate partners and/or non-partners in their lifetime. These high numbers are not surprising considering until 2007, Ghanaian Criminal Code section 42 (g) explicitly allowed marital rape by stating, “the consent given by a husband or wife at marriage, for the purposes of marriage, cannot be revoked until the parties are divorced or separated by a judgment or decree of a competent Court.” After the DOVVSU was established, section 42 (g) was revised to state, “The use of violence in the domestic setting is not justified on the basis of consent.” While the changes imply husbands can be criminally prosecuted for marital rape, there is no direct prohibition of marital rape statutorily in the Ghanaian Criminal Code. In addition, the revision in the law has yet to change cultural and patriarchal mindsets that contribute to the extent of marital rape and the attitudes of law enforcement officers who trivialize domestic violence cases.

The DOVVSU’s establishment marked a significant first step in improving the Ghanaian domestic violence landscape, however its effectiveness is marred by prevailing cultural norms. How can Ghana create an effective DOVVSU when major sources of its inadequacy are beliefs that can only be changed with time? This is a difficult question to answer, but the solution must include more rigorous sensitivity training for judges, police officers and leaders of communities, national emphasis on the issue and increased marketing about the DOVVSU. Queen mothers, who are the female leaders of many Ghanaian communities and dedicated advocates for women and children, and DOVVSU representatives should organize community discussions about gender roles and domestic violence. Similar conversations should be conducted in classrooms so from a young age children can start a normally nonexistent discussion regarding domestic abuse. Queen mothers should also spearhead female support groups as forums for women to talk freely about sexism and gender roles. Female focused NGOs must also work with Queen mothers and take advantage of their unique position with women and children. These open conversations regarding gender constructs and their societal influence will work to challenge the prevailing norms and change the mindsets that leave many Ghanaian women disentitled to their own bodies.

May 26, 2016 2 comments

Africa Asia Featured Global Health Uncategorized Women's Rights

Trust Women, Improve Water Supply

written by Chrissy Cheung

The world water crisis stands out as one of the most prominent international issues of the world today, affecting developed and developing countries alike. In developed countries, one of the larger impacts of lacking water is on agriculture, leading to a combination of increasing prices and decreasing employment. In developing nations, however, there is a significant lack of clean drinking water that not only leads to disease, but also to the death of a child every 21 seconds, which is over 4,000 children every day. According to the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program for Water Supply and Sanitation, around 1.8 billion people worldwide drink water that is contaminated, and based on a UN study, “even more drink water delivered through a system without adequate protection against sanitary hazards.” However, the world water crisis is not limited to health matters. Throughout Africa and parts of Southern Asia, lack of clean drinking water causes the continued disjuncture between male and female well-being.

To begin with, water—even when unsanitary—is not readily available to every community. In urban and suburban areas, like suburban Uganda, people depend on broken water pipes to access free, clean water. Their other option is, if geographically possible, to collect unsanitary water from a nearby stream because they cannot afford to pay for clean water (Water.org). In most rural throughout Africa, women and children must walk, on average, 6 kilometers every day to fetch water. They then carry around 20 liters back to their village, which wears on their necks and backs. In Malawi, women spend nine times as many hours as men do fetching water; girls spend three times as many (UN Women Watch). This time-consuming process often prevents those women and girls from working a paying job or attending school, whereas men and boys have more time to accomplish both tasks. As a result, the women in African rural communities end up, between gathering water and performing household tasks, working unpaid for twice the amount of time that the men work for a salary.

Furthermore, the need to fetch water for their family confines women in Central Africa to daily, unpaid labor and prevents them from receiving an education, making it so that there is little that women can do to escape their circumstances and lead a better life. It becomes extremely difficult for women to advance in the work force or in government, creating a cyclic effect that reinforces women’s role in society and furthering the divide between male and female well-being.

The most apparent solution to this situation is the implementation of water services like building a well for the community. Wells of Life, The Water Project, Water Wells for Africa, and The African Well Fund are a few of the international organizations that work to provide these services. Having access to a well in a rural community not only gives the people access to clean drinking water, but also significantly shortens the distance that women need to walk in order to fetch it. This would give them more time in their day to get an education and advance in the work force.

