Climate change, water,
sanitation and energy insecurity: Invisibility of people with disabilities
Gregor
Wolbring, University of Calgary, Faculty of Medicine, Dept. of Community Health
Sciences, Specialization Community Rehabilitation and Disability Studies
Verlyn
Leopatra, University of Calgary, Faculty of Medicine, Bachelor of Health
Sciences student.
Abstract
The problems
associated with climate change, energy scarcity, water and sanitation
insecurity and severe natural disasters are at the forefront of both national
and international policy agendas. Increasingly, people with disabilities are
those most critically affected by these environmental challenges; however,
literature addressing the implications for people with disabilities remains
scarce. The well-being of people with disabilities is threatened by this
invisibility. Here, we present survey results that suggest how women, children,
people with disabilities, indigenous people, ethnic minorities, and industry in
both high and low income countries are perceived to experience these
environmental challenges. Respondents ranked people with disabilities between
first and third in regards to experiencing climate change impact, energy
scarcity and water and sanitation insecurity. Our results emphasize the need to
make the impacts of climate change, energy scarcity and water and sanitation
insecurity experienced by people with disabilities a priority for local and
global discourses, public policy formation and academic research.
Climate change, water,
sanitation and energy insecurity: Invisibility of people with disabilities
Introduction
A 2002 World
Bank report acknowledges that climate change is impacting poverty reduction and
development efforts, that climate change related problems are increasing and
that the negative effect of climate change is severely felt by poor people and
poor countries (Sperling Frank (Managing Editor) World Bank, 2002). Poor people
also experience more energy insecurity (Kanagawa & Nakata, 2007; Oldfield,
2011; Sovacool & Brown, 2010), and diminished access to sanitation (Bosch,
Hommann, Rubio, Sadoff, & Travers, 2001; Brooks, 2011)
According to
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, “Persons with disabilities experience higher
rates of poverty” (UN News Centre, 2011; See also Beresford, 1996; Elwan, 1999;
Rosano, Mancini, & Solipaca, 2009; Stapleton, O’Day, Livermore, &
Imparato, 2006; Biyanwila, 2011; Eide & Ingstad, 2011; Mont & Cuong,
2011). Wolfensohn, a former president of the World Bank, stated: “Eliminating
world poverty and meeting the Millennium Development Goals is unlikely to be
achieved unless the rights and needs of disabled people are taken into
account.” (James D.Wolfensohn, 2002). UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon stated
the same in 2008 (United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, 2008).
Citing a link
between poverty and climate change , energy scarcity and water and sanitation insecurity,
numerous documents (Confalonieri et al., 2007; United Nations Development
Programme, 2007; Davis, Hansen, & Mincin, 2011; World Water Assessment
Programme, 2006; World Water Assessment Programme, 2009; Dowell, Tappero, &
Frieden, 2011; Nelson & Naa Dedei Agbey, 2005; Boyd et al., 2008; Comim,
2008; McFarlane, 2010) acknowledge groups such as women, children, and
indigenous people as uniquely affected by climate change. We also understand
that people with disabilities are especially vulnerable to climate change,
energy scarcity, water and sanitation insecurity (CARE International, 2008).
However, literature on potential implications for people with disabilities
remains scarce.
For more than
a decade, climate change, disaster insecurity, water and sanitation insecurity,
and energy insecurity have been acknowledged as salient public health issues
(Jara, 2009; Haines, Kovats, Campbell-Lendrum, & Corvalan, 2006; Hartwell,
2010; McFarlane, 2010; Ebi, 2008; Morris, 2010; Sheffield & Landrigan, 2011;
Bush et al., 2011; Longstreth, 1999; Noji, 2005; Dowell et al., 2011; Sorenson,
Morssink, & Campos, 2011; Haines et al., 2007; Penn, 1990; Hanlon &
McCartney, 2008; Gohlke et al., 2011; Teelucksingh & Poland, 2011;
Oldfield, 2011). However disabled people remain, largely, unaccounted for in
WHO reports on climate change; for example a 2009 report on climate change and
vulnerable populations fails to include people with disabilities or disabled
people. Instead, using a purely medical terminology that excludes many people
with disabilities the report states: “Health effects are expected to be more
severe for elderly people and people with infirmities or pre-existing medical
conditions”, (World Health Organization (WHO), 2009). Furthermore, a key goal for
the 2011 Durban
Declaration on Climate and Health is to “Actively include the participation
and empowerment of youth, women and indigenous peoples in the climate change
processes.” (International health leaders, 2011). While these international
assessments acknowledge certain demographic traits such as age, gender, and
ethnicity they fail to acknowledge certain social groups such as people with
disabilities. Indeed, failure to acknowledge people with disabilities pervades
the discourse on climate and health; a continued omission that threatens their
well-being.
Numerous
surveys and reports related to climate change, disaster, energy scarcity, water
and sanitation insecurity have been written to inform government policies and
to guide their implementation (Practical Action, 2010; Wolbring, 2009).
However, consistent with the aforementioned international assessments these
surveys fail to consider people with disabilities. Indeed, simply searching
Google and Google Scholar we found no surveys aimed at ascertaining how
non-disabled people perceive the situation of people with disabilities in
regards to climate change vulnerability and access to energy, water and
sanitation problems. One Canadian survey conducted in 2008 asked the open
question: “What types of Canadians, if any, do you think might be most likely
to experience the negative effects of climate change?” The group perceived to
be the most vulnerable to the negative effect of climate change were the
elderly (45%) followed by children (33%) and people with illness (14%) (Akerlof
et al., 2010). However the survey was concerned with health risks of climate
change and people with illnesses differ in many ways from people with
disabilities, a group that includes many people who have no acute illness.
