Policy Research Working Paper 11223 Women as Environmental Leaders Shifting the Narrative from Vulnerability to Empowerment Adhwaa Alsaleh Girija Borker Hannah Uckat Development Economics Development Impact Group September 2025 Policy Research Working Paper 11223 Abstract Women are often portrayed in climate discourse as dis- Readiness Framework (CLRF), which distills the skillset proportionately vulnerable to environmental change—a required for effective climate leadership. The framework reductive framing that, while grounded in evidence, can is used to assess women’s leadership potential across five obscure their agency and leadership in shaping climate domains: leadership, principles, skills, knowledge, and resilience. This paper addresses that gap by exploring how networks. Three spheres of transformation—practical, gendered experience equips women to lead effective cli- political, and personal—are applied to map where women mate action. It examines two interrelated drivers of women’s are currently leading within the climate space and where climate leadership: (1) the heightened impact of climate institutional and policy support can unlock greater impact. shocks, such as displacement, food insecurity, and health The study finds that women are uniquely equipped to and risks, on women, which fuels women and catalyzes adap- already play an active role in climate action, although it is tation efforts; and (2) the distinctive competencies women often underrecognized. By reframing women not as passive develop through their social roles, such as long-term ori- victims but as strategic actors, the paper offers a concep- entation, risk aversion, and prosocial behavior, which align tual and policy-relevant lens for advancing inclusive climate with the demands of climate leadership. The paper pres- governance. Embedding women’s leadership in climate ents a narrative review of interdisciplinary literature and strategies is not only an equity imperative, but also central develops a new conceptual model, the Climate Leadership to achieving durable and effective climate resilience. This paper is a product of the Development Impact Group, Development Economics. It is part of a larger effort by the World Bank to provide open access to its research and make a contribution to development policy discussions around the world. Policy Research Working Papers are also posted on the Web at http://www.worldbank.org/prwp. The authors may be contacted at gborker@worldbank.org. The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. Produced by the Research Support Team Women as Environmental Leaders: Shifting the Narrative from Vulnerability to Empowerment By ADHWAA ALSALEH, GIRIJA BORKER and HANNAH UCKAT1 Authorized for distribution by Arianna Legovini, Director, Development Impact Group, Development Economics, World Bank Group JEL Classification: J16, Q54, Q57, O21 Keywords: Gender, Climate Change, Leadership, Intersectionality, Adaptation, Resilience, Targeting, Agency 1 Adhwaa Alsaleh, Consultant, Development Impact Group, The World Bank, adwa.al.saleh@gmail.com; Hannah Uckat, Economist, Development Impact Group, The World Bank, huckat@worldbank.org; Corresponding author; Girija Borker: Economist, Development Impact Group, The World Bank, gborker@worldbank.org, WBG HQ 1818 H Street, N.W., Mail Stop MC 13-1302, Washington, DC 20433 U.S.A. We are grateful to our colleagues at the World Bank’s Development Impact Group for their continued support and collaboration. Their insights and expertise helped shape the conceptual foundations and policy relevance of this work. We also acknowledge the broader community of researchers and practitioners working at the intersection of gender and climate – along with any others referenced in this paper – whose work informed and motivated this contribution. Jaanvi Jairath provided excellent research assistance. Funding from the MNA Fellows Program at the World Bank is gratefully acknowledged. Any errors or omissions remain our own. The author declares no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. Introduction Climate change is one of the most pressing global challenges, with far-reaching consequences for ecosystems, economies, and human well-being. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warns that without immediate and transformative action, the world is on track to exceed 1.5°C of warming by the early 2030s, triggering irreversible ecological and economic disruptions (IPCC, 2023). These effects are no longer distant or abstract; they are unfolding globally with increasing frequency and severity. Rising temperatures have intensified extreme weather events— hurricanes, wildfires, droughts, and floods—displacing millions and exacerbating food and water insecurity (UNDRR, 2022). Over the past two decades, climate-related disasters have surged by 83% (UNDRR, 2020), displacing more than 20 million people annually (UNHCR, 2021). The effects of climate change are not evenly distributed. Their harshest consequences fall on more vulnerable populations, particularly in low-income and climate-exposed regions, who often lack the resources needed to adapt effectively (UNEP, 2021). Among them, women and girls are especially at risk. Due to existing structural inequalities and their roles in managing food, fuel, and water systems, women are more likely to experience climate-related poverty, health shocks, and displacement. In resource-dependent communities, women and children are 14 times more likely than men to suffer harm during environmental disasters (UN Women, 2021a). By 2050, climate change could push an additional 100 million people into poverty, with women disproportionately affected (World Bank, 2016). These risks compound existing disparities in access to education, health care, mobility, and decision-making power—widening gender gaps in resilience and recovery. Yet within this heightened vulnerability lies an overlooked paradox: women, while disproportionately affected, are also key actors in building resilience. Across the Global South, 2 women manage the very systems most susceptible to climate shocks – provision of food, water and energy – and often lead efforts to mitigate climate crises, in the form of mobilizing resources, leading local adaption efforts (engaging community networks), and anchoring informal safety nets (UN Women, 2020). More broadly, women have played a pivotal role in advancing the climate movement. Their contributions span every level of engagement, from local adaptation efforts and community initiatives to national policy making and global advocacy, demonstrating the many ways women shape climate action. Their close connections to natural resources, combined with their roles as caregivers and household managers, not only increase their exposure to climate risks but also position them as highly motivated and uniquely equipped to lead adaptive change across decision- making levels. Yet, women continue to face structural barriers—including limited access to finance, underrepresentation in leadership, and weak institutional support. As a result, their leadership in climate action remains underfunded, undervalued, and underutilized. These dynamics underscore a critical point: targeting matters. Gender-blind policies and top-down climate programs have historically overlooked women’s leadership and expertise—despite growing evidence of their potential to deliver effective and inclusive outcomes. At the household level, directing resources to women—such as through cash transfer programs—has been shown to improve overall household well-being across health, nutrition, and education indicators (Adato & Bassett, 2009). At the community level, women’s participation in adaptation planning has been linked to more sustainable natural resource management and stronger collective resilience (Agarwal, 2010, UNDP, 2016). Within firms, research highlights how women’s leadership contributes to stronger environmental performance and governance structures (Glas & Cook, 2018). At the national level, countries with greater gender inclusion in governance tend to adopt stronger climate and social protection policies (Mavisakalyan & Tarverdi, 2019). Yet climate finance and policy remain largely technocratic and gender blind. Despite a global total 3 of over $1.2 trillion in climate-related investments in 2021–22 alone (CPI, 2023), the bulk of these interventions prioritize emissions reductions and infrastructure while neglecting the social, behavioral, and institutional dimensions that underpin lasting resilience. Climate technologies are frequently introduced without considering women’s mobility, access to land and finance, or prevailing local norms—diminishing their uptake and long-term effectiveness. For example, 38% of the global agricultural workforce is women, placing them at the forefront of providing food and nutritional security, but only 20% of global landholders are women, limiting their ownership over resources (Jha et al., 2024). To maximize the impact of every dollar spent on addressing climate change, we must engage the actors already sustaining adaptation on the ground, of which many are women, in the most cost-effective way possible. This paper advances a central hypothesis: that women experience disproportionate impacts from climate change, but their roles as caregivers, resource managers, and community organizers equip them with distinctive capabilities that align with the core demands of effective and inclusive climate action. Much of the existing literature centers on women’s vulnerability, with limited analysis of the behavioral, institutional, and structural factors that shape their capacity to lead, and the policy tools needed to strengthen or channel this capacity. Furthermore, prevailing gender discourses often adopt binary or essentialist framings, neglecting the diverse and intersectional realities that shape both vulnerability and agency. This paper seeks to fill that gap by synthesizing interdisciplinary research and identifying how women’s leadership manifests across sectors, scales, and systems. In this paper, we conduct a structured narrative review spanning literature from climate studies, economics, development, and gender research. The review draws from global reports, academic databases, and grey literature, using thematic synthesis to examine the relationship between gender 4 and climate leadership. To guide this analysis, we introduce the Climate Leadership Readiness Framework (CLRF), a conceptual tool developed in this study to assess women’s leadership potential across five domains: leadership, principles, skills, knowledge, and networks. We also draw on the Three Spheres of Transformation (O’Brien & Sygna, 2013) to frame climate action across practical, political, and personal spheres—capturing behavioral strategies, institutional pathways, and shifts in norms and values. These frameworks together provide an integrated lens for examining both women’s leadership capacities and the structural barriers that limit their influence. Our findings show that women are already leading climate efforts across all three spheres: implementing adaptation strategies and natural resource management at the local level; influencing policy and governance processes; and shifting attitudes and environmental behaviors within households and communities. Yet, systemic barriers—such as exclusion from formal decision- making, limited access to finance, and weak institutional support—continue to hinder the scale and impact of their contributions. By reframing the discourse around women’s role in climate leadership, this paper offers a new conceptual foundation for embedding women’s leadership in climate strategy. It moves beyond rhetorical inclusion toward institutional application—outlining not only why women matter in climate action, but how their leadership can be recognized, supported, and scaled. Ultimately, the paper aims to inform researchers, practitioners, and policy makers with actionable insights and an easy-to-apply framework to advance inclusive and effective climate governance. 