Event Review: Reproductive Justice in a Changing Climate

Across the globe, people are experiencing the effects of climate change. But what does this mean in the context of human reproduction and reproductive choice? As part of a series of Cambridge Festival events focusing on 'Reproductive Justice in a Changing Climate', Cambridge Reproduction organised a panel discussion and exhibition that critically dissected this very question.

Chaired by Dr R Sánchez-Rivera from the University of Cambridge, the panel brought together three esteemed researchers: Professor Amanda Sferruzzi-Perri from the University of Cambridge, Dr Reetika Subramanian from the University of East Anglia (UEA), and Dr Lisa Tilley from the School of Oriental and African Studies. Asked first to summarise their academic backgrounds and research pursuits, the panellists immediately introduced the biological, cultural, and political lenses through which the rest of the subject would be examined.

A university professor in fetal and placental physiology, Professor Sferruzzi-Perri introduced the biological observations underpinning her research on how environmental stressors – such as heat exposure – can increase the risk of pregnancy complications, including preterm birth and stillbirth. Currently conducting research in the Gambia, where rising temperatures exacerbate these risks, she not only highlighted the biological implications of her work but also addressed the social stressors faced by developing countries like the Gambia, where women make up a significant portion of the workforce.

While the direct effects of climate change are felt globally, the knock-on effects on reproductive health, rights, and justice disproportionately affect certain subgroups. For example, those in the Global South are not only experiencing extreme heat but are also facing rising sea levels, droughts, and floods. These environmental crises, coupled with existing social and economic stressors, have immediate and lasting implications for women's reproductive autonomy.

A senior research associate at the UEA School of Global Development, Dr Subramanian, proceeded to introduce her research, which fits squarely within these themes. To disentangle the impacts of climate change and child marriage in South Asia, Dr Subramanian shone light on Western India, where marriage is considered a compulsory institution and child marriage remains prevalent. Critically, when women become wives, they also become workers. These women often enter the workforce as labourers, particularly in industries such as sugarcane production, where they endure harsh working conditions that compound existing environmental stressors. Dr Subramanian also underscored the loss of opportunity that young women face when they enter the workforce at such a young age.

Finally, Dr Tilley, a senior lecturer in development studies, brought in her political economy perspective, which, while distinct, was deeply connected to the broader discussion. Motivated by systemic questions surrounding reproductive justice, Dr Tilley examined how colonialism, capitalism, and imperialism intersect to shape environmental inequalities. She introduced the concept of 'environmental racism', highlighting that while developing countries bear the brunt of climate change, marginalised communities in developed countries – such as the USA – also face environmental injustice. From unequal exposure to environmental hazards to limited political representation, these disparities negatively impact fertility and pregnancy outcomes in these communities.

With distinct areas of expertise, the panellists were invited to consider why a multidisciplinary approach is necessary to tackle these issues. Acknowledging the 'multiple existing threats' that feed into this challenge, Dr Subramanian encouraged audience members to reconsider what 'climate change' means in practice.

Climate change, Professor Sferruzzi-Perri pointed out, is a multifaceted problem that cannot be fully understood or addressed through a single discipline. Collaboration between biologists, community workers, and policymakers is therefore crucial. Dr Tilley, however, cautioned against an overly simplistic 'cause and effect' analysis. Instead, she urged the audience to recognise that reproductive justice is shaped by global systems of oppression. Diving into the history of forced sterilisation camps, she argued that these racist and violent structures necessitate not just a multidisciplinary approach but also a maintained awareness of historical and contemporary injustices worldwide.

The remainder of the discussion explored how the climate crisis deepens social inequalities. Professor Sferruzzi-Perri considered how environmental stressors may contribute to increased domestic violence and directly influence family dynamics. On a global scale, Dr Tilley pointed out that poorer nations will suffer the most severe impacts, while wealthier nations often respond with a lack of urgency and an 'over there' mentality. Once all panellists had given their responses in turn, the session swiftly transitioned into a quick Q&A from audience members.

Following the discussion, audience members were invited to explore an accompanying multimedia exhibition. In addition to posters from the panellists, attendees encountered artworks, research presentations, and interactive exercises that explored the intersection of climate change and reproductive justice. One exhibit that struck me upon entering featured an artistic representation of microorganisms that have evolved to adapt to their environment. Another invited passers-by to write down their personal hopes and concerns around climate change and reproductive justice on a communal sheet of paper.

Overall, the discussion and exhibition provided attendees with a detailed insight into the biological, cultural, and political implications of climate change. Each panellist, armed with evidence from their own research, brought a unique yet complementary set of perspectives to the table.

As a biologist, I appreciated the opportunity to engage with the social and political dimensions of climate change that go beyond its immediate environmental impacts. However, as a woman facing an uncertain climate future, I left the event somewhat disappointed by the lack of proposed solutions. While the discussion painted a complex and thorough picture of the problem, it did not offer much in the way of actionable resolutions. Perhaps, this reflects a deeper challenge: translating academic observations into tangible policy change is no easy feat. Nonetheless, this event was not for those seeking reassurance – rather, it was a sobering, thought-provoking, and necessary conversation.

Despite its heavy themes, this event was an eye-opening multidisciplinary exploration of an urgent and important issue.