Excluding
disabled persons from the climate and health discourse can obstruct
well-intended efforts. For example, various attempts to implement water
solutions for disabled people have repeatedly failed because disabled people
were not consulted as to what the needs are and the solutions could be
(Matsebe, 2006).
The omission
of people with disabilities may be for the following reason: Firstly, decision
makers or influential groups in a given discourse may simply decide that other
social groups should be acted on first, whilst knowing that people with
disabilities are impacted. Alternatively the lack of acknowledgment of people
with disabilities within these discourses could stem from a lack of recognition
that people with disabilities face unique problems.
In this
article, we present findings from our survey on perceived impact of climate
change, energy scarcity, water and sanitation insecurity on women, children,
indigenous groups, ethnic minorities and industry in both high and low income
countries and how this impact on people with disabilities may be disparately
perceived.
Methods
Survey Instrument:
To generate
data on perspectives of climate change, energy scarcity, water and sanitation
insecurity for people with disabilities we used the online Survey Monkey platform to administer a
non-probability, exploratory survey.
Survey Implementation:
We used
convenience snowball sampling to recruit participants. Ethics approval was
granted by the University of Calgary, Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board.
The survey link was emailed to course instructors at Calgary, who notified
students of the opportunity to participate. The survey was further distributed
to the Eanth-l list serve, a mailing list dedicated to the scholarly discussion
of the field of ecological/environmental anthropology, and to NGO list serves
relevant to the survey topic.
Survey Content:
The survey
consisted of 43 Likert-scale questions, as well as opinion rating-scale
questions that encouraged respondents to consider the following:
a) think about
various aspects of energy generation;
b) think about
various issues of water insecurity;
c) think about
various issues of climate change;
d) what people
think of ways to make hydrocarbon extraction (e.g. oil and gas) from oil sands
and coal beds more environmental friendly by:
d1) minimizing the
environmental impact of oil sands production;
d2) by decreasing
the use of water, reducing greenhouse gas and hydrogen sulphide emissions;
d3) by enhancing
the production of clean burning natural gas from coal beds.
The survey had
five parts. Part A gathered demographic data; Part B covered energy issues;
Part C covered water issues; Part D covered climate change issues; and Part E
covered policy issues.
Survey
respondents were asked to rank people with disabilities, industry, women,
ethnic minorities, children, and indigenous people in high and low income
countries in the order the respondents felt they might be negatively affected
by climate change, energy scarcity, and water and sanitation insecurity.
Data Compilation and Analysis:
242
respondents completed and submitted the survey between October 2010 and March
2011 of which 148 (61.2%) filled out the complete survey. Response rates to
specific questions varied as it was not mandatory to answer every question. The
majority of respondents were Canadians between the ages of 18-65 years. A
database was automatically generated by Survey Monkey. Data were exported as
csv and pdf files for subsequent analysis. Descriptive statistics were analysed
for both demographic variables and content-related questions. Results were
cross-tabulated based on respondents’ occupation (University Student n=120;
University Researcher/Teacher n=50; Technical Expert n=25; NGO/CSO n=25;
International Organization n=12; Industry n=14;
Government n=11, the three countries with the
highest counts (Canada n=97; U.S.A. n=42; Iran n=18 (all of these respondents
currently reside in Canada ), gender (male n=83; female n=134) and age (
18-30 n=109; 30-65
n=92; over 65 n=11) (table 1). As this is a non-probability sample no tests of
significance were performed (The Advisory Panel on Online Public Opinion Survey
Quality, 2011).
Results
Respondents (table
1) who believed that energy (n=135) (table 4), water and sanitation (n=109)
(table 5) and climate insecurity (n=99) (table 3) exists were asked to rank the
following groups in high-income countries (HIC) and low-income countries (LIC)
(people with disabilities, industry, children, women, ethnic minorities and
indigenous people) in accordance with being negatively affected by climate
change and experiencing lack of access to clean water, sanitation and energy
(table 2-5) with the first place ranking indicating being the most negatively
impacted.
Results of survey: Difference
between HIC and LIC
For all groups
more respondents felt that the impact was more negative in LIC versus HIC
(energy insecurity: n max of 40 for HIC and n=99 for LIC; water and sanitation
insecurity: n max= 45 for HIC and n=93 for LIC) and the severity (weighted
means of a 1 to 10 scale) and respondents felt that climate change insecurity
was less an issue in HIC (5.x than LIC (7.x) (table 3). Absolute numbers
obtained regarding people with disabilities for example reflect large
differences between HIC versus LIC. For instance only 9.2% believed that people
with disabilities have sanitation access issues in high-income countries versus
the 56.9% who believed sanitation access issues exist for people with
disabilities in low-income countries (table 5).
Results of survey: Ranking
between groups
Group rankings
of people with disabilities are as follows: related to problem with access to
energy (energy Insecurity) (HIC/LIC) Third/First respectively (table 2 and 4);
severity of climate impact (climate insecurity) HIC/LIC Fifth/second (table 2
and 3); problem with access to clean water (clean water insecurity) (HIC/LIC)
Second/Third (table 2 and 5); problem with access to drinking water (drinking
water insecurity) (HIC/LIC) Third/First(table 2 and 5); and problems with
access to sanitation (sanitation insecurity) (HIC/LIC) Third/Second (table 2
and 5). Often people with disabilities tied with other groups for a given
ranking, i.e. people with disabilities of HIC were tied for second spot in
regards to clean water access problems with ethnic minorities and children of
HIC (table 5). Indigenous people ranked first in most categories (table 3- 5).