1. Methodology 1.1 Analytical Framework 5 This paper examines two core drivers that shape women’s roles in climate action. First, the disproportionate impact of climate change on women and girls, which not only increases their vulnerability but also drives a heightened motivation to engage in climate action. Second, the distinctive competencies women develop through social roles and lived experiences—such as collaborative leadership, long-term decision-making, and prosocial behavior—that align with the demands of effective climate leadership. To assess the first component, we conducted a targeted review of empirical studies and global reports offering evidence on the gendered effects of climate change. We prioritized sources with strong methodological rigor and relevance to understanding how climate shocks, such as displacement, health risks, educational disruption, and income loss, disproportionately affect women across regions and sectors. Thematic analysis of this literature revealed that these unequal impacts not only reflect deeper structural inequalities, but also often catalyze women’s active engagement in climate adaptation. This finding helped establish the foundational motivation and relevance of exploring women’s leadership potential in the context of the need for rapid climate action. To analyze the second component, we focused on understanding how women’s social and behavioral conditions translate into effective climate leadership. Climate action, particularly in adaptation, requires a tailored and specific set of skills that involve navigating uncertainty, mobilizing communities, and fostering collaboration across diverse actors (World Bank Group, 2021, Foresight, 2025). To systematically assess these capacities, we reviewed existing climate leadership frameworks to identify recurring domains of expertise in climate work. The Climate Adaptation Competency Framework (CACF), developed by the Resilience by Design Lab (RbD), is a useful tool that emphasizes strategic execution, foundational knowledge, and organizational experience as core competencies for climate action. However, it does not sufficiently address the 6 intersectional and relational competencies, such as community engagement, social network building, and navigating gendered power dynamics, that are essential for inclusive and effective climate leadership, particularly in communities most exposed to climate risks where women frequently lead informal adaptation efforts on the ground. Similarly, the Knowledge & Competencies Framework developed by the American Society of Adaptation Professionals (ASAP) (launched in 2019) highlights the importance of technical expertise, interdisciplinary awareness, and problem-solving skills in advancing climate adaptation. Yet, it lacks an explicit focus on leadership qualities and soft skills, such as trust-building, negotiation, and social norm shifting, that are critical for mobilizing collective action when faced with intertemporal asymmetry and uncertainty, and ensuring equitable outcomes in climate responses. Building on these existing frameworks and the broader literature on climate leadership, this paper develops and applies the Climate Leadership Readiness Framework (CLRF, see Figure 1). The CLRF is a comprehensive and adaptive tool designed to assess readiness for climate leadership. It integrates elements from established competency frameworks while also incorporating critical dimensions often overlooked in conventional models. Unlike traditional approaches that emphasize technical or managerial skills, the CLRF explicitly includes components such as guiding principles (e.g., equity, justice, inclusion), relational and social networks, and adaptive leadership—competencies essential for driving systemic change, building trust, and fostering collaboration across diverse climate stakeholders. It was developed to respond to a growing recognition that effective climate leadership, particularly in under-resourced or vulnerable contexts, demands not just expertise or authority, but also moral clarity, social embeddedness, and adaptive capacity. 7 As shown in Figure 1, the CLRF identifies five core competencies required for effective climate leadership: leadership, principles, skills, knowledge, and networks. These are not only widely recognized in interdisciplinary climate leadership literature, but have also been adapted to reflect the social, behavioral, and institutional dynamics that are critical to inclusive and transformational climate action. Importantly, two of these—principles and networks—are novel contributions that address blind spots in traditional leadership frameworks. Each competency is grounded in evaluative dimensions and evaluation criteria that enable a more dynamic and context-sensitive assessment of leadership potential. Leadership is assessed through the lens of agency and vision: the ability to articulate a long-term direction, mobilize others, and make decisions that shift systems rather than merely operate within them. Principles—captured through values and commitment—reflect a leader’s alignment with climate justice, equity, and sustainability; this dimension has often been omitted in traditional leadership frameworks but is especially salient in community-based and participatory climate initiatives. Skills are interpreted through the ability to demonstrate technical competence and adaptability under uncertainty, emphasizing both formal training and situational problem-solving. Knowledge reflects sectoral expertise and interdisciplinary fluency—understanding not just environmental science, but how it intersects with economic, social, and political systems. Finally, networks are evaluated in terms of influence and social capital: a leader’s ability to access partnerships, mentorship, collective platforms, and informal coalitions that can sustain and scale climate action. Importantly, while the CLRF can be applied to assess leadership readiness more broadly, this paper employs it specifically to evaluate women’s leadership potential in the climate space. By anchoring the assessment in these five competencies, we investigate whether there is empirical support for women’s demonstrated capacity to meet these leadership demands, and in doing so, whether women’s leadership is not only necessary but also strategic for accelerating climate progress. To 8 conduct this evaluation, we apply the CLRF through a narrative review of the literature, drawing on studies, case examples, and descriptive accounts that serve as proxies for performance across each of the five competencies. In Section 4, we operationalize the CLRF to evaluate women’s performance across the five identified competencies of climate leadership. This application not only illustrates why each competency is critical for advancing climate action but also explores how women demonstrate these capacities in practice—and how they contribute to tangible, context-specific outcomes. Beyond offering an assessment, the CLRF serves as an entry point for rethinking leadership through a gender-responsive lens: one that surfaces overlooked strengths, structural constraints, and strategic opportunities. By doing so, it provides researchers and practitioners with a practical tool to identify, support, and amplify women’s leadership in climate contexts—laying the groundwork for more inclusive, adaptive, and locally grounded approaches to climate policy and program design. Figure 1. Climate Leadership Readiness Framework (CLRF) 9 After examining women’s effectiveness as climate leaders, we conducted analysis to understand the spheres of influence for women within the climate space, and where policy and institutional mechanisms can unlock pathways for women’s leadership in climate action. To understand the broader landscape in which such leadership is exercised, we reviewed several influential climate action frameworks that structure the climate response and offer conceptual clarity around the levers of transformation. These include the IPCC’s Five Dimensions of Climate Response Options (adaptation, mitigation, finance, technology, and capacity-building) (IPCC, 2022), the UNFCCC Gender Action Plan, which outlines gender integration throughout climate governance (UNFCCC, 2019), and the Stockholm Environment Institute’s Ladder of Climate Action, which maps interventions across individual, institutional, and systemic scales (SEI, 2021). Among the frameworks reviewed, the Three Spheres of Transformation framework developed by O’Brien and Sygna in 2013 stands out as particularly comprehensive in capturing the multi-layered and interdependent nature of climate action. Originally proposed within the context of social transformation and climate resilience in the Global South, it was designed through interdisciplinary research at the University of Oslo to explain how behavioral, institutional, and normative change processes interact to enable sustainable futures (O’Brien & Sygna, 2013). The framework distinguishes between three nested spheres: the practical sphere, which focuses on behavioral and technical solutions; the political sphere, which encompasses governance structures and enabling systems; and the personal sphere, which involves values, beliefs, and worldviews. Although these categories are conceptually distinct, they are deeply interwoven. Change in one sphere can catalyze transformation across the others. For instance, shifts in norms—such as growing support for environmental sustainability—can influence political agendas and reshape institutional systems, while policy reforms can help mainstream and scale sustainable shifts and 10 solutions. Importantly, the personal sphere often holds the most impactful leverage points, as it shapes what is considered politically feasible and practically possible. Transformative climate action thus depends not only on advancing technical and policy solutions, but also on shifting the underlying narratives, worldviews, and social norms that govern them (O’Brien & Sygna, 2013). This framework is particularly well-suited to our research, as it captures the complexity of climate leadership while offering a structured lens to examine the specific opportunities and barriers women face in the climate space. In Section 5, we apply the Three Spheres of Transformation to map where and how women are already leading—and to identify the strategic points where policy, investment, and institutional support can further amplify their potential. The analytical framework employed in this paper integrates two complementary models to assess both the individual and structural dimensions of women’s climate leadership. The CLRF, developed as part of this research, evaluates women’s readiness for climate leadership. Building on this, the Three Spheres of Transformation framework—developed by O’Brien and Sygna— provides a structured lens to map the broader spheres of influence in which women operate and to identify critical entry points for policy engagement, institutional support, and investment. Together, these frameworks enable a holistic analysis that captures not only the unique strengths women bring to climate action but also the structural conditions needed to amplify their impact at scale. They also form the conceptual basis for the literature selection and thematic synthesis detailed in the next sub-section. 1.2 Scope of the Review Building on the analytical foundations outlined above, this narrative review synthesizes interdisciplinary literature to evaluate women’s positionality and capability within the climate space. To ensure both breadth and depth, the review drew on a range of sources including peer- 11 reviewed journal articles, working papers, policy briefs, global institutional reports, and select grey literature. Particular emphasis was placed on empirical contributions within economics and development, while also integrating interdisciplinary studies and regionally grounded case analyses. Although the review captures diverse perspectives, the linguistic limitation to English- language materials may have excluded relevant insights from non-English speaking regions—a constraint that future research should aim to address. The literature selection process followed a structured, multi-stage approach. The review began with an examination of flagship publications from multilateral institutions—such as the World Bank, United Nations, UNFCCC, and the International Labour Organization (ILO)—to identify prevailing themes, discourses, and research gaps at the intersection of gender and climate. This was followed by targeted academic searches in databases such as Google Scholar, JSTOR, Scopus, EconLit, and repositories like IDEAS/RePEc, SSRN, and the World Bank eLibrary. Search terms included “women in climate,” “climate change and gender,” “female leadership in adaptation,” and related variants. A snowballing technique was employed to identify additional literature by reviewing the bibliographies of key studies. Studies were included if they offered empirical or conceptual insights into one or more of the CLRF’s five competency domains—leadership, principles, skills, knowledge, and networks—or addressed behavioral, institutional, or normative dimensions consistent with the Three Spheres of Transformation framework. Each study was systematically coded according to its thematic focus, regional and sectoral scope, and its relevance to the evaluative lens of this paper. Codes were also inductively expanded to capture emergent themes such as informal adaptation networks, trust- building, and gendered governance constraints. This coding process enabled a structured comparison across regions, sectors, and institutional levels, while also highlighting evidence gaps. 12 The thematic synthesis was conducted using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-phase approach, which included data familiarization, initial coding, theme development, review, and