At the same time, the world water situation contributes to the political inequality, if not the near subjugation, of women in Central Africa and Southern Asia. According to the United Nations publication “Women and Water: 2000 and beyond,” women are the most involved in making decisions for their families regarding water sanitation. However, the organizations responsible for the planning and management of water and sanitation systems (whether they be governmental or privately owned) rarely allow women to be involved. This continues despite the fact that a United Nations-sponsored survey proved that water projects planned and managed by women are more likely to succeed than those conducted solely by men. This is exemplified in another UN study, which conducted research about the impact of water services on communities in east Nepal. In the study, women whose communities received improved water services experienced increased collection time when the services were placed near the roadsides. Women chose to walk to the wells, collect the water, return home, and repeat this process several times a day during menstruation, due to the shame of being seen cleaning their soiled clothes by males. This type of situation did not occur in areas where women were involved in planning: water services were instead placed in more private locations so women felt comfortable cleaning their laundry and gathering water at the same time. Thus, women should be involved when planning the implementation of water services for their communities.

Ultimately, the world water crisis significantly impacts the women throughout Africa and Southern Asia politically by causing a continued disjuncture between men and women’s well-being. The first step to alleviating the symptoms of the water crisis, allowing women to overcome the political issues that result from a lack of drinking water, is continuing to develop water services for countries in need. There are many organizations dedicated to building wells that give people access to clean groundwater below the surface, and supporting these organizations can hopefully have a real difference in the water crisis in the future. Until women and girls in impacted nations no longer spend most of their day fetching water, the cycle of women’s inferiority in the work force will continue.

November 27, 2015 1 comment

Photo Credit: Denis Bocquet, March 19, 2012 . Flicker under Creative Commons Licensing

Middle East Society and Culture Women's Rights

Tweets to Toyotas: Slow but Steady Progress for Women’s Rights in Saudi Arabia

written by Erica Anjum

Photo Credit: Denis Bocquet, March 19, 2012 . Flicker under Creative Commons Licensing

By Erica Anjum

A young woman in Orange County, California, theoretically has access to the same opportunities as a young man; except, it is still socially acceptable for her not to take advantage of her rights. As the most coveted variety of freedom is one that is easy to casually reject, in some ways and in some places today, it is better to be a woman than a man. In Saudi Arabia, however, it is definitely still highly preferable to be a man.

In both developed and developing nations, women continue to be denied rights, and in places, personhood. In the landscape of gender-inequality, Saudi Arabia remains perhaps the most notorious for its treatment of women in contemporary times. Even conservative neighboring states such as Yemen, where women stroll the streets shrouded head-to-toe in traditional black burqas, cite proudly that at least their women can drive and vote.

Nonetheless, the last few decades have witnessed monumental strides for women’s rights in Saudi Arabia: public education has been made available to women since the 1960s, and they now comprise over half of college graduates. Women have permission to work, although they only represent 14% of the current workforce. Furthermore, in 2011, King Abdullah announced that women would also be allowed to vote and run in municipal elections for positions in the Majlis Al-Shura (a government advisory group), although not before 2015. For the first time in history, a Saudi woman was even sent to the 2012 Olympic Games in London.

There is a catch, however, to all of it: male guardians (fathers, brothers, husbands) still choose whether the women in their families can pursue education, work, travel, who they marry, and whether they can seek needed medical attention. Women must still be accompanied by male relatives when they leave the house, must adhere to strict dress codes; and of course, Saudi Arabia remains the only country in the world where they are still not allowed to drive. Moreover, laws to protect victims of rape and domestic abuse are weak and insufficient at best.

The status of women in Saudi Arabia has historically been systematic and institutionalized: expectations and exclusion are formally incorporated, upheld, enforced (and deviations punished) via the legal framework. More so than the actual status of women which is certainly in itself deplorable, this institutional aspect is perhaps what has encouraged such widespread and eager criticism of Saudi practices: during this more enlightened era, it is wrong to criticize the culture of another people, but it is always acceptable to criticize their government.