In examining
the ranking according to our different demographics of respondents (table 2) we
see some variations in rankings, however the absolute numbers are often so
close that there is not much of a difference in absolute numbers between
various ranks.
Of the groups from which the respondents could choose, many were judged as
similar in regard to the question and the ranking with ‘industry’ the only one ranked
significantly below the others. Clearly, rankings alone only tell part of the
story
Results of survey: Ranking of
climate change, energy, water and sanitation insecurity
Water and
sanitation related issues are seen as less pressing compared with energy and
climate change (table 3-5).
Discussion
This study
represents a preliminary tep toward a more detailed investigation of
perspectives, experiences, and needs of people with disabilities in regards to
climate change, water, sanitation and energy insecurity .
In regards to
HIC, people with disabilities were mainly viewed as experiencing less energy
insecurity (table 4), sanitation insecurity (table 5), as well as being less
impacted by climate change (table 3) than indigenous people, ethnic minorities
and sometimes other groups the respondents could choose from. This is troubling
given that the accessibility to washrooms for people with disabilities in HIC
is variable and disputable (see for example recent video presented at the
Global Youth Assembly (Leopatra, 2011a; Leopatra, 2011b)). Disabled people are
also disproportionately poor .
For LIC,
respondents perceived the problems for people with disabilities in regards to
climate change, energy, water, and sanitation insecurity on the level of other
social groups such as women and indigenous people often ranking them first or
second on insecurity experience level (table 2-5). Furthermore, while
disability has clearly been omitted from much mainstream discourse on climate
change, recent statements by disabled people’s groups demand greater visibility for people with disabilities.
For instance, the International Disability and Development Consortium
(International Disability and Development Consortium, 2008) calls for:
1. Full
recognition and implementation of UNCRPD – specifically Article 32 on
International Cooperation, to facilitate better links between climate change
initiatives and persons with disabilities, their families, and their
organisations.
2. Disability
to be included in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) work plan 2009
3. Support for
the notion that new treaties under the UNFCCC umbrella should ensure that
action taken in the context of adaptation, mitigation and technology transfer
are in compliance with ALL existing human rights frameworks, including the
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
4. Persons
with disabilities to be included among the civil society actors contributing to
the negotiation and review processes.
5. Disaster
risk reduction methodologies and tools for scaling-up purposes, in particular
for risk assessment and monitoring and early warning systems, are accessible
and inclusive
6. Sufficient
funding to support these mechanisms
(International
Disability and Development Consortium, 2008)
Regarding
water and sanitation insecurity, again despite the omission of disability from
mainstream discourses, there are important recent documents which have called
for the inclusion of people with disabilities in water and sanitation policy
discussions (Fisher & WEDC, 2009; Jones & Reed, 2005; Jones, Reed,
& Bevan, 2003; Jones, Parker, & Reed, 2002; Pradhan & Jones, 2010;
Reed, 2010; Water for all, 2006; WaterAid, 2008; WEDC, 2005) (OneWorld South
Asia, 2008). However, the area of energy scarcity remains effectively void of
any voice for disabled persons.
The World Report
on Disability (World Health Organization, 2011) gives the following
recommendations:
Recommendation
1: Enable access to all mainstream policies, systems and services
Recommendation
2: Invest in specific programs and services for people with disabilities
Recommendation
3: Adopt a national disability strategy and plan of action
Recommendation
4: Involve people with disabilities
Recommendation
5: Improve human resource capacity
Recommendation
6: Provide adequate funding and improve affordability
Recommendation
7: Increase public awareness and understanding of disability
Recommendation
8: Improve disability data collection
Recommendation
9: Strengthen and support research on disability
Given that the
random sample of respondents in our survey acknowledged the challenges faced by
disabled people in regards to impacts of climate change, energy scarcity, water
and sanitation insecurity, and acknowledged that disabled people should be
included in local and global discourses on impacts of climate change, energy
scarcity and water and sanitation insecurity, it is troubling that disabled
persons remain excluded from high level public policy formation and academic
research. Our results suggest that omission of disabled persons from global
reports is not due to lack of awareness of vulnerabilities faced by disabled
persons.
So why does this vulnerable group remain excluded?
One
possibility is that disabled people are considered marginal, and thus subject
to limited degrees of accommodation provided by prevailing non-disabled people.
In other words, the able world sets the social and physical parameters in which
all people, including disabled people, are expected to navigate their way and
to operate within. This is the dynamic that leads to the invisibility of people
with disabilities in other discourses, namely the deployment of a version of
ableism where the so called non-disabled people expect certain abilities from
disabled people (Carlson, 2001; Finkelstein, 1996; Mitchell & Snyder, 1997;
Olyan, 2009; Rose, 2003; Schipper, 2006; Fiona A.K.Campbell, 2001; Overboe,
2007) with the accompanying disablism (Miller, Parker, & Gillinson, 2004),
the unwillingness to adapt to the needs of people that do not have certain
abilities.
Arguments used
to demand and justify the visibility of certain groups such as women in water
and sanitation discourse (Wolbring, 2011) suggests that the same form of
ableism and disablism is at play that plagues the involvement of people with
disabilities in many other discourses . Further, this ableism and
disablism, and the invisibility of disabled people in climate change, energy
scarcity, water and sanitation insecurity discourse can actually serve to
further impair people with disabilities. Thus the conversation has to change to
prevent further harm to disabled people .
Given that
poverty amplifies the impacts of climate change, energy scarcity, water and
sanitation insecurity, and given that people with disabilities experience
higher level of poverty, and that poverty is uniquely experienced by disabled
persons it is, therefore, necessary to push for comprehensive poverty reduction
strategies (Barder, 2009; MargaretWazakili, Mji, Dube, & MacLachlan, 2011;
Porter & Craig, 2004; Yeo & Moore, 2003; Eide & Ingstad, 2011).
