The relationship between climate change, HIV/AIDS and gender and reproductive health

Nov 02, 2010 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
As much as I understand the President’s chagrin at the seeming inadequacy of support across stakeholder bodies as it relates to his climate change efforts, it can perhaps be argued that insufficient public education may be at the heart of the problem.
Public education must of necessity encompass all pertinent aspects inherent in the national strategy including rationale etc.
At the outset I should state that I do not wish to become embroiled in arguments of the other important issues of transparency and accountability. I think others are quite competent to sustain arguments of their respective positions.
However, when I look at the public education interventions associated with climate change locally I am constrained to advocate that some of the lessons learned in the efforts to address HIV and AIDS may find some resonance in the current approach to climate change.
I have refrained from identifying whether those interventions should be focused specifically on mitigation or adaption.
Moreover, it is not implausible that a consolidated and integrated response may be necessary in resource-challenged developing countries.
It is my view that understanding of a concept is more likely to be reinforced by a contextual location that relates to people’s existence.
Notwithstanding Guyana’s record and its regional and international standing in its response and achievement in meeting certain universal indicators related to HIV and AIDS prevention and reduction rates it is instructive that Angele Luh, a United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Information Officer acknowledges that people in developing and least developed countries are likely to be worst hit by the effects of climate change which is likely to raise the vulnerability of populations with already high rates of HIV.
She argues that HIV/AIDS affected households are less able to cope with food shortages and high food prices occasioned by food insecurity caused by droughts, flooding and other extreme weather expected to occur more frequently as a result of climate change.
Mr. Editor, the horror doesn’t end there because the ensuing malnutrition can increase vulnerability to HIV infection and make it difficult for the infected to adhere to the antiretroviral regimen, and other medications for treating opportunistic infections.
In a country facing the ever present threat of malaria AIDS programmes are likely to be further complicated by malaria outbreaks which threaten the immune system already weakened by HIV.
The consequences of climate change if left unaddressed could impact severely on the sensitive gender issue with respect to women. Suneeta Mukherjee, country representative of the United Nations Food Populations Fund (UNFPA) identifies women in the category vulnerable to climate change which could reduce income from farming and fishing in a depleted environment, possibly driving women into sex work thereby increasing the risk of HIV infection. In other words the success of climate change initiatives is intertwined with the sustained reduction of HIV infection rates.
Therefore borrowing one of the five measures suggested by UNFPA to mitigate climate change and overpopulation, it is imperative that the Guyanese people develop a greater understanding of the relationship of HIV/AIDS, gender and reproductive health to climate change and environmental discussions at all levels.
In much the same manner that mainstreaming as a concept is applied in the area of HIV/AIDS prevention, it is also desirable for integrating policies and measures to address climate change into sectoral planning and management for long-term viability and sustainability of sectoral and development investments.
Mainstreaming develops the potential for more efficient and effective use of resources than designing, implementing and managing climate policy from sectoral policies. Richard J.T. Klein of the Stockholm Environment Institute (2007) posited that although synergies among sectors can increase cost-effectiveness of adaptation and mitigation, the absence of a relevant knowledge base and of human, institutional and organisational capacity are challenges.
The Guyana public sector response to HIV/AIDS prevention and control with non-health line ministries is a cogent example of synergy to address the HIV/AIDS education and awareness needs of public servants and the clients who are serviced by the different sectors.
With respect to climate change however, the opportunities to create synergies are greater in some sectors such as agriculture and forestry; buildings and urban infrastructure, but are limited in others like coastal systems, energy, and health.
In this regard the emergent picture of the integral involvement of certain sectors in the Guyana initiative becomes clearer.
The Guyana’s response to HIV/AIDS, for help in promoting environmental behaviour change represents a unique strategy with wide-reaching potential. The involvement of the NGOs in the HIV/AIDS response is one which I believe has vast potential for replication in the climate change scenario.
This is no more evident in view of the fact that unlike HIV/AIDS which is somewhat predictable in terms of time span the climate change problem is more complicated since the risk of severe or catastrophic climate change remains quite uncertain as to the mechanisms and potential timeline of occurrence.
To return to my initial theme HIV/AIDS public education is intended to cause people to change their behaviour and quite fittingly is termed Behaviour Change Communication. During the 1980s campaigns were developed in both Australia and Uganda to scare the public into safer behaviours and also to show that HIV was non-discriminatory.
What they both failed to do was not to provide information about HIV/AIDS nor did they suggest new behaviours effective in preventing HIV acquisition or transmission, and essentially only increased fear (Batrouney C. 2004; Walton D. 2001).
Thus lessons from HIV/AIDS behaviour change communication demonstrate the harm in promoting fear without simultaneously providing information and alternative behaviours. Moreover, as researchers (Lorenzoni I, Nicholson-Cole S and L Whitmarsh. 2007) have noted, “it is not enough for people to know about climate change in order to be engaged; they also need to care about it, be motivated, and able to take action.”
Lorenzi et al signal that one of the most significant barriers to behaviour change is the perception that mitigation strategies will require drastic changes in individual lifestyles and will require considerable personal effort.
This perception could be avoided with the active participation of multi-sectoral stakeholders who are informed by facts and motivated by national considerations.
Patrick E. Mentore

---

---