Digital Document (pdf, doc, ppt, txt, etc.)

Current research suggests that there is differentiated access to use of and control over infrastructure facilities and services by men and women, linked to inequalities in intra- household relations, property rights and cultural restrictions (Doran 1990). Yet in reality infrastructure projects are often gender insensitive because it is assumed that women and men will automatically equally benefit from new infrastructure, without due acknowledgement of the full range of social and economic impacts, whether positive or negative. Too often, the positive outcomes experienced by women through infrastructural projects have been unintended and unplanned. Well-designed, appropriately located and affordably priced infrastructure can be a powerful tool in the pursuit of gender equality. Therefore, gender mainstreaming should not only be regarded as a factor requiring attention in infrastructure projects but rather must be considered as a critical factor in ensuring the project’s success and sustainability by ensuring that women do not become worse off both absolutely and in relation to men (World Bank 2008). 

Examples of Gender Indicators for Infrastructure Project Cycle

Project design and input indicators.

• Infrastructure constraints on men's productive roles and women's economic, domestic and community

  management roles addressed.

• The economic and cultural issues affecting women's and men's access to transport and services identified and

  addressed.

• Staff in Project Coordination Team identified to facilitate women's participation in the project.

• Overall institutional structure set-up will help to encourage staff to address gender in their projects. This can be through increased gender sensitisation of staff, providing appropriate tools to undertake gender sensitive monitoring, ensuring quarterly progress reports are reporting gender disaggregated data on project achievements, establish dialogue amongst staff on constraints and achievements in addressing gender issues in the project, etc.

• Include HIV/AIDS indicators related to awareness, access to health services, treatment and counselling.

Project implementation indicators.

• Gender responsiveness of institutional arrangements and delivery systems for inputs.

• Participatory project planning and implementation with women and men in communities, including procurement activities of the project.

• Training, capacity building and methodologies used cater for both women and men.

• HIV/AIDS awareness campaigns for workers and communities and activities promoting access to health services, treatment and counselling.

Project output indicators.

• Increase in number of women selected to participate in project activities such as road or path construction and

  maintenance.

• Increase in ratio of women to men with access to appropriate physical infrastructure;

• Increase in ratio of women to men with access to employment and income generating activities.

• Increase in HIV/AIDS awareness, access to health services, treatment and counselling.

Project impacts indicators.

• Reduced time and costs for women and men taking goods to the market.

• Increased income for women and men.

• Increased number of women and men entrepreneurs on road sides;

• Reduced traffic related accidents;

• Increase in security for communities in the region;

• Increase in enrolment rates in primary and secondary schools;

• Improved women’s participatory and decision making skills in community infrastructure management issues;

• Improved maternal and child health;

• Reduced HIV/AIDS prevalence;

Past research has shown that the fears and concerns of transit passengers about safety influence their travel decisions. While the relationship between women’s fear of crime and public space has been the focus of considerable research, transit environments – which are especially threatening to female passengers – have received much less attention. This study examines the issue of women’s safety on transit through a comprehensive review of the literature on the topic, in-depth interviews with representatives of national interest groups, a survey of U.S. transit operators, and presentation of case studies and best practices from the U.S. and abroad.

The women interviewed for this study argued that women as a group have distinct safety/security needs and are often fearful of transit settings with specific social and physical characteristics. Their fear leads them often to adjust their behavior and travel patterns and/or avoid certain travel modes and settings at certain times. This situation is more acute for particular groups of women, who because of age, income, type of occupation, sexual preference, and place of residence may be or feel more vulnerable to victimization and harassment than others. The women interviewed outlined a series of design, policing, security technology, education and outreach strategies that would make women riders feel safer in public settings.

Nevertheless, the survey of transit operators found that only a handful of agencies in the U.S. currently have programs that target the safety and security needs of women riders. Most survey respondents believed that women have distinct safety and security needs, but only one third of them believed that transit agencies should put specific programs into place to address these needs. Additionally, the survey suggested that there is a significant mismatch between the safety and security needs and desires of female passengers and the types and locations of strategies that transit agencies use.

While transit operators in the U.S. have not initiated any particular programs specifically targeting women’s safe travel, transit agencies and municipal governments in some other countries and nonprofit groups in the U.S. and other countries have started initiatives that target women’s safe and comfortable travel. Based on lessons learned from such initiatives, as well as the input of respondents in our interviews and survey, this study proposes a series of suggestions to close the gap between research and practice on the topic of women’s safety, and address the mismatch between the needs of women and the practices of transit operators in the U.S. These include 1) initiation of researcher-practitioner dialogues; 2) incorporation of women’s voices in the planning process; 3) collaboration and partnering between transit agencies and nonprofits; 4) prioritization of safety/security needs in the transportation system; 5) tailoring safety/security initiatives to the particular needs of communities; 6) adopting a multipronged approach to safety that utilizes environmental design, policing, security technology, education and outreach strategies and policy initiatives; and 7) initiating pilot programs and policies with the goal of enhancing the safety of women riders. 