However these poverty reduction strategies have to be a product of extensive
consultations with disabled people so that the strategies are of use to
disabled people.
Limitations:
Our results
are obtained from a non-probability, exploratory survey and, as such, are not
generalizable. Furthermore, our study focused on water and sanitation, energy
and climate change governance. Our main focus was not to examine issues
pertaining to people with disabilities; only three of the 43 questions covered
disabled people. As such the sampling strategy was focused on people who might
have an opinion on the other 40 questions and not necessarily on the impact of
climate change, energy scarcity, and water and sanitation insecurity on people
with disabilities.
Due to the
fact that the main objective of the study was not related to people with
disabilities we did not set out to clarify non-disabled respondents’
understanding of the term “people with disabilities”, we did not differentiate
in our survey between different groups of people with disabilities and finally
we did not seek responses from people with disabilities.
Future
research should examine why it is that disabled persons are not acknowledged in
discourses on impacts of climate change, energy scarcity, and water and
sanitation insecurity. Hence, we plan to focus on various categories of
disabled people, and to include responses from people with disabilities
regarding the impact of climate change, energy scarcity, and water and
sanitation insecurity as we expect that the situation will be different for
different groups of people with disabilities. This prospective research program
will allow a more comprehensive picture of perceptions about the impact of
climate change, energy scarcity, and water and sanitation insecurity of people
with disabilities.
Conclusions:
Despite
increasing awareness of issues associated with climate change, energy scarcity,
and water and sanitation insecurity, literature assessing their potential
implications for people with disabilities remains wanting. Our study
acknowledges a gap in the literature on climate change impact on disabled
persons, yet we suggest that respondents are aware that disabled people are
among the most vulnerable to climate change, energy scarcity, and water and
sanitation insecurity. We further submit that public policy and academic
discourses be made more inclusive and comprehensive by considering studies that
focus on the impact of climate change, energy scarcity, and water and
sanitation insecurity on people with disabilities.
Acknowledgment:
We thank
Christopher Powell for his comments on the paper
Tables
Table 1. Respondent Demographics
|
|
Number of confirmative
responses |
Percent (%) of all responses |
|
Gender (n=218) |
|
|
|
Male |
84 |
38.4 |
|
Female |
134 |
61.5 |
|
Country of Origin (n=218) |
|
|
|
First Three
n=157 Canada |
97 |
44.5 |
|
United
States |
42 |
19.3. |
|
Iran |
18 |
8.25 |
|
Other countries |
79 |
27.95 |
|
Age (n=217) |
|
|
|
below 18 |
5 |
2.3 |
|
18-30 |
109 |
50.2 |
|
30-65 |
92 |
42.4 |
|
over 65 |
11 |
5.1 |
|
Occupation (multiple
answers possible) (n=215) |
|
|
|
University
Student |
120 |
55.8 |
|
University
Researcher/Teacher |
50 |
23.3 |
|
Technical
Expert |
25 |
11.6 |
|
NGO/CSO |
24 |
11.2 |
|
Self
Employed |
23 |
10.7 |
|
Management |
15 |
7.0 |
|
Industry |
14 |
6.5 |
|
International
Organization |
12 |
5.6 |
|
Government |
11 |
5.1 |
|
Other |
29 |
13.3 |
*n values are
indicative of the number of participants who answered the question. Refusing to
answer and multiple answers to one question possible.
Table 2. Respondent rankings of climate
change, energy, clean water, drinking water and sanitation insecurity in high
income (HIC) and low income countries (LIC)
|
Respondent
Demographic |
Energy
Insecure (HIC/LIC) |
Climate
insecure HIC/LIC |
Clean
water insecurity (HIC* n=/LIC) |
Drinking
water insecure (HIC*/LIC) |
Sanitation
(HIC*/LIC) |
|
All
respondents |
Third/First |
Fifth/First |
Second shared with two more/ Third |
Third/First |
Third/ Second |
|
Students |
Third/First |
Fifth/First |
Sixth/Third |
Fourth/Second |
Fourth/ Second |
|
Academics |
Second/First |
Third/Second |
Third/First |
Second/Second |
Third/First |
|
Industry |
Second (together with all the other
groups )/First |
Fourth/ Second |
0 response /Second |
0 response /Second |
0 response /Second |
|
Government |
First/First |
Sixth/First |
Second/First |
Second/First |
Second/Second |
|
International
Organization |
Second/Third |
First/First |
First/First |
First/First |
First/First |
|
NGO |
First/Second |
Third/Third |
First/Second |
First/Second |
First/Second |
|
Technical
Expert |
Second/First |
Third/Third |
1response/ First |
1response/ First |
1response/ Third |
|
Male |
Third/First |
Fifth/First |
Second/First |
First/First |
Second/First |
|
Female |
Second/First |
Fourth/Second |
Fifth/ Fourth |
Second/First with three other groups |
Third/Second |
|
Age
18-30 |
Third/First |
Fifth/First |
Sixth/Third |
Second/ Second |
Fourth/ Second |
|
Age
30-65 |
Second/Second |
Fifth/Fifth |
Second/ Third |
Third/Fourth |
Third/Fourth |
|