refinement. Based on emerging themes, additional targeted searches were conducted using refined terms such as “women’s adaptive capacity,” “gender and climate resilience,” and “women in climate governance.” This iterative process helped surface the key narratives that underpin the paper’s argument: that women’s engagement in climate leadership is not only a response to disproportionate vulnerability, but also a reflection of accumulated experience, tacit knowledge, and strategic capability. The final corpus comprised 106 studies, summarized in Table 1 by region and research field. Of these, 68 are global in scope; 10 focus on South and East Asia; 10 focus on North America; 6 on Africa; 2 on the Middle Eastern region; 2 on Europe; 7 on the Global South and 1 across nations in Europe, North America and Asia-Pacific. The studies span a diverse array of climate-relevant sectors, including agriculture, natural resource management, disaster preparedness, social protection, and governance. Together, this body of literature provides a robust empirical and conceptual foundation for analyzing women’s climate leadership in both its capacities and the structural contexts that shape it. 3. Women are disproportionately impacted by climate disasters, driving their heightened motivation to combat climate change 3.1 Disproportionate Impact Women, particularly those in low-income, rural, and female-headed households, are disproportionately affected by climate change due to a combination of social, economic, and cultural factors (FAO, 2024b). Their central roles in food production, water collection, and natural 13 resource management make them highly vulnerable to climate impacts such as crop failure, water contamination, and extreme weather events (UN Women, 2020). Yet, despite their proximity to these challenges, women remain persistently underrepresented in climate decision-making spaces — comprising only about 33% of representatives of UNFCCC constituted bodies, with some as low as 10% (UNFCCC, 2020), limiting their voice in decisions related to climate change. This gap in representation is compounded by systemic barriers that further limit women’s resilience and adaptive capacity. These include mobility constraints—such as inadequate access to safe transportation (Borker, 2024) and, in some contexts, social restrictions that require permissionor accompaniment to evacuate during emergencies (World Bank, 2021). Education gaps also play a role: women account for two-thirds of the world’s 774 million illiterate adults (UNESCO, 2010), which restricts access to information critical for adaptation. Moreover, digital divides persist, with only 19% of women in Least Developed Countries using the internet as of 2020 (ITU, 2023). Climate risks have disproportionate and detrimental impacts on women’s health as well. Disasters often disrupt access to essential health care, leading to adverse outcomes such as worsened reproductive health. For instance, following the 2010 earthquake in Haiti, there was a notable decline in the use of injectable contraceptives—the most widely used modern contraceptive method in the country. This reduction was accompanied by an increase in both current and unwanted pregnancies, reflecting the heightened unmet need for family planning in the aftermath of the disaster (Behrman & Weitzman, 2016). Similarly, after Hurricane Ike in the United States, 13% of women reported difficulties accessing contraception. Notably, Black women experienced significantly more difficulty compared to their white and Hispanic counterparts, highlighting the compounded impact of race and class on access to reproductive health care during climate crises (Leyser-Whalen et al., 2011). 14 Furthermore, climate-related disasters disproportionately displace women and girls, with an estimated 80% of those displaced by climate change being women (UNDP, 2024). Displacement, resource scarcity, and the breakdown of essential services significantly heighten the risk of gender- based violence (GBV), including domestic violence, sexual exploitation, and human trafficking (IFRC, 2015). For example, following Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the reported rate of rape among displaced women in Mississippi rose to six times the state’s baseline for that year (Le Masson et al., 2016). Women often face greater difficulty evacuating during disasters due to their caregiving responsibilities, and the labor-intensive task of restoring the household in the aftermath typically falls on them as well. In Bangladesh, for example, when Cyclone Gorky struck in 1991, women outnumbered men 14 to 1 among the dead due to cyclone-induced flooding. Similarly, when the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami hit Indonesia, three to four times more women than men lost their lives (Oxfam International, 2005). The risks are even greater for households led by single, widowed, or abandoned women, due to systemic social and economic inequalities. The 2015 Nepal earthquakes exemplify how natural disasters can exacerbate these pre-existing vulnerabilities. In this context, many female-headed households had to furnish citizenship certificates, which not all of them possessed, in order to receive grants to reconstruct their houses. (World Bank, 2021b,) This case underscores that these groups continue to remain more vulnerable even with climate-induced disasters. Interestingly, we see with crisis response that when women’s voices are excluded, recovery efforts can entrench inequality. After Hurricane Katrina (2005), the demolition of structurally sound public housing and the dismantling of community networks disproportionately harmed Black women, whose perspectives were absent from recovery planning. Many were unable to return 15 home or re-establish their support systems, prolonging displacement and hardship (IWPR, 2020). Similarly, during the 1991 Bangladesh cyclone, women made up the vast majority of fatalities, partly because evacuation shelters lacked privacy and safety features that would have encouraged their use (Ayeb-Karlsson, 2020). Had women’s input been considered in shelter design and evacuation planning, many lives could have been saved. Building on these lessons, Bangladeshi women’s groups later worked to make cyclone shelters more “female-friendly,” adding women- only spaces, separate latrines, and improved lighting (Oxfam America, 2020). We also saw this with Hurricane Mitch (1998) in Honduras and Nicaragua, where women organized rescue boat operations, led emergency committees, and directly participated in reconstruction (Moreno & Shaw, 2018). After the 2015 Nepal earthquake, women trained as masons, rebuilt homes, and restored livelihoods despite facing disproportionate impacts (GFDRR, 2020), highlighting the role of women in both immediate disaster response and long-term resilience-building. 3.2 Cycle of Poverty Climate change exacerbates existing gender inequalities, particularly in access to health care and education, and consequently, downstream impacts on economic opportunities. Ultimately, climate change deepens the cycle of poverty, especially for women and girls in vulnerable communities. Rural women, often responsible for securing basic household needs such as water, food, and caregiving, bear a growing burden during climate disruptions—with climate change projected to increase their daily water collection time by up to 30% by 2050, compared to levels averaging 22.84 minutes globally and as high as 110 minutes in parts of Ethiopia during the period 1990- 2019 (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, 2024). Women’s vulnerability is compounded by their overrepresentation in the informal economy—estimated at around 58% of women working in the informal sector globally—particularly in sectors such as agriculture and 16 small-scale trade, which are highly sensitive to climate shocks (ILO, 2018). The loss of income due to climate change impacts, like crop failure or natural disasters, also disproportionately reduce women’s income, undermining both their ability to escape poverty and the broader community’s resilience (FAO, 2024a). The loss of income further diminishes women’s decision-making power in the household and community (Anderson & Eswaran, 2009). 3.3 Perception of Climate Costs and Benefits Social theories of loss aversion and identity protection suggest that men, who benefit more from existing social and economic hierarchies, often perceive greater psychological and material costs in adapting to climate change—particularly in wealthier countries where their employment and consumption patterns are more carbon-intensive (McCright & Dunlap, 2013). Survey data from nearly 13,000 respondents across 10 countries in the Americas and Europe reveal that as national income rises, men’s concern about climate change declines significantly—at a steeper rate than that of women—creating a pronounced gender gap strongly correlated with GDP per capita (ρ = 0.83, p = 0.003) (Bush & Clayton, 2023). Focus group data from the same study already show that American men were twice as likely as women to cite economic hardship from climate policies, particularly job loss in carbon-intensive sectors such as coal, beef, and timber. Beyond financial concerns, men in higher-income countries also report heightened psychological costs, driven by the perception that decarbonization undermines traditional masculine roles tied to work, autonomy, and consumption. These roles are often central to self-worth and identity—threatened by climate- friendly behaviors that are culturally coded as feminine (Daggett, 2018; Willer et al., 2013). In contrast, women are more likely to frame climate change as a collective welfare issue, leading to greater support for climate action. 17 4. Women possess distinct capabilities, shaped by social roles and behavioral conditions, which make them particularly effective in climate leadership This section applies the CLRF to evaluate women’s readiness for climate action across a comprehensive set of competencies. As outlined earlier, the CLRF is designed to assess the full spectrum of capabilities required to lead effective and inclusive climate efforts. Using this lens, we examine women’s performance across critical climate action competencies in five key domains: leadership, skills, knowledge, principles, and networks—exploring not only why these competencies matter, but how women demonstrate and apply them to drive meaningful climate solutions. 4.1 Leadership Leadership is a fundamental foundation of effective climate action, requiring the ability to navigate uncertainty, mobilize stakeholders, and make strategic decisions that balance immediate needs with long-term sustainability (Awashreh, 2025). Given the resistance and complexity inherent in climate action, effective leadership in this space must be rooted in collaboration, empathy, and a commitment to collective well-being (Bamberg et al., 2018). Studies have found that women, by virtue of their socialization, roles, and lived experiences, bring leadership qualities that closely align with the demands of climate action, positioning them as key drivers of meaningful change. A meta-analysis of 45 studies comparing leadership styles found that women tend to be more transformational leaders—building trust, mentoring subordinates, and encouraging innovation (Khan, 2024). In contrast, men were more likely to engage in corrective or disciplinary behaviors and were more often associated with laissez-faire leadership, which reflects minimal engagement. Given that transformational and participative styles are widely seen as more effective in modern organizations, the findings suggest that women’s leadership approaches—centered on inclusivity, collaboration, and long-term vision—are not only different, but often more effective, especially in 18 tackling complex issues like climate change (Harvard Business Review, 2007, Vinkenburg et al., 2011). These differences in leadership styles are not rooted in biology but shaped by social dynamics. As women navigate the "double bind"—the tension between being authoritative and being perceived as likable—they often turn to inclusive leadership as a way to assert authority without triggering negative gender bias. By involving others in decision-making and leading as supportive mentors and role models, women can project influence in a way that feels both effective and socially acceptable (Harvard Business Review, 2007). Women’s tendency to prioritize the welfare of others—often shaped by caregiving and household management responsibilities— translates into leadership approaches that emphasize sustainability and equitable resource distribution. Empirical evidence supports this: in a randomized policy experiment across West Bengal and Rajasthan, India, villages randomly assigned a female village council leader invested significantly more in public goods, such as drinking water and sanitation, than villages with a male village council leader (Chattopadhyay & Duflo, 