Last week, as I read through a scholarly article about social
science-based energy research, I was surprised to see “Gender and Identity” in
the list of promising though underdeveloped research areas. I shouldn’t have
been surprised. While under-appreciated, gender
interacts with energy in many important ways.
Women throughout the world spend hours collecting fuel before
using it for cooking and other chores. Energy
also shapes our practices, cultures, and communities. For example, the article notes how
communal cooking fires can act as havens “where women can gather to discuss
their personal issues without the presence of men.” Of course Schwartz Cowan’s link between technology and
gender roles (see the More Work for
Mother posts) also applies to energy.
In recent years policy
wonks have highlighted behavioral change as an important tool for
reducing electricity loads and/or shifting them to reduce expensive “peak load”
periods. They tell people to turn lights
off, turn the thermostat down, and run the dishwasher at night. They champion technological "solutions" like smart meters, smart appliances, data feedback portals, and
real-time price signals to support such behavioral changes. While all these things have value, such blanket solutions rarely account for how different groups use electricity.
As we saw before, women tend to be the ones at home during the
day. As a result, they are more likely to be
the ones shivering when the thermostat is turned down. Women also tend to be the ones performing the "housework." Hence they will be the ones forced to hang dry the laundry or structure their cleaning schedules around energy prices.
Policies and technical solutions that fail to account for such dynamics promise
to (unintentionally) pile more burdens onto women. For an interesting scholarly
article on this see here.
The moral of the story? Gender has important implications
for energy policy and technology usage generally. We should be doing more
to understand this dynamic!
Unfortunately I also saw the Microsoft ads targeting women this week. Did they take a nuanced look at gender differences in technology usage? Only if you think wedding planning, Pinterest, and harried mom's are nuanced. Similar campaigns by other companies have highlighted shopping, scrapbooking, and diets. There is much work to be done . . .
I think you make a great point. It is important to make a point to include women because they can offer an untapped knowledge base (that often goes hand-in-hand with a division of labor that has not been considered). I was also reading this article that makes similar points as you make. And: "the institutionalized suppression of intellectual, experiential, and other climate-resilience-building resources that women possess amount to about 50 percent of untapped potential" http://www.forbes.com/sites/ashoka/2014/04/03/supporting-women-to-solve-our-big-environmental-challenges/?utm_content=buffer7f536&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
ReplyDelete