However, institutions are culturally embedded and this may pose an even bigger challenge to progress than the laws themselves. For example, the October 26, 2013 “Driving Protest” inspired men like Sheikhs Nasser al-Omar and Mohammed al-Nujaimi to quickly organize and voice their concerns to the King. These men fear that further extending rights to women will lead to the overall moral debasement of Saudi society and may also have long-lasting political consequences. Behind these fears, the suspicion persists that Western imperialism, and perhaps even an intentional attempt by foreign powers to weaken the Kingdom, lurks underneath progressive platforms. Consequently, not only are activists socially persecuted, stalked and threatened, success at organizing and protesting is often swiftly met with indefinite periods of incarceration.

Surprisingly, many of the kingdom’s women quietly back the rightist hardliners. Some have even formed women’s groups to guard against the evils of Western culture penetrating and defiling the Kingdom’s values and politics. While there are activists within the country, their inability to gain popular support over the years and orchestrate a mass protest demonstrates how deeply ingrained conservative traditions are throughout most of Saudi society.

Interestingly, even activists such as 60 year old psychologist Madiha al-Ajroush state that they “don’t want to break any laws,” while pursuing their agenda. Thus, it appears that even the rebels have not broken free of the culture of acquiescence long imposed on women via Saudi traditions. Nor do they seem to be in a hurry to divorce such values as they pursue progressive reforms.

Furthermore, as the Saudi brand of Islam is almost indistinguishable from the local culture, dissatisfaction with change often surfaces as accusations of un-Islamic behavior. For instance, Princess Reema Bint Bandar al-Saud, who runs a Harvey Nichols Department store in Riyadh, recently received a phone call from an irate customer regarding the Princess’s choice to play music in the store. The complaint came from one of her most frequent shoppers-a woman who has spent thousands of dollars during each of her many visits.

Princess Reema decided to do away with the music but has continued to push for something even more controversial: building a staff of female employees. While the Princess believes women’s empowerment and inclusion are imperative for the Kingdom’s future prosperity, the women who work for her are frequently driven by more immediate economic needs. For them, joining the workforce generally is not a political statement, act of rebellion, or even a matter of pride. In fact, they and their families often hide the truth from others like teenagers hide tattoos from their parents. The laws may have relaxed, but the taboos remain strong.

Amusingly, conservatives may be right to worry about Western imperialism shaping Saudi culture and politics, albeit not through the direct and targeted interference by foreign governments that the Sheiks have generally feared. Travel, education abroad, social media, and satellite television have proven to be highly effective vectors for transferring cultural values. As this 21st century form of imperialism has resulted from simply opening channels for information exchange as well as increased mobility across borders, it is more difficult to combat. War cannot be waged against some foreign “other” as the perpetrators are the country’s own citizens.

For example, Princess Reema’s father served as ambassador to the United States for 17 years: she herself grew up in Washington D.C. and attended George Washington University. Her American upbringing and education has no doubt influenced her outlook and drive for strengthening the role of women in Saudi society. Likewise, women such as Madiha Al-Ajroush and the others who participated in the Driving Protest, learned how to drive and obtained their licenses abroad.

Of course, a few rebellious princesses and well-to-do professionals will not be enough to precipitate constitutional changes. Before any laws pass, cultural values must shift at a more popular level. Fortunately for the rebels, it does appear that exposure to the norms and practices of other cultures is slowly shaking the rigid adherence to traditions which has characterized the nation’s men, but more importantly, women, for so long.

Meanwhile, the activists continue to have humble goals. They are neither looking for a revolution, nor for an aggressive campaign launched by sympathizers from neighboring and distant nations to help their cause. They do believe, however, that a new generation that has wholeheartedly embraced the global culture of hashtags and retweets can ultimately bring about the progress they have so long waited for.

February 24, 2014 0 comment

Asia Featured The International Economy Uncategorized Women's Rights

China’s Housing Market: It’s More Than Just a Bubble

written by thegeneration

By Tina Kim
Editor

Often hailed as the economic spotlight of the world, China has enjoyed its robust growth in manufacturing, waves of foreign investments, and increasing economic power. In recent months the media have been covering stories indicating a looming housing bubble threatening to stagnate the growth of China’s economy. Reports have highlighted China’s high housing prices, millions of vacant apartments, and tax measures from the government to contain the housing bubble. One of the most striking examples has been “ghost cities,” entire developments of luxury apartments and high-end shopping malls completely empty of residents. Meanwhile, housing prices have supposedly skyrocketed while real estate development has stalled—allowing construction, steel and cement production, and furniture and interior manufacturing to come to a halt. Will China’s rapid urbanization and growth finally come to an end?