2004). In West Bengal, for example, female-led councils invested 62% more in drinking water infrastructure, and women in those villages reported higher satisfaction with services compared to male-led councils. Similarly, in Rajasthan, female leaders were more responsive to local women’s expressed concerns, resulting in increased spending on water access over roads—the top priority of male constituents. Beyond leadership style, women’s decision-making tendencies further enhance their effectiveness in roles that require foresight and prudence. A growing body of research finds that women are significantly more risk-averse than men—meta-analyses estimate that women are approximately 15% to 25% more risk-averse, particularly in strategic decision-making contexts (Croson & Gneezy, 2009, Niederle & Vesterlund, 2011). This orientation toward risk has practical implications in how women respond to environmental threats. Research has shown that women consistently express greater concern about ecological and disaster-related risks and are more likely 19 to support preventive strategies. For instance, a systematic review found that women generally perceive flood risks as more threatening and are more inclined to support mitigation measures (Kellens et al., 2013). In Taiwan, China, women reported higher levels of fear and perceived threat related to earthquakes compared to men (Kung & Chen, 2012). Similarly, in Romania, women exhibited heightened anxiety and a stronger sense of vulnerability regarding flood risks (Armas & Avram, 2009). At the political level, this concern translates into action: a cross-national study found that increased female representation in government correlates with the adoption of more stringent environmental policies (Hunter et al., 2004). This risk sensitivity also feeds into women’s strength in intertemporal decision-making— balancing short-term trade-offs with long-term benefits. Studies suggest that women tend to prioritize future well-being over immediate gains, a crucial perspective in environmental governance, where present-day decisions have lasting ecological implications, often for future generations. One such study shows that for every woman there are 1.25 men that choose one of the extreme options, while women’s decisions tend to cluster around more balanced intertemporal choices (Thöni & Volk, 2021). This long-term orientation is particularly evident in household decision-making, where women, when given control over financial resources, allocate more toward health, education, and overall family welfare (Duflo, 2012). This perspective carries into environmental governance, where women’s emphasis on sustainability supports resource management strategies grounded in resilience and intergenerational equity. 4.2. Principles A strong value system rooted in empathy—for both people and the planet—is a fundamental driver of commitment and action in climate leadership (Wang et al., 2022). The ability to recognize and respond to the emotions and needs of others enhances collaboration, fosters trust, and strengthens sustainable and collective action. Research consistently shows that women, on average, demonstrate 20 greater empathy than men, a trait often assessed through emotional intelligence and interpersonal sensitivity measures (Rueckert et al., 2011). This heightened empathy is not only influenced by socialization, but also through biology (Baron-Cohen, 2003). Neuroimaging research shows that women exhibit stronger activation in brain regions associated with emotional processing, when exposed to emotional stimuli (Rueckert et al., 2011). These biological factors, coupled with cultural norms and social roles that encourage caregiving and emotional sensitivity from an early age, shape women's heightened capacity for empathy and collective concern. Beyond empathy, women also demonstrate a stronger inclination toward prosocial behaviors and cooperative problem-solving—qualities that are critical for addressing collective challenges like climate change (European Central Bank, 2022). Experimental research on social value orientations shows that women are substantially more likely than men to adopt prosocial strategies in group decision-making tasks. In van Lange (1999), 61% of women consistently prioritized joint outcomes and fairness over individual gain, compared to only 38% of men—a difference of over 20 percentage points, observed consistently across multiple experimental settings. These prosocial orientations—marked by reciprocity, fairness, and concern for collective welfare—are critical for fostering collaboration and building consensus, both of which are essential for advancing inclusive and effective climate solutions that require broad stakeholder engagement. 4.3 Skills A diverse and adaptive skillset is essential for effective climate action, enabling leaders to navigate complex, interconnected challenges across disciplines and respond to rapidly evolving environmental crises (World Bank Group, 2021, Foresight, 2025). Studies indicate that women excel in multitasking, enabling them to manage multiple and interrelated challenges. We see this in neuroscientific research where an analysis of brain imaging data from over 880 individuals in the US found that females exhibit significantly higher modal controllability in key regions of the brain, 21 such as the frontal and parietal cortices (Cornblath et al., 2018). This trait—associated with the brain’s ability to shift between different cognitive states—is a marker of cognitive flexibility, allowing individuals to adapt more efficiently to complex and dynamic tasks (Rosenthal et al, 2018). Similarly, research has shown that women in post-disaster settings often take on multiple, intersecting roles—providing care, coordinating recovery efforts, and addressing both immediate and long-term needs of their communities. This multitasking ability is not only a reflection of social expectations but also a demonstration of cognitive and emotional adaptability that significantly enhances community resilience (Bradshaw & Fordham, 2015). Women’s ingenuity and resourcefulness in responding to climate-induced disasters plays a critical role in ensuring both household and community survival. In a study from Bangladesh and Uganda, women, in the face of drought and flooding, shifted to alternative income sources such as petty trade, small-scale poultry farming, and home-based enterprises to offset agricultural losses (Eastin and Dupuy, 2021). Women also repurposed household items—such as using plastic containers for water collection and storage—to address acute shortages. In displacement settings, the study documents how women organized informal child-care networks, constructed makeshift sanitation facilities for privacy and safety, and developed group-based savings schemes to access emergency funds. These adaptive strategies not only mitigate the immediate impacts of climate shocks but also reflect core competencies in problem-solving, risk navigation, resilience-building, and community mobilization—skills that are central to effective climate leadership. 4.4 Knowledge Women, particularly in developing countries, are at the forefront of environmental stewardship, possessing invaluable experiential knowledge derived from their roles in food production, land management, and resource conservation. This extensive engagement in climate-sensitive sectors equips women with practical knowledge of sustainable practices, including crop diversification, 22 soil conservation, seed saving, and water management, which are crucial for building climate resilience (UNEP, 2020). Their sectoral expertise in agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and water management is essential for effective climate action, as these sectors are both highly dependent on and particularly vulnerable to climate change. A deep understanding of these industries equips leaders with the technical knowledge necessary to assess environmental risks, implement targeted mitigation and adaptation strategies, and drive sustainable resource management (IPCC, 2023). Agriculture and food supply are very sensitive to weather and climate as they rely heavily on land, water, and other natural resources that climate affects. Specifically, climate change is significantly disrupting agricultural productivity and food systems through rising temperatures, shifting rainfall patterns, and longer growing seasons. While some regions may see short-term gains, overall impacts include increased irrigation needs, soil erosion, and heightened pest and disease pressure. Wildfires, ozone pollution, and disrupted pollination cycles further reduce crop yields. Heavy rains and sea-level rise degrade soil and water quality, while runoff contributes to hypoxia in aquatic systems. Agricultural workers also face greater health risks from heat stress, pesticide exposure, and disease-carrying pests—undermining productivity, food security, and rural livelihoods (EPA, 2025). Women’s contributions to agriculture and natural resource management are substantial, yet often overlooked. In Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, and Latin America, women produce 60%–80% of food, playing a critical role in biodiversity preservation and ecosystem maintenance (FAO, 2023). Women’s labor contribution, although frequently informal and unrecorded, constitutes 39.7% of the agricultural workforce globally (ILO Modelling Estimates, 2023), with the composition at 43% of the agricultural labor force in developing countries, varying from 20% in Latin America to 50% in East Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa (FAO, 2011). In Nepal and India, women perform between 4.6 and 6.6 times more agricultural work than men, highlighting their indispensable role in food 23 security and land stewardship (Nellemann et al., 2011). Figure 2 shows the female constitution of sectoral labor force in the sectors most vulnerable to climate change. Figure 2: Share of women in the labor force of different sectors Note: Mining and quarrying includes coal, oil, gas, minerals; Utilities include electricity, gas, steam and water supply, and waste management; Agriculture, forestry and fishing includes crop & animal production, forestry, fishing; Manufacturing includes food processing, garments/textiles, chemicals, machinery, metals, and other industrial products; Accommodation and food services include tourism-linked activities such as hotels, catering, and food services; Other services include arts, care, domestic, and informal services. Source: ILO Modelling Estimate (2023) Beyond their on-the-ground expertise, women have demonstrated strong leadership in environmental movements and climate adaptation initiatives. Women-led organizations have pioneered large-scale sustainable land and water management efforts, demonstrating their ability to implement effective solutions for ecosystem restoration. In India, the Self-Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) has empowered rural women farmers to adopt organic farming techniques, improve soil health, and enhance agricultural productivity through climate-smart practices. In Kenya, the Green Belt Movement, founded by Wangari Maathai, mobilized thousands of women to 24 plant millions of trees, combat deforestation, and restore degraded land, illustrating women’s capacity to lead transformative environmental initiatives (Green Belt Movement). Given their significant presence in climate-proximate industries, women are uniquely positioned to serve as mentors and champions in the climate space. Their deep tacit knowledge—acquired through generations of environmental contribution—enables them to guide communities in adopting climate-resilient practices. Women’s skills and leadership in these areas foster knowledge-sharing networks that enhance community resilience and promote inclusive climate governance. For example, in Jamaica, the GirlsCARE Mentorship Initiative equips young women and girls with the knowledge, technical skills, and confidence to champion effective climate action through a mentorship model. Similarly, the Women4Climate Mentorship Program by C40 Cities has supported over 1,000 emerging women climate leaders across 22 global cities through structured mentorship, training, and networking opportunities. These examples underscore the role of women not only as practitioners of sustainable resource management but also as innovators and change-makers in the global climate movement. 4.5 Networks Social capital—the web of trust, reciprocity, and mutual support embedded in community relationships—is increasingly recognized as a cornerstone of effective climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction (DRR) (Wambura, 2024). As climate-related shocks intensify, successful adaptation often depends not only on formal institutions but also on the ability of communities to mobilize rapidly, share knowledge, and act collectively. Women, through their deep communal ties and informal neighborhood networks, are uniquely positioned to facilitate this kind of collective action, particularly in the most vulnerable and resource-constrained settings. This informal network becomes especially valuable as women benefit less from formal networks than men (Beaman et al., 2017). 