Age
65 and over |
Third/Third |
Second/Fifth |
0 or 1 response/ Second |
0 or 1 response/ First |
0or 1 response/First |
|
Respondent
from US |
Second/Third (N=14 in LIC with first place n=18
indigenous people) |
Third/Third |
Sixth/Fourth with the respondents between first
and fourth only n=3 difference in LIC) |
Fourth/Fourth with the respondents
between first and fourth only n=3 difference in LIC) |
Sixth/Second shared with various
groups |
|
Respondents
from Canada |
Second/First (for LIC n=57 with
second spot indigenous people with n=47) |
Third/First |
Sixth/First (with four groups having
a difference of 2respondents 35v37 in LIC) |
Third/First |
Third/Second |
*overall low
number of respondents causes the ranking fluctuation within the HIC of water related
issues (see table 5 for non cross-tabbed total numbers)
Table 3. Respondent ranking of negative
climate change impacts on marginalized groups
|
|
No effect =0 |
10= biggest effect |
Weighted Means |
N= |
|
People with disabilities
in high income countries |
6.7% (6) |
22.2% (20) |
5.6 |
105 |
|
People with
disabilities in low income countries |
2.0% (2) |
46.9% (46) |
7.9 |
111 |
|
Industry in
high income countries |
3.3% (3) |
20.0% (18) |
5.8 |
104 |
|
Industry in low
income countries |
2.1% (2) |
34.7% (33) |
7.2 |
109 |
|
Women in
high income countries |
5.6% (5) |
20.2% (18) |
5.4 |
103 |
|
Women in low
income countries |
1.1% (1) |
45.3% (43) |
7.7 |
103 |
|
Ethnic
Minorities in high income countries |
3.3% (3) |
22.0% (20) |
5.9 |
104 |
|
Ethnic
Minorities in low income countries |
1.0% (1) |
46.4% (45) |
7.6 |
108 |
|
Children in
high income countries |
|
21.5% (20) |
5.8 |
109 |
|
Children in
low income countries |
1.0% (1) |
47.4% (46) |
7.8 |
111 |
|
Indigenous
People in high income countries |
2.2% (2) |
24.4% (22) |
6.4 |
103 |
|
Indigenous
People in low income countries |
2.0% (2) |
49.0% (48) |
7.8 |
109 |
*n values are indicative of the
number of participants who answered the question. Refusing to answer and
multiple answers to one question possible.
Table 4. Participant perspectives of
energy insecurity in the form of a lack of energy access (n=135=100%)
|
|
Number of confirmative “do not
have access” responses |
Percent
(%) of total responses |
|
People with disabilities in
high income countries |
39 |
28.9 |
|
People with disabilities in
low income countries |
101 |
74.8 |
|
Industry in high income
countries |
4 |
3.0 |
|
Industry in low income
countries |
62 |
45.9 |
|
Women in high income countries |
11 |
8.1 |
|
Women in low income countries |
85 |
63.0 |
|
Ethnic minorities in high
income countries |
40 |
29.6 |
|
Ethnic minorities in low
income countries |
93 |
68.9 |
|
Children in high income
countries |
16 |
11.9 |
|
Children in low income
countries |
85 |
63.0 |
|
Indigenous People in high
income countries |
49 |
36.3 |
|
Indigenous People in low
income countries |
98 |
72.6 |
|
Other |
11 |
8.1 |
**n values are indicative of the
number of participants who answered the question. Refusing to answer and
multiple answers to one question possible.
Table 5. Participant rankings of lack of
water access and water insecurity for various marginalized groups (n=109=100%)
|
|
Clean
Water |
Drinkable
Water |
Water
usable for other purposes |
Water
Sanitation |
Response
Count |
|
People
with disabilities in high income countries |
12.8%
(14) |
11.9%
(13) |
10.1%
(11) |
9.2%
(10) |
29 |
|
People
with disabilities in low income countries |
64.2% (70) |
67.8% (74) |
48.6% (53) |
56.9% (62) |
92 |
|
Industry
in high income countries |
9.2%
(10) |
8.25
% (9) |
8.2%
(9) |
3.66%
(4) |
22 |
|
Industry
in low income countries |
28.4%
(31) |
30.2%
(33) |
41.2%
(45) |
33.9%
(37) |
67 |
|
Women
People in high income countries |
11.9% (13) |
10.1% (11) |
9.2% (10) |
7.33%
(8) |
25 |
|
Women
People in low income countries |
63.3% (69) |
63.3% (69) |
49.5% (54) |
51.3% (56) |
84 |
|
Ethnic
Minorities in high income countries |
12.8% (14) |
12.8% (14) |
13.7% (15) |
11.0% (12) |
32 |
|
Ethnic
Minorities in low income countries |
63.3% (69) |
57.7% (63) |
44.9% (49) |
54.1% (59) |
86 |
|
Children
in high income countries |
12.8% (14) |
10.1% (11) |
10.1% (11) |
6.4% (7) |
25 |
|
Children
in low income countries |
66.0% (72) |
65.1% (71) |
46.7% (51) |
55.0% (60) |
87 |
|
Indigenous
People in high income countries |
23.8% (26) |
22.9% (25) |
23.8% (26) |
19.2% (21) |
45 |
|
Indigenous
People in low income countries |
68.8% (75) |
66.9% (73) |
54.1% (59) |
59.6% (65) |
93 |
**n values are indicative of the
number of participants who answered the question. Refusing to answer and
multiple answers to one question possible.
References:
Akerlof, K.,
DeBono, R., Berry, P., Leiserowitz, A., Roser-Renouf, C., Clarke, K. L. et al.
(2010). Public Perceptions of Climate Change as a Human Health Risk: Surveys of
the United States, Canada and Malta. International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 7(6), 2559-2606. doi:DOI 10.3390/ijerph7062559. Retrieved
from ISI:000279196000010
Barder, O.
(2009). What Is Poverty Reduction? Center for Global Development Working Paper No.170.
Beresford, P.