UCLA Professor of Urban Planning Paavo Monkkonen says a housing bubble is not the right way to frame China’s current housing market. Although high housing prices may be the case for large cities such as Shanghai or Beijing, there are lower prices in areas where there is not as much economic activity. Similar to the U.S. and elsewhere, the high prices are relative to the location: the closer to the hub of the city, the more expensive, and the farther away, the cheaper. Rather than high housing prices, limited investment opportunities and income inequality are greater explanations for unaffordable housing.

China is generally a “savings” oriented nation and has one of the highest savings rates in the world. According to Forbes, this fact may reflect the cultural preference for sons; “about half of the increase in the savings rate of the last 25 years can be attributed to the rise in the sex ratio imbalance.” One hundred and twenty-two boys are born for every 100 girls today, which means one of five Chinese men will not marry. As a result, men have tried to become more “competitive” bachelors by increasing their savings and owning an apartment.

However, there is constant insecurity from the cost of health care, education, and age-old pensions that may change in the future despite these savings. The natural reaction would be to invest one’s earnings. But for an individual in China’s middle and working class, there are very limited options. The government sets interest rates for banks, which yield very little return. As a result, individuals have turned to buying second or third apartments in order to secure their future. However, as more people began investing in real estate, prices have risen. In response, the Chinese government issued a 20% capital gains tax on sales of second homes in Shanghai (and later throughout the country) to discourage real estate investment and dampen fears of a housing bubble.

Interestingly, many couples have gone as far as divorcing to circumvent the tax. While remaining divorced on paper, couples would live as a married couple to buy a second home. But this does not fully explain why individuals would invest in developments of ghost cities, where there are no tenants or returns on investment, or pay for infrastructure like a new subway or terminal, where there are no people.

Monkkonen, who has taught at the University of Hong Kong, explains that ten years ago, this same phenomenon occurred. Local Chinese governments in the past built massive terminals, roads, high-speed railways and other infrastructure at the edges of cities. For a few years, these areas would remain empty, but ten years later, people would eventually occupy to a point where the government needed to build more.

People from rural areas moving to cities have primarily fueled this expansion. At the end of 2011, 691 million people were living in urban areas and about 657 million were still left in the rural areas. With a large supply of rural migrants, the expanding infrastructure and ghost cities are literally developments years ahead of their time, waiting for these people to fill the streets and sustain economic growth. However, at some point, China will run out of rural migrants moving to cities.

“So far everything has been about growth,” Monkkonen explains. “But eventually the expansion is going to stop and the whole way that cities get money is going to disappear or get very limited. They have to learn new ways to get money or else there’s going to be a huge disaster.”

The new property taxes, therefore, may be a transition for local governments to obtain new sources of revenue other than through expanding cities. Moreover, a new wave of tax reforms may also indicate a greater and ubiquitous problem in China’s economy: income inequality.

The gap between rural farmers and the rural elite has contributed greatly to this income gap. According to the New York Times, half of China’s 1.3 billion people live on incomes “less than a third of those in cities,” but “many outside analysts say [income inequality] has actually gotten worse, making China among the world’s most unequal societies.” New tax reforms and taxes are thus attempting to bring greater access to social programs to the poor and elderly. China’s new rural pension has added over 240 million people since 2009 and in 2011 over 55% of adults had pensions. However, China’s funding for pensions and the overall welfare system has been drastically underfunded. In some rural areas, pensions are as low as 55 yuan (about $8.75) per month.

“Welfare spending has been inadequate, amounting to about half the level of comparable middle-income countries,” as stated in the Wall Street Journal. In addition, there are more than 200 million migrant workers in cities who are systematically blocked from obtaining social services and jobs (despite cities’ high dependence on rural migration). This system, called Hukou, continues to divide income levels between the rural and urban people. Moreover, as rural migration continues and urban populations expand, the issue of affordable housing has become an increasing problem.

