Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
In this limited podcast series from Oil Change International, host Shady Khalil pulls back the curtain on the true cost of fossil fuels and the villains blocking climate action. Through candid conversations with global climate leaders, the podcast explores the damage caused by fossil fuels, the obstacles in our path, and how people-powered movements are forging the path towards a just and equitable transition that leaves no one behind.
From the frontlines of the climate crisis to the global halls of power, we look at the political, economic, and people-powered battles shaping our future. This is not just a fight about climate and carbon, it’s a fight for people and justice. Together we can create the livable future we deserve.
New episodes will be released every week. Find out more at https://oilchange.org/burned/
Shady Khalil (00:04)
Hello everyone, this is Shady Khalil from Oil Change International. You are listening to Burned: The Price of Oil, a podcast where we expose the true cause of fossil fuel and the villains blocking climate action and how a movement of people power is fighting back to create momentum for just an equitable transition that leaves no one behind. Joining me on this episode, Dr. Amiera Sawas, Head of Research and Policy at the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty. Welcome Amiera.
I'm very excited to have you here.
Amiera Sawas (00:34)
Thanks for having me.
Shady Khalil (00:36)
For our listeners, Amiera has worked for almost 20 years at the intersection of climate change, gender and social justice and public participation. And Amiera, I've known you for, I don't know how long, might be over seven years maybe, engaging on different pieces around communication and climate change and how communities actually experience and define climate change. And we had our first project in...
I think four countries in Middle East and North Africa. So I'm excited. So maybe we can also take the audience into this journey of getting to know more about what are the personal experiences that shaped how you see the connection between colonialism, gender, extractivism and climate justice. But I think you embody this kind of like intersection and connection. And I am personally curious to know how did you naturally like bring all of this?
Amiera Sawas (01:33)
such a good question and I could talk for hours as you know, in general, but especially on this question. So I come from a family that have been affected by colonialism in different ways with different levels of privilege as well. So ⁓ my dad's side of the family are Syrian, my mom's side of the family are Irish and working class, very working class. And so it was very present in childhood.
the way that power can affect ordinary people and the systems of power that existed. But I didn't have the words. I didn't have the full language around colonialism, probably because of the more working class nature of my family history. So I was one of the first people in my family to go to university, just as an example. And I remember even my first degree, which was in psychology, I was working on issues around Islamophobia and gender, women's rights.
didn't have the language of colonialism, I didn't know how to articulate what felt uncomfortable. Just something didn't feel right. I never felt like I always felt there was something wrong in the way that the world existed and particularly issues around racism and discrimination. That really catalyzed at 9-11 actually, when 9-11 happened. Obviously, I'm in the UK, despite the working class background in my family.
We were socially mobile and so I had the privilege for part of my childhood going to private schools and we were the only, or some of the only Muslim families. And after 9-11, the tone of my experience changed dramatically and the way that people looked at and framed my family members. So that also became really present for me. So I always just felt a bit disconnected. And then when I was doing my studies, I just became more aware and ⁓
learning about how the world had evolved, the role of the British Empire in the struggles that my own family had experienced was very, yeah, the language came, the privilege of education gave me their words. And then after, you know, my masters, just, which I did in global politics, where I learned a lot of this stuff, that was on the global recession here. So the concept of macroeconomic shocks and stresses became really present at that time.
I graduated into a very difficult market, but I got the first job that I could. The first job that I could was for a reputation management consultancy, which was ⁓ a former offshoot of Edelman, the PR agency, which many of you know about because of their relationship to fossil fuels now. A lot of the clients that I was working with were dealing with the environment. I started to become aware of the role of corporations.
in the environment in the global south and climate change. And I just had this crisis where I was like, what am going to do with my life? Because what I'm doing right now is possibly supporting greenwashing. So I did a PhD, which was on climate change, basically. And it was initially on water governance in Pakistan. And then the mega floods of 2010, 2011 happened. So it became about climate change very dramatically. And yeah, being there and witnessing and
playing a role in doing research on the issue opened my eyes to many things that are important for me now. One of them was, what's my role as a mixed heritage woman who's half white with all the privileges that comes with, with access to the education I managed to have? What's my role in countries in the global south? And I obviously went in with a bit of the white savior syndrome. And then I realized when I was there, there's so many experts that aren't getting the
access and opportunities that I am to talk about climate change and to talk about injustice. Why am I getting the speaking panel opportunities and why am I getting the funding opportunities and they aren't? So that's when my role became really important as well, my positionality in that work.