(1996). Poverty and Disabled People: challenging dominant debates and policies.
Disability
& Society, 11(4), 553-568.
Biyanwila, J.
(2011). Poverty and Disability in the Global South. Third World Quarterly, 32(8), 1537-1540.
Retrieved from Taylor & Francis.
Bosch, C.,
Hommann, K., Rubio, G. M., Sadoff, C., & Travers, L. (2001). Water,
sanitation and poverty. Draft chapter.Washington DC: World Bank.
Boyd, E.,
Osbahr, H., Ericksen, P., Tompkins, E., Lemos, M., & Miller, F. (2008).
Resilience and ‘Climatizing’ Development: Examples and policy implications. Development, 51(3),
390. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1533862111&Fmt=7&clientId=12520&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Brooks, T.
(2011). Beyond the Taboo: Achieving a Sustained Right to Water and Sanitation.
Retrieved from Malm+Â h+Âgskola/Kultur och samh+ñlle.
Bush, K. F.,
Frumkin, H., Kotha, S. R., Dhiman, R. C., Eisenberg, J., Sur, D. et al. (2011).
The Impact of Climate Change on Public Health in India: Future Research
Directions. Epidemiology,
22(1), S21. Retrieved from ISI:000285400800030
CARE
International. (2008). Humanitarian Implications of Climate Change Mapping
Emerging Trends and Risk Hotspots for Humanitarian Actors. CARE International. Retrieved from http://www.careclimatechange.org/files/reports/CARE_Human_Implications.pdf
Carlson, L.
(2001). Cognitive Ableism and Disability Studies: Feminist Reflections on the
History of Mental Retardation. Hypatia, 16(4), 124-146.
Comim, F.
(2008). Climate Injustice and Development: A capability perspective. Development, 51(3),
344. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1533862151&Fmt=7&clientId=12520&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Confalonieri,
U., B.Menne, R.Akhtar, K.L.Ebi, M.Hauengue, R.S.Kovats et al. (2007). Human
health. In O.F.C.J.P.P.P.J.v.d.L.a.C.E.H. M.L.Parry (Ed.), Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and
Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 391-431). Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Davis, E. A.,
Hansen, R., & Mincin, J. (2011). Vulnerable Populations and Public Health
Disaster Preparedness. Health Care Emergency Management: Principles and Practice, 371.
Retrieved from Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Dowell, S. F.,
Tappero, J. W., & Frieden, T. R. (2011). Public Health in HaitiùChallenges
and Progress. New
England Journal of Medicine, 364(4), 300-301. Retrieved from Massachusetts
Medical Society.
Ebi, K. L.
(2008). Costs of Public Health Adaptation to Climate Change. Epidemiology, 19(6),
S80. Retrieved from ISI:000260191900246
Eide, A.,
& Ingstad, B. (2011). Disability and Poverty: A Global Challenge Policy Pr.
Elwan, A.
(1999). Poverty
and Disability: A Survey of the Literature Worldbank, Social Protection
Discussion Paper Series, No. 9932.
Finkelstein,
V. (1996). MODELLING DISABILITY. Disability Studies Program, Leeds University, UK.
Retrieved from http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/finkelstein/models/models.htm
Fiona
A.K.Campbell. (2001). Inciting Legal Fictions: ‘Disability’s’ Date with
Ontology and the Ableist Body of the Law. Griffith Law Review, 10(1), 42.
Fisher, J.,
& WEDC. (2009). Why should the water and sanitation sector consider
disabled people? WELL
resource centre for water, sanitation and environmental health. Retrieved
from http://www.lboro.ac.uk/well/resources/Publications/Briefing%20Notes/BN12%20Disabled.htm
Gohlke, J.
M., Thomas, R., Woodward, A., Campbell-Lendrum, D., Pr³ss-Ust³n, A., Hales, S.
et al. (2011). Estimating the Global Public Health Implications of Electricity
and Coal Consumption. Environmental Health Perspectives.
Haines, A.,
Kovats, R. S., Campbell-Lendrum, D., & Corvalan, C. (2006). Climate change
and human health: Impacts, vulnerability and public health. Public Health,
120(7), 585-596. doi:DOI 10.1016/j.puhe.2006.01.002. Retrieved from
ISI:000239272000003
Haines, A.,
Smith, K. R., Anderson, D., Epstein, P. R., McMichael, A. J., Roberts, I. et
al. (2007). Energy and health 6 - Policies for accelerating access to clean
energy, improving health, advancing development, and mitigating climate change.
Lancet, 370(9594),
1264-1281. doi:DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61257-4. Retrieved from
ISI:000250091900027
Hanlon, P.,
& McCartney, G. (2008). Peak oil: Will it be public health’s greatest
challenge? Public
Health, 122(7), 647-652. doi:DOI 10.1016/j.puhe.2008.03.020. Retrieved from
ISI:000257625900003
Hartwell, H.
(2010). Climate Change and Public Health - should we be bothered? Perspectives in
Public Health, 130(1), 2. Retrieved from ISI:000274084300001
International
Disability and Development Consortium. (2008). A Statement to the Human Rights
Council Resolution 7/23 “Human Rights and Climate Change. Office of the High Commissioner on human
rights.
International
health leaders in Durban for the global climate talks. (2011). Durban
Declaration on Climate and Health. Healthcare without harm. Retrieved from http://www.noharm.org/global/news_hcwh/2011/dec/hcwh2011-12-05.php
James
D.Wolfensohn. (2002, December 3). Poor, Disabled and Shut Out . Washington Post.
Jara, M.