In Beijing, 2 million people of its 20 million population live in apartment-style bomb shelters underground. These are informal markets, with landlords and advertisement in websites for people attempting to find affordable housing in the city. The 2 million individuals are drivers, waiters, students (estimated at 30%), and people of lower income. A new policy in Beijing has ordered the eventual eviction of these residents, sometimes referred to as the “rat population,” according to Professor of Urban Planning at MIT Annette Kim’s research in Beijing.

China has taken measures to address income inequality; however, social programs have been significantly underfunded and the rural migrants in cities have been marginalized from social programs and services. Moreover, a more fundamental method to address inequality would be to invest and improve the livelihood of the younger generation. Due to China’s one-child policy, there is a greater burden for only children to someday financially support and look after their elderly parents. According to Brookings, “In 2010, there were 116 million people aged 20 to 24 and by 2020, the number will fall by 20% to 94 million;” however, the number of the elderly, which is already greater than the youth population, is projected to increase to 240 million by 2020.

Greater access to affordable housing, more investment opportunities, and social programs for lower income and the elderly must occur to secure China’s future middle and working classes and maintain China’s growth. Sensational policies such as building glamorous infrastructure, tackling corruption scandals, and containing the “housing bubble” may be helpful to a degree. However, for China—and any other country for that matter—its future economic power lies within the productivity of the younger generation, not in its buildings. China’s youth is the country’s greatest asset and will be the country’s greatest impediment if its government fails to recognize them its most sustainable investment.

Facts and figures from Forbes, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, The Economist, Bloomberg, CBS News, a personal interview with UCLA Professor of Urban Planning Paavo Monkkonen, and a guest lecture by MIT Professor of Urban Planning Annette Kim.

April 18, 2013 8 comments

Thatcher-Peace-John Minihan-Getty Images-worldnews-nbcnews

Europe Featured Security Security and Conflict Uncategorized Women's Rights

Thatcher’s gone

written by thegeneration

by Brad Rowe
Editor

Thatcher is gone.

Margaret Thatcher, former Prime Minister of Great Britain died April 8, 2013 at the age of 87. She was a controversial leader who had a major impact on not only her own country but on the course of international events as well.

Thatcher was a neoliberal, along with Reagan and German Chancellor Helmut Kohl. These “free marketeers” privatized businesses, cut taxes, broke unions and demonstrated military might. Because of her no-nonsense leadership style, a Soviet journalist dubbed her the “Iron Lady.”

What may be her most lasting legacy was her abiding campaign against communism. Her time in office perfectly coincided with the fall of the Soviet sphere of authority over the world. Her relationship with the U.S. was famous, and, as President Barack Obama stated, “She helped restore the confidence and pride that has always been the hallmark of Britain at its best.”

Even her long time adversary, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev credited her with helping to end the Cold War, noting that “relations were complicated sometimes, not always fair, but serious and responsible on both parts…We managed to achieve mutual understanding after all.” He also told Interfax news agency, “Thatcher was a politician whose words carried great weight,” calling her death “sad news”.

Many questioned whether she was justified in sending her navy halfway around the world to reclaim the Falkland Islands from the Argentinians who had invaded. For that bold move, she is revered as a hero to the English and Falklanders alike.

Thatcher-Falklands-Hulton Archive : Getty Images

British Troops enter the Falklands -Hulton Archive – Getty Images

This is not the case in Argentina. They remember her as a war criminal who ordered an Argentinian ship to be sunk during that conflict. That day, 323 lives were lost. In all, over 600 Argentineans would pass during this conflict.

The silver lining to Argentina’s humiliating loss of the Falklands was that the military junta dictatorship in power was discredited and soon fell from power. This brought about a split from decades of state terrorism against leftists and socialists and signaled the return to democratic rule in Argentina.

United States President Ronald Reagan, Thatcher’s strongest ally, had backed a peace plan that called for Britain to step back from controlling the Falklands. Thatcher hated this and let him know it. She could not stand the way Washington coddled the authoritarian regime in Buenos Aires. She was unwavering. Even during one of her less popular times she famously said, “the lady does not turn.”