Shady Khalil (05:42)
Thank you so much, Amiera. mean, there are many, many parts of the things that you were saying resonated with me. So Amiera, in the last few episodes, we have been talking about the commitments all countries have made to transition from fossil fuel and the global north countries blocking progress on oil and gas phase out by massively expanding their production, as you know, while also withholding the trillions in public finance needed to fund the fair energy transition. But in this episode, we are just like hoping to go deeper.
and dive into the just transition and how it looks like to decolonize our energy and economic systems in a way that can enable a just transition where we can see a potential of transformational change and not only reproducing extractive dynamics and moving from fossil fuel extraction to critical transitional mineral extraction. from extraction to extraction, but how can actually just transition? Because I know you are really, really holding the storage.
Hi, when it comes to how can that just energy transition enable system transformation? So can you possibly explain this to us and to the listeners?
Amiera Sawas (06:52)
Yeah, sure. I didn't really get to the point you'd asked, which was how do they end up where I am now? And part of that was recognizing that I subsequently worked for a number of years on climate impacts. So I was looking at the impacts of extreme weather, the impacts of the lack of financing for adaptation activities and so on. But it became started to become very clear that, you know, while it's critical to understand the impacts, like the root causes are not being addressed.
And it really shocked me. I had a stint as a contributing author to the IPCC report, which was on the gender climate nexus, which is something I worked on for a very long time and I still really believe in working on. But it became clear through kind of engaging with the wider literature on climate change that, you know, this statistic that something like over 80%, I think 86 % of the warming driven by emissions in our atmosphere.
comes from fossil fuels. looking around at the trajectory of fossil fuel production, currently it's 120 % more, think, is planned in production over the next few years than is compatible with our climate targets. It becomes very obvious that we can put as many plasters on the symptoms. But if we don't address the root causes, only those people in the global South who are going to experience worse.
impacts while those in the north who have access to money and resources can try to protect themselves. And so that's why I ended up moving into this field because I felt like it shouldn't be, but it's a fairly new topic area within the climate justice movement or in general. I know OCI has obviously been working for a very long time on this, but it's a small group of dedicated individuals, either at the grassroots level.
who've been seeing the damage of extractive projects for a long time, or in the global campaigning space, who've been saying, we need to really address fossil fuels and phase them out. So that's kind of how I ended up where I was. But the second kind of element to that is understanding that this transition that we're talking about is not possible until we start to unpack the structural drivers that are causing what I guess David Harvey used to call this accumulation by dispossession, right?
the rich get richer and then the poor and those marginalized by climate injustice are being affected worse over time. So this race to the bottom is happening, which is driven by many factors of overlapping crisis that aren't being dealt with. So one, obviously the capitalist system and its link to fossil fuels or this desire for fossil fuels, two, how that's linked to patriarchy. So this notion of like men's ideas about what works.
what needs to happen and male dominated approaches to everything. They tend to lean towards fossil fuels and this kind of damaging, violent, racialized capitalism. Obviously racism and the legacy of colonialism. It's overlapping and playing out when it comes to the transition as well. But that's why I always say we need a global transition. We need a globally just transition.
We can't just talk about just transition in a national context, even though there are many amazing activities that are happening at the national level in many places driven by civil society workers, feminist movements and others, indigenous peoples especially. How are they supposed to do that in the context of like an escalating debt crisis and really, really bad unequal exchange between the North and the South? So one of the studies that I always go back to in my mind, which I'm sure you'll be very much aware of is
series of studies done by Jason Hickel and some of his colleagues on the drain and the net appropriation of resources from the Global South to the Global North. What they basically say is that the North is relying on those resources in the South, but it's draining over like 10 trillion a year in resources, and then it's giving aid back. when they calculate the difference, actually, it's something like 30 % more that they're draining from the Global South and they're giving back in aid.