During the twentieth century, great strides were made in reducing dis- ease and improving the health of individuals and populations. Public health measures such as sanitation, improved hygiene, and vaccines led to major reductions in mortality and morbidity (Turnock, 2001). Increased attention to the hazards of the workplace resulted in reduced injuries and better health for workers (IOM, 2003a). Advances in biomedical research helped expand knowledge of disease and spurred the development of new clinical and pharmaceutical interventions. More recently, the sequencing of the human genome has provided information that holds the promise for further improving human health.

Over the years a large body of evidence has emerged indicating that social and behavioral factors such as socioeconomic status, smoking, diet, and alcohol use are important determinants of health (Berkman and Kawachi, 2000; IOM, 2000; Marmot and Wilkinson, 2006). Recent studies also suggest that examining interactions among genetic and social- environmental factors could greatly enhance understanding of health and illness. For example, Caspi and colleagues (2003) found “evidence of a gene- by-environment interaction, in which an individual’s response to environmental insults is moderated by his or her genetic makeup.” In a study showing how the social environment can influence biological response, Manuck et al. (2005) found that the socioeconomic status of communities is associated with variations in central nervous system serotonergic responsivity, which may have implications for the prevalence of psychological disorders and behaviors such as depression, impulsive aggression, and suicide 

As part of a strategy to determine how best to integrate research priori- ties to include an increased focus on the impact on health of interactions among social, behavioral, and genetic factors, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research, in con- junction with the National Human Genome Research Institute and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, requested that the Institute of Medicine undertake a study to examine the state of the science on gene- environment interactions that affect human health, with a focus on the social environment.1 The goal of the study was to identify approaches and strategies to strengthen the integration of social, behavioral, and genetic research and to consider the relevant training and infrastructure needs. More specifically, NIH requested the following:

1. Review the state of the science on the interactions between the social environment and genetics that affect human health.

2. Develop case studies that will demonstrate how the interactions of the social environment and genetics affect health outcomes; illustrate the methodological issues involved in measuring the interactions; elucidate the research gaps; point to key areas necessary for integrating social, behavioral, and genetic research; and suggest mechanisms for overcoming barriers.

3. Identify gaps in the knowledge and barriers that exist to integrating social, behavioral, and genetic research in this area.

4. Recommend specific short- and long-term priorities for social and behavioral research on gene-social environment interactions; identify mechanisms that can be used to encourage interdisciplinary research in this area.

5. Assess workforce, resource, and infrastructure needs and make ac- tionable recommendations on overcoming barriers and developing mechanisms to accelerate progress. 

Men still dominate flying by better than ten to one ratio,but there is no question tha tfemale participation in all aspects of aviation has increased dramatically in the past decade, and will no doubt continue to do so in the future. Although women have been flying airplanes since 1910, little attention was paid to them in terms of suitability and adaptability to flight, as compared to their male counterparts, until recently. It wasn't until the 1980's, after Congress modified existing law to allow women into the flight programs of the military in large numbers, that studies to ascertain what accommodations, if any, would have to be made to cockpits, training, health care, flight clothing, and a multitude of other situations hitherto largely unconsidered. Further emphasis was added as U.S. air carriers, in response to the booming expansion of the airlines in the 199O's, began hiring women pilots in unprecedented numbers.

There are real differences between male and female aviators, with advantages and disadvantages affecting both. The extent to which these characteristics can be resolved by technology advances is relatively limited: 

• Non-genetic color blindness, i.e., acquired due to lead, drug or alcohol poisoning, multiple sclerosis or brain injury, afflict men and women equally.  
• Hearing loss due to noise affects women and men equally
• Several studies have documented that females are much more susceptible to decompression sickness, in the order of about four times more likely than men to be stricken with symptoms following low-pressure exposure.
• As many women as men die of heart attacks in the U.S., however men are h r more likely to be stricken at earlier ages, often in their forties and fifties.  
• Seventy-seven percent ofthe female population fills below the male 5'" percentile in sitting height, and 27% fall below in buttocks to knee length.  In ejection seats, light weight people where women predominate, run an increased risk of spinal compression and fracture, due to the more rapid onset of acceleration
• Women are at a substantial disadvantage versus men regarding cockpit control movements (see chart) with women typically possessing about 60% of average male strength overall
• In refractive eye surgery women pilots experience significantly greater lack of acuity, corneal haze, glare tendencies, and myopic instability. These diffkxenceswere associated with contraceptive use, pregnancy, and menopause.
• Whether due to hormones, genetic disposition, cultural factors or a simple lack of aversion to risk, flight discipline violations seem to be an exclusive domain of males. 
• It has long been known that females have a small but measurable reaction time advantage over males. This is a useful trait in the aeronautical environment, especially when one is forced with an emergency situation where even a split second can be critical.
• At some point in a pregnancy, a woman must quit flying. To a large extent, this is dictated by the type of flying environment in which the woman participates. For example, a high-stress, high "g" environment, such as aerobatic routines requires a conservativeapproach, as does any flying where the use of  an ejection seat or a parachute is a possibility