She was Britain’s first female Prime Minister who became known for sweeping away social supports that have yet to return. She was a brash trailblazer that shattered glass ceilings for generations of UK women to come.

Thatcher-Workers-Central Press via Getty Images

Thatcher meets with workers early in political career – Central Press via Getty Images

Many of the mining labor organizers in northern England were reported to be “raising a drink” to toast her passing – remembrance of Thatcher shutting down unprofitable mines and crushing the unions during the Miners Strike of 1984-85.

Thatcher was also famously known for being the grocer’s daughter who became a conservative icon. Few can argue that she did not have a huge impact on Britain and on the world. In keeping with her simple ways, her funeral on April 17 will not be a full-state affair, and the service will be followed by a private cremation.

Even this procession will not be without controversy, though. In protest, opponents have planned to turn their backs en masse as procession passes by. Ironically, one could imagine the feisty Thatcher would have approved of this kind of unapologetic demonstration of free speech.

April 14, 2013 0 comment

Global Health Security and Conflict Women's Rights

International Women’s Day 2013: Going Beyond Awareness

written by thegeneration

by Sara Pilgreen
Editor

Here we are again, 102 years since the inaugural celebration of International Women’s Day (IWD). It is no secret that women, who constitute half the world’s seven billion people, also comprise the majority of the world’s absolute poor. Moreover, they are paid significantly less than their male counterparts, are confronted with outrageous rates of domestic violence, and lack an equal presence in both politics and the boardroom. In spite of this it is common knowledge that women and men alike desire change.

This is not to say that progress has not been made in the past century. Take a look back to the Arab Spring in which Tunisian women have played a critical role in the uprising and continue the fight for equality. In Rwanda, women hold 45 of the 80 seats in Parliament, furthering the female fight for representation. Women in Jamaica are outpacing men in holding high-skilled jobs such as senior officials, legislators, and managers. Just as some see the election of President Barack Obama in the United States as a symbol of progressing equality for blacks in America, some may see these trends in Tunisia, Rwanda, or Jamaica as evidence of the end of the global gender gap. However, this is far from a reality, as this issue defies simple solutions and quick actions.

The realities of what social media can produce in an age of globalization are impressive, including open petitions denouncing brutal gang rape from India to the United States and viral videos that expose child labor. Yet, while social media provides vast exposure, we must ask ourselves whether instantaneous awareness helps or hurts. Campaigns drafting petitions, activists wearing red lipstick, women offering free cupcakes to note IWD – do these actions affect anything but a fleeting recognition in our conscious? While these gestures may have good intentions, they do not adequately honor those who founded this day and their reasoning for it: to help all women who desperately seek equality.

The U.N. boldly claims that for 2013, “A promise is a promise: Time for action to end violence against women.” Yes, much action is needed; however, what action will be taken? The responsibility of the media, political leaders, and individual citizens to challenge the inequalities and atrocities facing women is one place to begin. We need to recognize how such issues are framed. The perspectives of privileged citizens from developed nations, who may know little about the realities of the other half of the world beyond bite-size news clips and Facebook petitions, must change. The dehumanization of women occurs, in part, by lack of recognition that many well-intentioned citizens support global economic and political structures that perpetuate gender inequality and disempower the world’s women. The multifaceted aspects of such structures result from a confluence of sociocultural, situational, and personal factors. Global systems of inequality have existed for centuries and continue today, while we take part consciously or unconsciously. We have come to a point arguably worse than not knowing: becoming aware of an issue, yet being relatively dismissive. Perhaps we sign a petition, post on Facebook, or wear a specific color for a day. We are far enough removed from the immediate situation, yet feel content that our attention was held, if just for a second, to open our eyes to what has happened before closing them yet again to the reality.

Greater awareness and endless amounts of information regarding women around the world have thus created a paradox: yes, we may know about these issues, yet we do not act on them, save for re-tweeting someone else’s comment before posting an update of what we ate for breakfast. For example, we may concede that violence against women has structural determinants. Then what? As we process the distress we endure from reading about such violence, we enter an almost virtual world of inconsistencies, one where we forget to question the reasoning behind the structures in place, one in which we inadvertently support the system that encourages us to contribute to this paradox. Then, perhaps we agree on the comforting narrative that we, the strong open-minded citizens of the world, will see that progress is made through the assiduous application of the Western values we consider to be universal.