25 Women tend to rely more heavily on bonding social capital—connections within close-knit groups such as families, peer networks, and local associations—compared to men, who often access more formal bridging or linking capital (Zhao et al., 2025). This distinction allows women to cultivate trust and cohesion within communities, making them critical actors in localized resilience-building efforts. Their networks have been shown to promote key mechanisms for resilience, including social learning, disaster preparedness, and the coordination of information and resources. Quantitative evidence from Oman supports this insight, showing that women’s contributions to DRR are not only widespread but also deeply valued across key dimensions (Abdalla et al., 2024). In a nationally representative survey, respondents ranked women’s role in social protection at 89.2%, showing the positive perception regarding the contribution of women to disaster mitigation. The survey ranked women’s roles at 87.5% in knowledge sharing, 85.6% in voluntarism, and 85.3% in crisis management—demonstrating their active leadership across both planning and response phases. Real-world examples further illustrate this impact. In the aftermath of the 2018 floods in southern India, the Kudumbashree network—a federation of over 4 million women-led self-help groups—mobilized rapid clean-up operations and distributed essential services, helping to restore community infrastructure and well-being (Walia & Nasrat, 2020). Women’s networks also play a pivotal role in overcoming social norms that inhibit participation in formal disaster preparedness efforts. In conservative rural settings where cultural taboos may discourage women from using shelters or attending public trainings, women-led mobilization has helped reshape attitudes through trust-building and peer engagement. For instance, in Bangladesh, women leaders were instrumental in increasing shelter use among female community members by engaging them directly and reframing participation as a protective and collective act (World Bank, 2011). Beyond disaster response, women’s social networks function as essential platforms for the dissemination of climate adaptation knowledge—ranging from climate-smart agriculture to 26 sustainable water use and biodiversity conservation (Otieno et al., 2021). These informal structures help ensure that adaptation strategies are not only technically sound but also locally appropriate and socially embedded, increasing their uptake and long-term sustainability. Crucially, women are also on the frontlines of last-mile service delivery in some of the most climate-vulnerable sectors—such as health, agriculture, and water management. As health extension workers, agricultural advisors, nutrition promoters, and community mobilizers, women are often the most visible and trusted interface between the state and marginalized populations. Globally, women make up approximately 67% of the health and social care workforce, providing essential services to an estimated 5 billion people (WHO, 2020). For example, in Ethiopia, over38,000 female Health Extension Workers (HEWs) deliver primary health care services across rural regions, forming the backbone of the country’s community health infrastructure (IDRC, 2018). Their dual role as both community insiders and public sector actors positions them to bridge institutional gaps, tailor services to local needs, and ensure that public goods reach the most marginalized populations in need. 5. How to Harness Women’s Leadership for Effective Climate Action 5.1 Mapping women’s spheres of influence and structural barriers in climate action While this narrative review has established why women should be recognized as climate leaders— highlighting their unique strengths, capabilities, and readiness—the question of how to effectively harness and scale their leadership requires a systematic understanding of where women are already exercising influence, and where structural barriers continue to limit their potential. As outlined in Section 2.1, we reviewed several influential conceptual frameworks that capture the complexity of climate governance and offer analytical entry points for identifying levers of 27 transformation (SEI, 2021). Among these, we apply O’Brien and Sygna’s (2013) Three Spheres of Transformation framework as it is particularly well-suited to our analysis. Figure 3 showcases how this framework distinguishes between three interdependent spheres: the practical sphere, focused on behavioral and technical solutions; the political sphere, encompassing institutional structures and policy systems; and the personal sphere, which includes values, beliefs, and social norms (O’Brien & Sygna, 2013). This framework aligns closely with the objectives of our study, allowing us to examine both the visible and structural dimensions of women’s climate leadership. In this section, we apply the Three Spheres of Transformation to map where women are already leading—practically, politically, and personally—and to identify the critical points at which policy, investment, and institutional reform can amplify their contributions and unlock greater leadership potential. Figure 3. The Three Spheres of Transformation for Climate Action (O’Brien & Sygna, 2013). 28 (i) Practical Sphere: Women as Implementers and Innovators The practical sphere represents the core of climate transformation, where tangible actions—technical, behavioral, and managerial—drive progress in mitigation and adaptation. It is often the most visible arena for climate action, yet focusing solely on measurable outputs can obscure the deeper levers of systemic change (Meadows, 2012). While women are heavily involved in agriculture and natural resource management, policy must broaden its recognition of their roles across other critical sectors, including small enterprise leadership, sustainable manufacturing, and clean energy innovation (World Bank, 2023). Women must be empowered as leaders not only in traditional adaptation sectors, but also in the industries driving the green transition—such as circular economy enterprises, nature- based infrastructure, digital climate technologies, and sustainable transport. Their leadership in these areas is critical to embedding inclusivity, local knowledge, and long- term sustainability into the design and implementation of climate solutions. Moreover, involving women more meaningfully in project design and delivery enhances community buy-in, improves outcomes, and ensures that climate interventions meet diverse needs. When women are centered in the scaling of climate-smart innovations and resilient infrastructure, the result is a dual dividend: stronger environmental outcomes and broader social impact (World Bank, 2023). Realizing this potential, however, requires addressing a set of persistent structural barriers that continue to limit women’s leadership and participation across these sectors. A study in Benin found that secure land rights for women improve their long-term economic stability (Botea et al., 2025). Without secure land rights or access to collateral, many 29 women remain excluded from the credit and investment opportunities needed to adopt or lead climate-smart solutions (UN Women, 2021b). In 24 countries in West and Central Africa, 70% of women work in agriculture, but only 30% of them own land (jointly or alone), impeding their access to credit. Climate technologies and tools often fail to reflect women's practical realities, due to design processes that exclude their input (UN Women, 2021b). Legal and cultural constraints—especially around land tenure and resource control—undermine women’s ability to invest in long-term adaptation strategies (UN Women, 2021b). Overcoming these constraints calls for targeted reforms: from expanding access to climate finance and co-designing technologies with women users, to embedding gender equity in green industrial policies that shape emerging climate economies. (ii) Political Sphere: Women as Policy Makers and System Shapers The political sphere encompasses the governance structures, regulatory frameworks, and power dynamics that shape the climate change response. It is the arena where trade-offs are negotiated and where long-term visions become codified into budgets, laws, and institutions. This is the domain where policy debates, lobbying, electoral politics, social movements, and corporate strategies intersect, often resulting in competing interests between progressive climate initiatives and entrenched economic and political structures (Forsyth, 2004). Women's participation here remains low, yet where they do lead, their influenc consistently tilts policy toward more sustainable and equitable outcomes (Hunter et al., 2004). Globally, Kandemir et al., (2024) found that with a critical mass of at least 30% women's participation in the political sphere (e.g. parliament), there are more environmentally favorable outcomes, 30 such as reduced subsidies for fossil fuels, higher environmental taxes and greater environmental spending. Studies show that governments with higher female political participation are more likely to ratify environmental treaties, enforce stricter conservation laws, and invest in climate resilience programs (Kandemir et al., 2024). Women also play a pivotal role outside formal politics—as leaders in civil society, environmental NGOs, and community movements—where they have catalyzed public pressure and accountability for progressive climate policies (Strumskyte et. al, 2022). In the private sector, women in executive and board positions contribute to the integration of sustainability into corporate governance, aligning institutional strategies with ESG standards and low-carbon transition goals (IFC, 2024). Yet, systemic barriers continue to limit women's influence in climate governance. Institutional biases and exclusionary norms result in male-dominated negotiations that fail to prioritize gender-responsive solutions (Wray et al., 2023). Women's limited access to leadership training, policy making networks, and global platforms – arising from a combination of social, cultural, and structural issues which limit women's access to suitable networking, mentoring and training – constrains their ability to shape climate discourse at scale (IFC, 2024). Moreover, gender disparities in access to climate finance mean that women-led initiatives—particularly at the grassroots level—receive a fraction of the resources available to male-led projects. OECD (2022b) shows that only 57% ($18.9 billion) of the total volume of bilateral public climate finance in 2018-19 achieved any form of gender equality objective, while only 2.4% had gender equality as its primary goal. To address these inequities, a multi-pronged strategy is needed. This includes implementing gender quotas in climate decision-making bodies in the short- term, integrating gender-responsive criteria in national climate policies and plans (e.g., NDCs), and mandating parity in the governance structures of climate finance 31 mechanisms. Dedicated financing streams for women-led climate initiatives, particularly in adaptation and resilience, are also critical. Equally important is building long-term leadership pipelines through mentorship programs, technical capacity-building, and support for women’s participation in international policy forums. (iii) Personal Sphere: Women as Catalysts of Social and Cultural Transformation The personal sphere encompasses the beliefs, norms, and worldviews that shape how individuals perceive and respond to climate change. It is where some of the most impactful leverage points for lasting transformation reside, influencing what is considered socially acceptable, politically feasible, and practically actionable (Torbert et al., 2004). Changes in this sphere have far-reaching consequences, as they shape behaviors, social norms, and decision-making processes that extend into both the political and practical spheres (Meadows, 2012). Women already play a critical role in this domain—as household decision-makers, community educators, and stewards of intergenerational knowledge. Their influence over household consumption choices, such as energy use, food sourcing, and waste management, allows them to directly reduce emissions and promote sustainable practices. Studies show that when women have greater decision-making power over household resources, outcomes like energy efficiency and waste reduction improve significantly (WEDO, 2009), as they are more likely to direct investments toward renewable energy, climate-resilient housing, and sustainable livelihoods that embed long-term adaptation into daily life. Beyond the household, and as highlighted in Section 4.4, women act as community influencers and drivers of cultural change. They lead grassroots movements that challenge 32 entrenched gender norms and promote climate-conscious behaviors, while playing a central role in environmental education and the transmission of sustainable values to future generations. However, significant barriers still limit the scale and visibility of women’s impact in this sphere (Jayachandran, 2020). Deeply rooted gender norms often restrict women from assuming leadership roles in environmental decision-making at home and in their communities (WEF, 2022). Many lack access to climate education and sustainability training, limiting their ability to make informed decisions or participate in broader dialogues (GGCA, 2016). The underrepresentation of women in media and climate leadership further compounds these issues, reinforcing the perception that environmental governance is a male-dominated domain (OECD, 2022b). To unlock the full potential of women’s leadership in the personal sphere, policy must target the cultural and informational foundations that shape agency. This includes embedding climate and sustainability education in school curricula, especially for girls, investing in awareness campaigns that elevate women’s roles in environmental stewardship, and creating platforms that amplify diverse female voices in public and media spaces (UN Women, 2021c). Cultural transformation is a prerequisite for systemic change, and women—when empowered—are among the most effective agents of that shift. 