Climate Wrongs, Human Rights and Female Condoms

A belated plug for a couple of top notch recent Oxfam policy papers. My colleague Kate Raworth has written an important paper on the relationship between human rights and climate change. By exploring the impact of climate change on a number of rights within international law (eg to food, life and security, subsistence and health), the paper links two important, but often separate disciplines. In public policy as in science, this kind of cross-fertilisation between disciplines often leads to innovation and progress. In this case, a human rights perspective highlights the obligations governments have already signed up to under international law, and raises the long-term possibility of tobacco-style litigation if they fail to uphold them.
Another good recent paper was on the criminal neglect by policy makers and researchers of female condoms as part of the response to the HIV and AIDS pandemic. The female condom is the only female-initiated method that provides protection from HIV infection; it also (obviously) prevents unwanted pregnancy. Studies have shown it is acceptable to users, increases the proportion of protected sex acts, and is cost-effective when provided in addition to male condoms. Yet most women cannot access them and new female-initiated technologies such as microbicides will not be available for many years. A scandalous example of how gender bias (in this case in investment decisions on the response to HIV) can kill.