But how does short-circuit awareness impact the real problem, the end goal being the cessation of violence against women worldwide? This indefinite loop of awareness – through 24-hour news channels, endless sources of social media, and ceremonial days such as IWD – allows us to acknowledge instances of rape in India, sweatshop abuses in Asia or child-bride trafficking in Pakistan. Yet, we are rarely attentive to the complexity of those abuses. We certainly do not contemplate what material conditions underpin the world’s structural violence against women, and thus, social change cannot materialize in a way that actually provides sustainable alteration to the structures that perpetuate such violence. In order for real action and reform to occur, we must analyze and interrogate the structures historically and currently in place. From there, individually and collectively, as countries and continents, we will realize that structural change is needed to ameliorate the gender disparity and end violence against women. Yes, we must be aware, yes, we must question. More importantly though, we must not only process our distress and give someone a free cupcake; we must make the connection to take direct action, action called for by the U.N.

Facts and figures from The World Bank, United Nations, and Aljazeera.

Sara Pilgreen received her BA in Psychology and Communications from University of Hawaii, Hilo, in 2004. She then went on to serve in the Peace Corps in the Republic of Vanuatu where she focused on gender and development while teaching English. Before entering the combined MSW/PhD program at UCLA, Sara completed her MA at Teachers College — Columbia University in clinical psychology. Currently, Sara is in her second year of the MSW program and first year of the PhD program at Luskin School of Public Affairs.

March 7, 2013 8 comments

Asia Global Health The International Economy Women's Rights

The Next Global Dilemma: An Aging World

written by thegeneration

by Tina Kim
Co-Editor

The next great crisis of our generation may not be global warming, nuclear attacks, looming deficits, or any pending apocalypses. It’s babies—specifically, not enough babies. 97 percent of the world’s population now lives in countries where fertility rates are declining, according to the Wall Street Journal. In 60 years, the global population will begin to decrease and the world will lose its most valuable and fundamental resource: human capital. For the past century, large populations have brought innovations to technology and science and provided the manpower to drive the economy. Moreover, a plethora of taxpayers have allowed governments to fund healthcare, defense, education, and all other spending. However, at some point when the world transitions into a situation where the old largely outnumber the young, we will come face to face with an immeasurable problem.

Throughout the world, countries have already faced the consequences of low fertility rates, varying culturally from region to region. In Asia, “tiger” nations such as China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore have fertility rates well below the 2.1 replacement rate. The “tiger” culture of an intensely competitive workplace and lifestyle leave individuals without much spare time while depriving them of the disposable income necessary to enjoy their lives and raise a child.

“Most of my friends are not married,” a 35-year-old female civil servant in Singapore said in an article from Forbes. “They don’t want to be single but they are too busy with their work commitment. My friends are consumed by work. Money, status, prestige, climbing the ladder. You expect things to change when you get older but it doesn’t. The calculation just doesn’t work out.”

Joel Kotkin, author of The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050, explains this issue as an “economic and spiritual” problem. Economically, the high costs of living and the time and money consuming nature of child rearing are seen as major roadblocks. In addition, unlike in the U.S. (with a few exceptions like New York City), many of these Asian countries have high density apartment living. In high density areas, traffic congestion, overloaded public transport, higher rates of crime, higher costs of basic products and services, and general overcrowding are everyday occurrences. Kotkin, who has interviewed and researched individuals living in Singapore and other East Asian countries, stated that spiritually, people who live in these conditions are reflective of their difficult lives. For these individuals, the growing pessimism towards the future has given them a dismal outlook for the next generation, which has led many to not have children.

In 2009, 20 percent of women between the ages of 30 and 39 chose to remain childless; it is estimated that in some East Asian societies, up to a third of all women will remain childless. In addition, as women become more educated, many have pursued their own careers, which have prevented marriage or child rearing. As a result, women are no longer able to take on the cultural expectation, including that of being the sole caretaker of the child. Countries in Southern Europe, which have had similar cultural views, have also had significantly lower fertility rates compared to their Northern European counterparts.