(2009). Activists call for public health to take central role in UN climate
change talks. British
Medical Journal, 339. doi:ARTN b4611;DOI 10.1136/bmj.b4611. Retrieved from
ISI:000271833700004
Jones, H.,
& Reed, B. (2005). Why should the water and sanitation sector consider
disabled people?
12.
Jones, H. E.,
Reed, R. A., & Bevan, J. E. (2003). Water and sanitation for the disabled
in low-income countries. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Municipal Engineer,
156(2), 135-141. Retrieved from ISI:000185509900011
Jones, H.,
Parker, K. J., & Reed, R. (2002). Water supply and sanitation access and
use by physically disabled people A Literature Review. Water, Engineering and Development Centre
Loughborough University Leicestershire. Retrieved from http://wedc.lboro.ac.uk/projects/proj_contents0/WEJY3%20-%20WSS%20Special%20Needs/www/outputs/Literature%20review_watsan%20for%20disabled.pdf
Kanagawa, M.,
& Nakata, T. (2007). Analysis of the energy access improvement and its
socio-economic impacts in rural areas of developing countries. Ecological
Economics, 62(2), 319-329. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.06.005.
Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VDY-4KCXJH1-1/2/6caa6608af120bd7f089fa18c0a83c2c
Leopatra, V.
(2011a). Able People Disabling World (You tube video on water and sanitation)
Part 1. You
Tube. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCFbgaBy-tE
Leopatra, V.
(2011b). Able People Disabling World (You tube video on water and sanitation)
Part 2. Youtube.
Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gs-W_6DUrDg
Longstreth,
J. (1999). Public health consequences of global climate change in the United
States - Some regions may suffer disproportionately. Environmental Health Perspectives, 107,
169-179. Retrieved from ISI:000078823800015
MargaretWazakili,
T. C., Mji, G., Dube, K., & MacLachlan, M. (2011). Social inclusion of
people with disabilities in poverty reduction policies and instruments: initial
impressions from Malawi and Uganda. Disability and Poverty: A Global Challenge, 15.
Retrieved from Policy Pr.
Matsebe, G.
(2006). Sanitation Policy in S Africa: Does it address People with
Disabilities? 32nd
WEDC International Conference, Colombo, Sri Lanka, 2006. Retrieved from http://researchspace.csir.co.za/dspace/bitstream/10204/1185/1/matsebe_2006_D.pdf
McFarlane, G.
J. (2010). Climate change - the greatest public health threat of our time:
Seeing the wood, not just the trees. Perspectives in Public Health, 130(1), 21-26.
doi:DOI 10.1177/1757913909355217. Retrieved from ISI:000274084300025
Miller, P.,
Parker, S., & Gillinson, S. (2004). Disablism How to tackle the last prejudice
DEMOS. Retrieved from: http://www.demos.co.uk/files/disablism.pdf
Mitchell, D.
T., & Snyder, S. L. (1997). The Body and Physical Difference: Discourses of
Disability (The Body, In Theory: Histories of Cultural Materialism). Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Mont, D.,
& Cuong, N. V. (2011). Disability and poverty in Vietnam. The World Bank
Economic Review, 25(2), 323. Retrieved from World Bank.
Morris, G. P.
(2010). Ecological public health and climate change policy. Perspectives in
Public Health, 130(1), 34-40. doi:DOI 10.1177/1757913909354149. Retrieved
from ISI:000274084300027
Nelson, W.,
& Naa Dedei Agbey, S. (2005). Linkages between poverty and climate change:
Adaptation for livelihood of the poor in Ghana. The Netherlands Climate Assistance Programme.
Retrieved from http://www.nlcap.net/fileadmin/NCAP/Countries/Ghana/032135.0403xx.GHA.CON-01.Output8.v1.pdf
Noji, E. K.
(2005). ABC of conflict and disaster - Public health in the aftermath of
disasters. British
Medical Journal, 330(7504), 1379-1381. Retrieved from ISI:000229840100031
Oldfield, E.
(2011). Addressing Energy Poverty Through Smarter Technology. Bulletin of
Science, Technology & Society, 31(2), 113. Retrieved from SAGE
Publications.
Olyan, S. M.
(2009). The ascription of physical disability as a stigmatizing strategy in
biblical iconic polemics . The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 9(Article 14), 2-15. Retrieved
from http://www.arts.ualberta.ca/JHS/Articles/article_116.pdf
OneWorld
South Asia. (2008). Towards disabled-friendly water solutions. OneWorld South
Asia. Retrieved from http://southasia.oneworld.net/Article/towards-disabled-friendly-water-solutions
Overboe, J.
(2007). Vitalism: Subjectivity Exceeding Racism, Sexism, and (Psychiatric)
Ableism. Wagadu:
A Journal of Transnational Women’s and Gender Studies, 4(2), 23-34.
Retrieved from http://wagadu.org/Volume%204/Vol4pdfs/Chapter%202.pdf
Penn, J.
(1990). Towards an ecologically-based society: a Rawlsian perspective. Ecological
Economics, 2(3), 225-242. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/0921-8009(90)90032-P.
Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VDY-45DHYBD-11/2/84a0316aab069b93ea6d49c03dcfa409
Porter, D.,
& Craig, D. (2004). The third way and the third world: poverty reduction
and social inclusion in the rise of ‘inclusive’ liberalism. Review of
International Political Economy, 11(2), 387-423. doi:DOI
10.1080/09692290410001672881. Retrieved from ISI:000222750700007
Practical
Action The Schumacher Centre for Technology and Development. (2010). Poor
people’s energy outlook 2010. Practical Action The Schumacher Centre for Technology and Development.
Retrieved from http://practicalaction.org/docs/energy/poor-peoples-energy-outlook.pdf
Pradhan, A.,
& Jones, O. (2010). Creating user-friendly water and sanitation services
for the disabled: The experience of WaterAid Nepal and its partners. WaterAid.