5.2 The Path Forward This study highlights a critical gap in the dominant climate discourse: while extensive research has focused on women’s heightened vulnerabilities to climate change, far less attention has been given to their agency, leadership, and concrete contributions to climate resilience. The prevailing narrative most often casts women as passive victims rather than active agents of transformation. This paper challenges this reductive framing by developing and applying the Climate Leadership 33 Readiness Framework (CLRF) to assess women’s contributions across five key pillars— leadership, principles, skills, knowledge, and networks. The findings show that women are not only prepared to lead in climate governance but are, in many cases, already shaping climate outcomes at multiple levels with limited recognition. Women’s leadership spans multiple, interconnected spheres of climate action. At the practical level, they serve as implementers and innovators, leading climate-smart agricultural practices, resource conservation efforts, and disaster response initiatives. In the political sphere, they are increasingly involved in policy making, sustainability governance, and international negotiations. At the personal and social level, they influence consumption patterns, challenge entrenched norms, and embed climate awareness into everyday decision-making. These overlapping roles position women as critical actors in driving systemic change—translating local knowledge into institutional strategies, mobilizing communities, and building adaptive governance structures. Despite this, structural barriers continue to limit their full participation. Underrepresentation in decision-making, unequal access to finance and technology, and persistent institutional biases constrain the scalability of women’s impact. Addressing these barriers requires targeted action: integrating women’s leadership into climate finance architecture, embedding it in governance frameworks, and investing in robust leadership pipelines. Governments, development institutions, and the private sector must move beyond rhetorical commitments toward institutional implementation—ensuring that women’s leadership is recognized, resourced, and systemically embedded across the climate change response. At the same time, this review highlights important limitations in the existing literature that underscore the need for further research at the intersection of gender and climate. A key constraint is the limited availability of large-scale empirical studies that quantify the relationship between 34 women’s leadership and climate resilience outcomes. Much of the current evidence remains qualitative or small in scale, pointing to the need for more rigorous methodologies —such as impact evaluations and longitudinal analyses—to assess both effectiveness and scalability. Additionally, the role of intersectionality remains insufficiently explored. Women do not experience climate risk or exercise leadership uniformly; intersecting factors such as race, class, geography, and age shape both their exposure and their capacity to act. Yet prevailing discourse often relies on binary or essentialist framings of gender, overlooking the broader structural dynamics that shape access, power, and participation. Advancing more accurate and actionable insights will require an intersectional lens that captures the full complexity of women’s experiences and the enabling conditions that support their leadership in diverse contexts. Ultimately, this paper calls for a shift in perspective: from the feminization of vulnerability and the focus on women’s exposure to risk toward a recognition of their capacity to lead transformative change. Doing so is not simply a matter of equity—it is a strategic imperative. By centering women’s leadership in climate frameworks, institutions can strengthen the effectiveness, legitimacy, and sustainability of climate action. This reconceptualization provides a new foundation for policy and practice—one that aligns more closely with the realities of those already leading on the front lines of climate resilience. 6. Appendix 6.1 Scope of review table Geogra # Economy Research Research area Name p hic field scope Agricultu Gender gaps in agriculture and food 1 Global Global re & systems FAO, 2011 Gender Agricultu Challenges for use of water in 2 Global Global FAO, 2020* re & agriculture Water 35 Behavioral Reviews gender differences in Croson & 3 Global Global Economics economic preferences (labor and goods Gneezy, market) 2009 Climate & Gendered impacts of heatwaves and 4 Global Global FAO, 2024a Rural floods Livelihoods Describes personal, political, and O'Brien 5 Global Global Climate practical spheres of change for climate & Sygna, Action action 2013* Climate Emphasizes the need for collaborative Foresight, 6 Global Global Adaptation action for climate adaption 2025* Beliefs on climate change differ by Bush & 7 Global Global Climate gender Clayton, Attitudes 2023 Climate Poverty impacts of climate change and Hallegatte et 8 Global Global Change & policy responses al., 2016* Poverty Trends and figures on global climate Climate 9 Global Global Climate finance flows Policy Finance Initiative, 2023* Effects of climate change on rural poor, 10 Global Global Climate FAO, 2024b women, and youth Inequity Highlights gendered dimensions of Climate CONCORD 11 Global Global climate justice and advocates feminist Justice & Sweden, climate policy frameworks Gender 2020 Guidance for integrating gender into 12 Global Global Climate UNDP, national climate strategies Policy 2016* Synthesizes scientific findings from 13 Global Global Climate IPCC, IPCC Working Groups I–III Science 2023* Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability 14 Global Global Climate IPCC, to climate change Science 2022* Corporate Studies how women leaders affect Glass & 15 Global Global Leadership business practices and diversity efforts Cook, 2018 Close links between women’s Development 16 Global Global empowerment and economic Duflo, 2012 Economics development 17 Global Global Digital Examines gender gaps in ICT access ITU, 2023 Inclusion Disast Highlights the prevalence of gender- 18 Global Global IFRC, 2015 er & based violence in post-disaster settings Gende 36 r Disaster Role of social capital in post-disaster Zhao et al., 19 Global Global Resilienc recovery 2025* e Disaster 20 Global Global UNDRR’s progress and strategy in UNDRR, Risk 2022 2023* Reductio n Disaster UNDRR’s activities and strategy for 21 Global Global UNDRR, Risk 2020 2020* Reductio n Educati Impact of climate change on girls' Malala 22 Global Global on & education Fund, Climate 2021 Educati 23 Global Global Global trends in gender parity in UNESCO, on & literacy 2010 Gender Environmenta Gender variation in environmental Hunter et 24 Global Global l Behavior actions across countries al., 2004 Environmenta SEI’s institutional progress and 25 Global Global SEI, 2022* l Governance commitments for 2021 Environmenta UNEP’s 2021 actions on climate and 26 Global Global UNEP, l Policy nature 2022* Investigates the psychological Environmenta Bamberg et 27 Global Global foundations of collective climate action l Psychology al., 2018* - group identity, shared norms and beliefs Environmenta Explores the link between empathy Wang 28 Global Global l Psychology with nature and pro-environmental et al., behavior 2022* Analyzes how female parliamentary Fiscal Policy Kandemir et 29 Global Global representation correlates with eco- & Gender al., 2024 friendly fiscal policies Gend Outlines gender-specific climate UN Women, 30 Global Global er & resilience approaches 2021a Clim ate Gend Survey of evidence on gender and 31 Global Global GGCA, er & climate change 2016 Clim ate Explores the intersections of gender Gend 32 Global Global and WEDO, er & climate change, and their policy 2009 37 Clim implications ate Gend World 33 Global Global er & Three key facts on gender and climate Bank Clim Group, ate 2011 Awareness Gender & UNFCCC’s Gender Action Plan for 34 Global Global UNFCCC, Climate 2019 2019 Policy Gender & Gender representation in UNFCCC 35 Global Global UNFCCC, Climate bodies 2020 Policy Gender & Gender equality in climate finance World Bank 36 Global Global Climate and decision-making Group, 2023 Policy Gender & Gender-specific climate risks and hope Nelleman 37 Global Global Climate narratives n et al., Risks 2011 Niederle & Gender & Experimental evidence on gender and 38 Global Global Vesterlund, Competition competitive behavior 2011 Gender & Toolkit for gender equality in recovery 39 Global Global UNDP, Crisis settings 2024 Recovery Gender & Facts on rural women’s development UN Women, 40 Global Global Development outcomes 2012 Gend How disasters exacerbate violence Le 41 Global Global er & against women Masson Disas et al., ters 2016 Gend Bradshaw 42 Global Global Gendered experiences of disasters er & & Disas Fordham, ters 2015 Gender & Empowering rural women for UNEP- 43 Global Global Environment sustainability WCMC, 2020 Gender Emotional reactivity and gender Rueckert et 44 Global Global Psychology differences in empathy al., 2011 Health Gender disparities in the global health 45 Global Global WHO, 2020 Workforce workforce Equity Private sector investment for climate World 46 Global Global Investment adaptation and resilience Bank Policy 38 Group, 2021* Snapshot of informal economy gender 47 Global Global Labor ILO, 2018 distribution Statistics Leadersh 48 Global Global Barriers women face in leadership roles HBR, 2007 ip & Gender Leadersh Role of women leaders in gender- 49 Global Global IFC, 2024 ip & responsive governance Gender Leadersh Gender equality and women’s Strumsky 50 Global Global ip & environmental leadership te et al., Gender 2022 World Leadersh Argues that women’s leadership is 51 Global Global Econo ip & crucial to successful climate action mic Gender Forum, 2022 Leadersh Promotes expanding women’s UN Women, 52 Global Global ip & participation in leadership spaces 2021c Gender Leadership & Calls for equitable representation in Wray et 53 Global Global Gender climate leadership roles al., 2023 Equity Leadership Explores action inquiry as a framework Torbert 54 Global Global Development for reflective, transformative leadership et al., 2004* Leadership Meta-analysis on gender differences in 55 Global Global Khan, 2024 Styles & leadership Gender Leadership Examines gender stereotypes of Vinkenburg 56 Global Global Styles & leadership styles et al., 2011 Gender Rosenthal et 57 Global Global Neuroscience Structural-functional brain relationships al., 2018* Peacebuildi Explores gender, climate risks, and UN Women 58 Global Global ng & sustaining peace et al., 2020 Climate Critical view exploring politicized 59 Global Global Political view to science can aid environmental Forsyth, Ecology decision-making 2004* Explores how 'petro-masculinities' Political shape authoritarian identity politics, 60 Global Global Daggett, Ecology and fueling climate denial, racism, and 2018 Gender misogyny in Western socio-politics 39 Examines the link between female Mavisakal Politi 61 Global Global parliamentarians and stronger climate yan & cal policy Tarverdi, Econ 2019 omy Differences in male-female brain and Baron- 62 Global Global Psychology the empathy they exhibit Cohen, 2003 Qualitative Introduces thematic analysis as a Braun & 63 Global Global Methods method in psychology Clarke, 2006* UNHCR’s operational and financial 64 Global Global Refugee UNHCR, performance