In Northern Europe, greater male participation in child rearing has offset much of the difficulties faced by other countries. Such cultural differences have influenced government policies and have led to higher fertility rates. An article by the New York Times states that, “many countries with greater gender equality have a greater social commitment to day care and other institutional support for working women, which gives those women the possibility of having a second or third child.” For instance, Scandinavian countries provide state support for having a child and guarantee paternity leaves, which gives women the opportunity to work while raising a baby. More importantly, since both parents are more likely to work, financially, the couple is better able to handle obstacles such as high living costs.

In response, many governments in Asia have instituted measures such as state-funded childcare to encourage parenthood. However, according to Kotkin, these state-funded initiatives will only marginally increase fertility rates. The fundamental determinant in encouraging people to have children would be to improve the difficult living conditions people deal with on a daily basis; addressing problems such as high commodity costs, high college tuitions (and debt), rising housings costs, and in some cases environmental pollution, would be more effective in convincing parents to have children.

To make up for these decreases in fertility rates, countries such as Germany, Japan, and the U.S. have largely depended on immigration to offset decreasing birth rates. For example, Germany attracted migrants to establish a highly skilled and productive labor force in order to create an export oriented market. Thus, Germany is able to pay for welfare and provide social programs that many Eurozone countries have struggled to provide. In contrast, debt-ridden Southern European countries such as Spain, Italy, and Greece offer no incentives or job prospects for people to immigrate. By depending on tourism and real estate, when the economy collapsed due to the housing bubble and the financial crisis of 2007, many of the foreign investors fled these countries, leading to great debts.

But even for Germany and other countries that count on imported labor, the dependence on immigration may not be an option in the future. In the next century, the world’s population will decline and so will the surplus of people in Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America. Even if regions such as Africa and India do have surpluses of people, there is the issue of having an educated and skilled workforce. According to UNESCO, South and West Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa have among the lowest literacy rates in the world, at about 63 percent.

Ultimately, Kotkin predicts that the “diminished labor force and consumer base” will eventually “slow economic growth and limit opportunities for business expansion.” However, there are predictions that the need for human manpower will be replaced with innovations in technology and economic growth will continue. But how many more Steve Jobs can come from a significantly smaller population?

Politically, the smaller youth population will have many problems. On one level, the youth will have less political power and representation, as seniors will be the majority of voters. A UN report states that in 2050 the number of people 60 years and older will increase by a factor of 2.6 (from 784 million to more than 2 billion). These seniors will need social security and healthcare, but how will a disproportionately smaller workforce handle paying for these programs? These individuals have the burden of paying today’s and future government debts, along with healthcare and social security for seniors as well.

Already, there have been protests against governments cutting social programs and raising taxes. With income inequality increasing and the population decreasing, there may be a future where seniors will not be able to count on state support. Governments around the world have become aware of their impending demographic cliffs. However, the general trend among political figures around the world has been to implement austerity measures, which ultimately ignores addressing these core issues. Austerity will no longer work in a future of an unbalanced population, increased income inequity, and a world of reduced economic growth.

Whether governments do anything to address these issues or not, the social, economic, and political consequences are imminent and they will affect people on a global scale. How exactly will this unfold? This generation will just have to wait and see.

Facts and figures obtained from Forbes, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, UNESCO, the United Nations, and a personal interview with Joel Kotkin.

Tina Kim is a second year Communications major and Urban Planning and Public Policy double minor at UCLA. She is co-editor of The Generation.

February 18, 2013 23 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts

UCLA's Foreign Affairs Magazine

Women’s Rights

Trump Administration Threatens the Future of Global Female Contraceptive Use

The Double-Edged Sword of Female Leadership

Cutting Them Close: Female Genital Mutilation Today

Domestic Violence in Ghana: Socially Accepted and Judicially Trivialized

Trust Women, Improve Water Supply

Tweets to Toyotas: Slow but Steady Progress for Women’s Rights in Saudi Arabia

China’s Housing Market: It’s More Than Just a Bubble

Thatcher’s gone

International Women’s Day 2013: Going Beyond Awareness

The Next Global Dilemma: An Aging World