Retrieved from http://www.wateraid.org/documents/ch24_creating_userfriendly_water_and_sanitation_services_for_the_disabled_the_experience_of_wateraid_nepal_and_its_partners.pdf
Reed, B.
(2010). Water supply and sanitation access and use by physically disabled
people. DFID
webpage. Retrieved from http://www.research4development.info/SearchResearchDatabase.asp?ProjectID=3872
Rosano, A.,
Mancini, F., & Solipaca, A. (2009). Poverty in People with Disabilities:
Indicators from the Capability Approach. Social Indicators Research, 94(1), 75-82.
doi:DOI 10.1007/s11205-008-9337-1. Retrieved from ISI:000269536500006
Rose, M.
(2003). The
Staff of Oedipus: Transforming Disability in Ancient Greece. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
Schipper,
J. (2006). Disability
Studies and the Hebrew Bible: Figuring Mephibosheth in the David
Story. New York: Continuum Retrieved from http://books.google.ca/books?id=RCNJ1CHI6nMC&pg=PA63&lpg=PA63&dq=disability+mesopotamien&source=bl&ots=gmx3YsyfW0&sig=sDvkgjI9NIoqbBkziNLlFNgdo6g&hl=en&ei=OigcS_OTEp26tQOoydyzBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CA0Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=disability%20mesopotamien&f=false.
Sheffield, P.
E., & Landrigan, P. J. (2011). Global Climate Change and Children’s Health:
Threats and Strategies for Prevention. Environmental Health Perspectives, 119(3),
291-298. doi:DOI 10.1289/ehp.1002233. Retrieved from ISI:000287926700015
Sorenson, S.
B., Morssink, C., & Campos, P. A. (2011). Safe access to safe water in low
income countries: Water fetching in current times. Social Science & Medicine. Retrieved
from Elsevier.
Sovacool, B.
K., & Brown, M. A. (2010). Competing dimensions of energy security: an
international perspective. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 35, 77-108. Retrieved
from Annual Reviews.
Sperling
Frank (Managing Editor) World Bank. (2002). Poverty and Climate Change Reducing
the Vulnerability of the Poor through Adaptation. OECD. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/60/27/2502872.pdf
Stapleton, D.
C., O’Day, B. L., Livermore, G. A., & Imparato, A. J. (2006). Dismantling
the poverty trap: Disability policy for the twenty-first century. Milbank
Quarterly, 84(4), 701-732. Retrieved from ISI:000241774100004
Teelucksingh,
C., & Poland, B. (2011). Energy Solutions, Neo-Liberalism, and Social
Diversity in Toronto, Canada. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 8(1),
185. Retrieved from Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI).
The Advisory
Panel on Online Public Opinion Survey Quality. (2011). Standards and Guidelines
for Sampling. Public
Works and Government Services Canada. Retrieved from http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/rop-por/rapports-reports/comiteenligne-panelonline/page-03-eng.html
UN News
Centre. (2011). Ban urges inclusion of persons with disabilities into society. United Nations.
Retrieved from http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=40602&Cr=persons&Cr1=disabilities
United
Nations Development Programme. (2007). Human Development Report 2007/2008 Fighting climate
change: human solidarity in a divided world United Nations Development
Programme. Retrieved from: http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2007-2008/
United
Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. (2008). Secretary-General, on
International Daysats UN remains committed to promoting accessibility
--digital, political, physica-- for persons with disabilities. United Nations.
Retrieved from http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2008/sgsm11980.doc.htm
Water
for all. (2006). Water
and Sanitation for disabled people. Retrieved from: http://wedc.lboro.ac.uk/projects/new_projects3.php?id=60; http://www.developments.org.uk/data/issue27/water-all.htm
WaterAid.
(2008). Creating user-friendly water and sanitation services for the disabled:
the experience of WaterAid Nepal and its partners. WaterAid. Retrieved from http://www.wateraid.org/documents/plugin_documents/wa_nep_diability_paper_mar08.pdf
WEDC. (2005).
Water and environmental sanitation - working towards equity and inclusion for
disabled people: a discussion paper. WEDC. Retrieved from http://wedc.lboro.ac.uk/projects/proj_contents0/WEJFK%20-%20WATSAN%20disability%20dissemination/www/outputs/WATSAN_disability%20discussion%20paper.pdf
Wolbring, G.
(2009). A Culture of Neglect: Climate Discourse and Disabled People. Journal Media and
Culture, 12(4). Retrieved from http://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/viewArticle/173
Wolbring, G.
(2011). Water discourse, Ableismc and disabled people: What makes one part of a
discourse? Eubios
Journal of Asian and International Bioethics, 21(6), 203-207. Retrieved
from http://www.eubios.info/EJAIB112011.pdf
World Health
Organization. (2011). World Report on Disability. World Health Organization (WHO).
Retrieved from http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/en/index.html
World Health
Organization (WHO). (2009). Protecting health from climate change: connecting
science, policy and people. World Health Organization (WHO). Retrieved from http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2009/9789241598880_eng.pdf
World Water
Assessment Programme. (2006). The 2nd UN World Water Development Report: ‘Water, a shared
responsibility’.
World Water
Assessment Programme. (2009). Water in a changing world The United Nations World Water Development
Report 3. Retrieved from: http://www.unesco.org/water/wwap/wwdr/wwdr3/pdf/WWDR3_Water_in_a_Changing_World.pdf
Yeo, R.,
& Moore, K. (2003). Including disabled people in poverty reduction work. World
Development, 31(3), 571-590. Retrieved from Elsevier.