for 2021 Affairs 2022* Risk Flood risk perception and public Kellens et 65 Global Global Communicati messaging al., 2013* on Risk Gender gaps in risk, time, and social Thöni & 66 Global Global Perception preferences Volk, & Gender 2021 Understanding differences among prosocial, individualistic, and Social van 67 Global Global competitive orientations where Psycholo Lange, prosocial refers to joint outcomes and gy 1999* equality in outcomes Donel Framework for identifying leverage 68 Global Global Systems la points for change Thinking Mead ows, 2012* Examines determinants of female 69 Development autonomy using household-level data Anderson National Banglades Economics from Bangladesh & h Eswaran, 2009 70 Disaster Risk Women's deaths in cyclone due to Ayeb- National Banglades & Gender shelter inaccessibility Karlsson, h 2020 Experimental evidence on how land 71 Land certification affects widows’ tenure Botea et National Benin Tenure & security al., 2025 Gender Health Mobile tech improving women health 72 National Ethiopia IDRC, 2018 Tech & worker performance Gender Women's Impact of Haiti earthquake on women’s Behrman & 73 National Haiti Reproductive reproductive health Weitzman, 40 Health 2016 Analyzes women’s role in forest Environmenta 74 National India governance and institutional Agarwal, l Governance participation 2010 Gend Walia & 75 National India Case study on Kerala floods er & Nusrat, Disas 2020 ters Leaders Impact of female political leaders on Chattopadh 76 National India and policy outcomes yay & policy Duflo, 2004 Women’s Women-led union for informal sector 77 National India Economic SEWA, n.d. workers Empowermen t Environmenta Community-led afforestation and Green Belt 78 National Kenya l Activism women’s leadership movement Movement, n.d. Beaman et 79 National Malawi Labor Job referrals and gender in labor al., 2017 Economics markets 80 Gender & Women masons in post-earthquake National Nepal Reconstructio recovery GFDRR, n 2020 Gender & Abdalla et 81 National Oman Disaster Women’s leadership in DRR in Oman al., 2024 Resilienc e Disaster Gender and geographic variation in Armaş & 82 National Romania Perceptio flood risk awareness Avram, n 2009 Risk Earthquake risk perception and gender Kung & 83 National Taiwan, Perception influence Chen, 2012 China & Gender Social Capital Wam 84 National Tanzania Role of social capital in climate action & Resilience bura, 2024* Climate & US-specific climate impacts on 85 National United US EPA, Agriculture agriculture and food supply States 2025* Analyzes how political ideology and 86 Environmenta demographic identity affect McCright National United l Sociology environmental concern & Dunlap, States 2013* 87 Gender & Exclusion of Black women in 41 National United Disaster Hurricane Katrina recovery IWPR, 2020 States Policy Gend Interplay of Race, class, and gender in David & 88 National United er & response to Hurricane Katrina Enarson, States Disas 2012 ters Tests masculine Willer et al., 89 National United Gender overcompensation hypothesis 2013 States Norms Explores sex differences in brain Cornblath et 90 National United Neuroscience network controllability and cognitive al., 2018 States performance in youth Reproductive Racial inequality in contraceptive Leyser- 91 National United Health access post-Hurricane Ike Whalen et States al., 2011 Climate Women’s leadership in climate 92 Regional Arab Gulf Awashreh, Leadership innovation and net-zero strategy 2025 Labor & Impact of gender diversity on corporate 93 Regional Europe ECB, 2022 Climate climate outcomes Policy Gend Glo How gender shapes vulnerability and Eastin & 94 Regional er & bal adaptation in climate change Dupuy, Clim Sou 2021 ate th Adaptation Glo Gendered Women spend 30% more time fetching 95 Regional PIK, 2024 bal Labor water due to climate change Sou Burden th Glo Explores how social norms limit Jayachandra 96 Regional Labor bal women’s employment n, 2020 Economics Sou opportunities th Cash transfers as tools to support Glo Adato & 97 Regional Social health, education and nutrition in bal Bassett, Protection vulnerable Sou 2009 families th Examines constraints to women’s safe Glo 98 Regional Urban and equitable use of public Borker, bal Transport transportation 2024 Sou th Argues that empowering women in Glo 99 Regional Water & irrigation enhances food security and Jha et al., bal Gender resilience 2024 Sou 42 th Glo Women in Women produce 80% of food in 10 Regional FAO, 2023 bal Agriculture developing nations 0 Sou th Disaster 10 Haiti Recove Gender-blind disaster recovery in Haiti Oxfam 1 Regional & ry & and the U.S. America, Unit Gender 2020 ed State s 10 Wom 2 Honduras en in Women-led response after Hurricane Moreno Regional & Disast Mitch & Shaw, Nicaragu er 2018 a Response Gender-responsive climate finance 10 Regional OECD Climate OECD, trends 3 Finance 2022b Inclusive Focus on marginalized groups in World 10 Regional South Resilience building resilience Bank, 4 Asia 2021b* Oxfam South/Sou Gend 10 Regional Women’s experience post-2004 International th East er & 5 tsunami , 2005 Asia Disas ters Wes Climate- Empowering women in sustainable UN Women, 10 Regional t & Resilient agricultural practices 2021b 6 Cent Agriculture ral Afri ca Notes: This table presents the sources included in this narrative review, organized first by geographic scope, then alphabetically by country (where applicable), and finally by research field. It summarizes key publications at the intersection of climate change, gender, and related disciplines. The following acronyms are used in the table: ECB – European Central Bank, FAO – Food and Agriculture Organization, GGCA – Global Gender and Climate Alliance, HBR – Harvard Business Review, IDRC – International Development Research Centre, IFC – 43 International Finance Corporation, ILO – International Labour Organization, IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ITU – International Telecommunication Union, SEI – Stockholm Environment Institute, SEWA –Self Employed Women’s Association, UNDP – United Nations Development Programme, UNDRR – United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, UNEP – United Nations Environment Programme, UNESCO – United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNFCCC – United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNHCR – United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, UN Women – United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, US EPA – United States Environmental Protection Agency, WHO – World Health Organization, WEDO – Women’s Environment and Development Organization, WB / World Bank – World Bank Group. *Denotes papers that do not use a gender lens in their analysis explicitly. 6.2 Declaration of generative AI technologies in the writing process During the preparation of this work, the authors used OpenAI’s ChatGPT solely to improve the readability and language of the paper. After using this tool, the authors carefully reviewed and edited the content to ensure accuracy and appropriateness and take full responsibility for the content of the published paper. 6.3 Key findings 1. Women’s disproportionate exposure to the impacts of climate shocks—such as displacement, income loss, and food insecurity—drives a unique and deeply personal motivation to engage in climate action. 2. Social roles and lived experiences equip women with distinct competencies—such as long- 44 term thinking, collaboration, and community mobilization—that align closely with the demands of effective climate leadership. 3. Despite these strengths, structural barriers—including limited access to finance, exclusion from decision-making, and weak institutional support—continue to constrain women’s ability to lead and scale impact. 4. The Climate Leadership Readiness Framework (CLRF) identifies five core domains of climate leadership—leadership, principles, skills, knowledge, and networks—through which women demonstrate strong readiness and capacity to lead. 5. Women lead across three key spheres of influence in climate action: at the community level through practical adaptation efforts, within institutions by shaping policy and governance, and in society by shifting norms and values—yet their influence remains under-recognized and under-supported. 7. References - IPCC. (2023). Sections in: Climate change 2023: synthesis report. Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change [Core Writing Team, H. Lee and J. Romero (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 35-115, doi: 10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647 - UNDRR. (2023). Annual Report 2022, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) - UNDRR. (2020). Annual Report 2020, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) - UNHCR. (2022). UNHCR Global Report 2021, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) 45 - UNEP. (2022). Annual Report 2021, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) - UN Women. (2021a). World’s Women 2021: Women’s Resilience in the Face of Climate Change – Concept Note - Hallegatte, S., Bangalore, M., Bonzanigo, L., Fay, M., Kane, T., Narloch, U., Rozenberg, J., Treguer, D., & Vogt-Schilb, A. (2016). Shock waves: Managing the impacts of climate change on poverty, World Bank - UN Women, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), & United Nations Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA). (2020). Gender, climate and security: Sustaining inclusive peace on the frontlines of climate change. - Adato, M., & Bassett, L. (2009). Social protection to support vulnerable children and families: the potential of cash transfers to protect education, health and nutrition. AIDS Care, 21(sup1), 60–75. - Agarwal, B. (2010), Gender and Green Governance: The Political Economy of Women's Presence Within and Beyond Community Forestry. Oxford - UNDP. (2016). Gender Equality in National Climate Action: Planning for Gender- responsive Nationally Determined Contributions. - Glass, C., & Cook, A. (2018). Do Women Leaders Promote Positive Change? Analyzing the Effect of Gender on Business Practices and Diversity Initiatives. Human Resource Management, 57, 823-837. - Mavisakalyan A., Tarverdi Y., (2019), Gender and climate change: Do female parliamentarians make difference?, European Journal of Political Economy, Volume 56, Pages 151-164, ISSN 0176-2680. 46 - Climate Policy Initiative. (2023). Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2023: Executive Summary. - World Bank Blogs. Jha, S. K., Mumssen, Y. U., Talbi, A., & Livani, T. (2024). Fostering gender equality in irrigation promotes food security. Retrieved from https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/water/investing-in-women--a-game-changer-in- climate-resilient-irrigati. Accessed on July 24, 2025 - O'Brien, Karen & Sygna, L.. (2013). Responding to climate change: The three spheres of transformation. Proceedings of the Conference Transformation in a Changing Climate. 16- 23. - World Bank Group. (2021). Enabling Private Investment In Climate Adaptation & Resilience. - Foresight (2025). Climate adaptation is a collaborative effort. Retrieved from http://climateforesight.eu/articles/climate-adaptation-is-a-collaborative-effort Accessed on July 15, 2025 - IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, 3056 pp., doi:10.1017/9781009325844 - UNFCCC. (2019). The Gender Action Plan, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Retrieved July 9, 2025 - SEI. (2022). Action and Accountability - Annual Report 2021, Stockholm Environment 47 Institute (SEI) - Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 3. 77-101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa. - Borker G. (2024), Understanding the constraints to women’s use of urban public transport in developing countries, World Development, Volume 180, 106589, ISSN 0305-750X - Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR). (2020). Get to the Bricks: The Experiences of Black Women from New Orleans Public Housing after Hurricane Katrina. - Ayeb-Karlsson, S. (2020). When the disaster strikes: Gendered (im)mobility in Bangladesh. Climate Risk Management, 29, 100237. - Oxfam America (2020). Local women know best when it comes to ensuring women’s safety in a disaster. Retrieved from https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/stories/local- women-know-best-when-it-comes-to-ensure-womens-safety-in-a-disaster/ Accessed August 28, 2025 - Moreno, J., & Shaw, D. (2018) Women’s empowerment following disaster: a longitudinal study of social change. Nat Hazards 92, 205–224. - GFDRR. (2020). Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Disaster Recovery. Disaster Recovery Guidance Series - World Bank. (2021b). Inclusive Resilience: Inclusion Matters for Resilience in South Asia. Washington, DC: World Bank - UNESCO. (2010). Adult and youth literacy: Global trends in gender parity (Fact Sheet No. 3) - ITU. (2023). Bridging the gender divide, International Telecommunication Union (ITU). - UNFCCC. (2020). Gender composition: Report by the secretariat. United Nations 48 Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) - Behrman, J. A., & Weitzman, A. (2016). Effects of the 2010 Haiti Earthquake on Women's Reproductive Health. Studies in family planning, 47(1), 3–17. - Leyser-Whalen, O., Rahman, M., & Berenson, A. B. (2011). Natural and social disasters: racial inequality in access to contraceptives after Hurricane Ike. Journal of women's health (2002), 20(12), 1861–1866. - UNDP (2024). Gender and recovery Toolkit: Advancing Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Crisis and Recovery Settings. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) - International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) (2015). Unseen, unheard: Gender-based violence in disasters. In International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies - Le Masson, V., Lim, S., Budimir, M., Podboj, J. S. (2016). Disasters and violence against women and girls. (Working Paper). Overseas Development Institute (ODI) - Oxfam International (2005). The tsunami’s impact on women (Oxfam Briefing Note) - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. (2024). https://neksap.org.np/uploaded/resources/Publications-and-Research/Reports/Annual Household Survey 2015_16_Major findings.pdfUp to 30 percent more time: Climate change makes it harder for women to collect water. Retrieved from https://www.pik- potsdam.de/en/news/latest-news/up-to-30-percent-more-time-climate-change-makes-it- harder-for-women-to-collect-water Accessed July 10, 2025 - ILO. (2018). Women and men in the Informal Economy: A statistical picture (Third edition). International Labour Office (ILO). 49 - Anderson, S. & Eswaran, M. (2009). What determines female autonomy? Evidence from Bangladesh. In Journal of Development Economics (Vol. 90, pp. 179–191). - McCright, A. & Dunlap, R. (2013). Bringing Ideology In: The Conservative White Male Effect on Worry about Environmental Problems in the USA. Journal of Risk Research. 16. 10.1080/13669877.2012.726242. - FAO. (2024a). Heatwaves and floods affect rural women and men differently, widen income gap. Newsroom. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Rome. - FAO. (2024b). The unjust climate – Measuring the impacts of climate change on rural poor, women and youth. Rome. - FAO (2020). The State of Food and Agriculture. Overcoming water challenges in Agriculture. Rome. - Malala Fund (2021). Malala Fund publishes report on climate change and girls’ education. Retrieved from https://malala.org/news-and-voices/malala-fund- publishes- report-on-climate-change-and-girls-education Accessed on July 10, 2025 - Bush, S. S., & Clayton, A. (2023). Facing Change: Gender and Climate Change Attitudes Worldwide. American Political Science Review, 117(2), 591–608. doi:10.1017/S0003055422000752. - Daggett, C. (2018). Petro-masculinity: Fossil Fuels and Authoritarian Desire. Millennium, 47(1), 25-44. - Willer, R., Rogalin, C. L., Conlon, B., & Wojnowicz, M. T. (2013). Overdoing Gender: A Test of the Masculine Overcompensation Thesis. American Journal of Sociology, 118(4), 980–1022. - Awashreh, R. (2025). Leadership in the pursuit of net-zero emissions: overcoming barriers and embracing strategic innovation. Arab Gulf Journal of Scientific Research. 50 - Bamberg, S., Rees, J. & Schulte, M. (2018). Environmental protection through societal change. 10.1016/B978-0-12-813130-5.00008-4. - Khan, S. I. (2024). Transactional, transformational and Laissez-Faire leadership styles: A meta analysis comparing women and men. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 35(2), 100502. - Harvard Business Review (HBR) (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2007/09/women-and-the-labyrinth-of-leadership. Accessed July 14, 2025. - Vinkenburg, C. J., Van Engen, M. L., Eagly, A. H., & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. (2011). An exploration of stereotypical beliefs about leadership styles: Is transformational leadership a route to women’s promotion? The Leadership Quarterly, 22(1), 10–21. - Chattopadhyay, R. C., & Duflo, E. (2004). Women as Policy Makers: Evidence from a Randomized Policy Experiment in India. Econometrica, 72(5), 1409–1443. - Croson, R., & Gneezy, U. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(2), 448–474. - Niederle, M., & Vesterlund, L. (2011). Gender and Competition. Annual Review of Economics, 3, 601–630. - Kellens, W., Terpstra, T. and De Maeyer, P. (2013), Perception and Communication of Flood Risks: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research. Risk Analysis, 33: 24-49. - Kung, Y.-W. and Chen, S.-H. (2012), Perception of Earthquake Risk in Taiwan: Effects of Gender and Past Earthquake Experience. Risk Analysis, 32: 1535-1546. - Armaş, I., & Avram, E. (2009). Perception of flood risk in Danube Delta, Romania. Natural Hazards, 50(2), 269–287. - Hunter, L. M., Hatch, A., & Johnson, A. (2004). Cross-National Gender variation in 51 Environmental Behaviors*. Social Science Quarterly, 85(3), 677–694. - Thöni, C., & Volk, S. (2021). Converging evidence for greater male variability in time, risk, and social preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(23). - Duflo, E. (2012). Women empowerment and economic development. Journal of Economic Literature, 50(4), 1051–1079. - Wang, L., Sheng, G., She, S. & Xu, J. (2022). Impact of empathy with nature on pro‐ environmental behaviour. International Journal of Consumer Studies. 47. 652-668. 10.1111/ijcs.12856. - Rueckert, L., Branch, B., & Doan, T. (2011). Are gender differences in empathy due to differences in emotional reactivity? Psychology, 02(06), 574–578. - European Central Bank. (2022). Does gender diversity in the workplace mitigate climate change? In ECB Working Paper Series (No 2650). - Baron-Cohen, S. (2003). The essential difference: The truth about the male and female brain. Basic Books. - van Lange, P. A. M. (1999). The pursuit of joint outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative model of social value orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 337-349. - Cornblath, E. J., Tang, E., Baum, G. L., Moore, T. M., Roalf, D. R., Gur, R. C., Gur, R. E., Pasqualetti, F., Satterthwaite, T. D., & Bassett, D. S. (2018, January 15). Sex differences in network controllability as a predictor of executive function in youth. - Rosenthal, G., Váša, F., Griffa, A., Hagmann, P., Amico, E., Goñi, J., Avidan, G., & Sporns, O. (2018). Mapping higher-order relations between brain structure and function with embedded vector representations of connectomes. Nature Communications, 9(1). - Bradshaw, S. & Fordham, M. (2015). Chapter 14 - Double Disaster: Disaster through a 52 Gender Lens. In J. F. Shroder, A.E. Collins, S. Jones, B. Manyena, J. Jayawickrama, Hazards, Risks, and Disasters in Society, (pp. 233-251). Academic Press. ISBN 9780123964519. - Global Gender and Climate Alliance. (2016). Gender and Climate Change: A closer look at existing evidence. In Gender and Climate Change. - David, E. & Enarson, E. (2012). The Women of Katrina: How Gender, Race, and Class Matter in an American Disaster. Vanderbilt University Press - Eastin, J. & Dupuy, K. (2021) Gender, climate change and livelihoods: vulnerabilities and adaptations. CABI eBooks. - UNEP-WCMC. (2020). Empowering rural women and girls as a solution to environmental sustainability and food security. Retrieved from https://www.unep-wcmc.org/en/news/empowering-rural-women-and-girls-as-a- solution-to-environmental-sustainability-and-food-security. Accessed on July 16, 2025 - US EPA (2025). Climate change impacts on agriculture and food supply. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/climateimpacts/climate-change-impacts-agriculture-and- food-supply Accessed on July 15, 2025 - FAO (2023) Women produce up to 80% of food in developing countries. Retrieved from https://www.fao.org/family-farming/detail/en/c/1634537/ Accessed on July 15, 2025 - UN Women (2012). Rural Women - Facts & Figures: Rural Women and the Millennium Development Goals. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/womenwatch/feature/ruralwomen/facts-figures.html. Accessed on 53 July 15, 2025 - Nellemann, C., Verma, R., and Hislop, L. (eds). (2011). Women at the frontline of climate change: Gender risks and hopes. A Rapid Response Assessment. United Nations Environment Programme, GRID-Arendal. - SEWA (n.d.) Retrieved from https://www.sewa.org/ Accessed on July 15, 2025 - Green Belt Movement (n.d.) Retrieved from https://www.greenbeltmovement.org/ Accessed on July 15, 2025 - Wambura, N. S. P. (2024). Building Resilient Communities: the Interplay between Climate Change and Social Capital. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 24(2), 1801–1812. - Beaman, L., Keleher, N., & Magruder, J. (2017). Do Job Networks Disadvantage Women? Evidence from a Recruitment Experiment in Malawi. Journal of Labor Economics, 36(1), 121–157. - Zhao, G., Hui, X., Zhao, F., Feng, L., Lu, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2025). How does social capital facilitate community disaster resilience? A systematic review. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12. - Abdalla, S., Ramadan, E., Mamari, W.A. (2024). Enhancing gender-responsive resilience: The critical role of women in disaster risk reduction in Oman. Progress in Disaster Science, Volume 24, ISSN 2590-0617. - Walia, A. and Nusrat, N. (2020). Kerala Floods 2018. National Institute of Disaster Management, New Delhi, Pages 106. - The World Bank Group. (2011). Gender & climate change: Three things you should know. 54 - Otieno G., Zebrowski W.M., Recha J., Reynolds T.W., (2021) Gender and Social Seed Networks for Climate Change Adaptation: Evidence from Bean, Finger Millet, and Sorghum Seed Systems in East Africa. Sustainability; 13(4):2074. - WHO. (2020). Value gender and equity in the global health workforce. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/activities/value-gender-and-equity-in-the-global-health- workforce. Accessed on July 15, 2025 - IDRC. (2018). Enhancing health worker performance in Ethiopia with mHealth. Retrieved from https://idrc-crdi.ca/en/research-in-action/enhancing-health-worker- performance-ethiopia-mhealth Accessed on July 15, 2025 - Donella Meadows. (2012). Leverage points: places to intervene in a system - the Donella Meadows project. Retrieved from https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points- places-to-intervene-in-a-system/ Accessed on July 15, 2025 - World Bank Group. (2023). Placing Gender Equality at the Center of Climate Action. - Botea, I., Goldstein, M., Houngbedji, K., Kondylis, F., O'Sullivan, M., Selod, H. (2025). Certified to Stay?: Long-Run Experimental Evidence on Land Formalization and Widows’ Tenure Security in Benin. Policy Research Working Paper; 11102. © World Bank. License: CC BY 3.0 IGO. - UN Women. (2021b). Empowering Women Through Climate-resilient Agriculture In West And Central Africa. - Forsyth, T. (2004). Critical Political Ecology: The Politics of Environmental Science. 10.4324/9780203017562. - Kandemir, A. S., Lone, R. R., & Simsek, R. (2024). Women in Parliaments and Environmentally Friendly Fiscal Policies: A Global Analysis. Sustainability, 16(17), 7669. 55 - Strumskyte, S., Ramos Magaña, S., Bendig, H., & Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development. (2022). Women’s leadership in environmental action. In OECD Environment Working Papers (Report No. 193). - IFC. (2024). Gender-responsive Climate Governance and the Role of Women Leaders. International Finance Corporation (IFC). - Wray B., Veidis E.M., Flores E.C., Phillips A.A., Alani O., Barry M. (2023). A Call to Action for Gender Equity in Climate Leadership. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1;108(6):1088- 1092. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.22-0674. PMID: 37127272; PMCID: PMC10540118. - Torbert, W. R., Cook-Greuter, S., Fisher, D., Foldy, E., Gauthier, A., Keeley, J., Rooke, D., Ross, S., Royce, C., Rudolph, J., Taylor, S., and Tran, M. (2004). Action inquiry: The secret of timely and transforming leadership. Berrett-Koehler. - WEDO. (2009). Climate change connections. In A. Grossman (Ed.), Climate Change Connections. WEDO - CONCORD Sweden. (2020). Feminist Policies for Climate Justice - highlighting key linkages between Gender and Climate. - Jayachandran, S. (2020). Social Norms as a Barrier to Women’s Employment in Developing Countries. NBER. - World Economic Forum (2022). Why women’s leadership is key to climate action. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/stories/2022/02/women-gender-equality- climate-change-leadership. Accessed on July 24, 2025. - OECD (2022b) Development Finance for GenderResponsive Climate Action. OECD Development Cooperation Directorate. OECD Publishing, Paris. - UN Women (2021c). Claiming women’s space in leadership. Retrieved from https://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2021/3/compilation-claiming-womens- 56 space-in-leadership. Accessed on July 25, 2025. 57