And we're seeing that now with the debt crisis. So like if we just look at the debt crisis, which is escalating, currently, like countries have paid out, I think something like over 60 billion USD a year in just servicing their debts. They're just paying for the interest and servicing their debts, which is more than double what they receive in climate finance. But I think that research was done by IIED last year. And so what we're seeing is debt is surging. And when debt is surging, the fiscal space is shrinking.
And so there's no space for climate solutions, there's no space for just transition. And then when you also look at that, you see that who gets most affected by the debt crisis, it's those who are marginalized structurally anyway, particularly women and girls. So from my perspective, you can't talk about a just transition without dealing with the structural drivers of injustice.
Shady Khalil (11:57)
And also reflecting on this, because every transition there is someone who loses and someone who wins. And I think that the work that you're leading and how you're leading the work is quite key because we don't want a transition where the minority are the one who's winning out of this, which is the rich top 1%. But you're looking into how the transition can actually work and the benefit of that global majority, making sure that we look into the rules of the game.
to be fair and actually benefit the most vulnerable. But also, as we have been saying in this podcast, the most vulnerable, the community, they are not the minority. We are the global majority. And this takes me to one of the, I would say, the most hyped spaces. It's a UN climate talks space where we go every year to negotiate rules and regulation around climate change and in relation to the Paris Agreement. This year, it's the 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement.
So it's been 30 years and just two years ago where it was the only first acknowledgement of the root cause of climate crisis, which is fossil fuel, I three years ago. Now, which is for me, it's crazy. It took them 28 years to acknowledge the root cause of climate change just within the space. So it's quite slow. But I know that you and the treaty are working among other mechanisms.
to create more accelerated impact. So can you tell our listeners a bit about the treaty, how it started and what's the vision? Sure.
Amiera Sawas (13:31)
So the fossil fuel treaty, think it's an idea that emerged from a number of different spaces. So I think there were stakeholders in the Pacific, obviously small island developing states are facing the worst existential crises of climate injustice and we're not seeing the progress on the biggest driver that they wanted to. And separately, there were kind of activists, climate justice activists who were also saying we're not seeing enough.
The challenge with the Paris Agreement and the UNFCCC is the lack of a kind of binding accountability framework. So of course the goals, particularly now that fossil fuels are at least named, in principle the goals of kind of working collectively to bring down emissions is that in line with common and different common but differentiated responsibilities as it's articulated in the UN system. It's good. It's a good goal. It's a goal.
celebrate, but what is happening, and we know this as we're crashing through 1.5 degrees, which is the target that was set to stave off the worst, most disastrous climate change. As we crash through that target, we can see that there's something missing. So it's not to say that we want to throw the whole thing out, no, and it's not to say that we want to disrespect the tireless efforts at diplomacy that have been done for so long. There's so much respect in our coalition for that.
The idea emerged that maybe what we need is a complementary work plan, like a complementary mechanism or instrument, as it would be called in international law, which can actually create the conditions where you actually name the cause in a way which feels productive and planned rather than naming it in a way which feels like this bad thing, this bad guy, and let's just not go there and let's not deal with it. And anybody who's using fossil fuels is bad and that's not helping, right?
What would help is looking at the problem and saying, is there a plan that we can develop which is equitable? And so yeah, these ideas sort of emerged and then it was really championed by Pacific States. They first had a call, a political declaration called the Port Villa Call, which stated the intention to phase out fossil fuels. And then the campaign around the fossil fuel treaty led by Sephora Berman, our chair and founder, and many of our colleagues and networks kind of really grew from there.
The strength is that it comes from both government and civil society, which is not super common. So we're in the initial stage, which is getting the countries on board. And part of that is creating incentives. So basically saying to governments, should they, particularly those who are currently extracting fossil fuels or those who feel that they should, we're making a case to them that it's not in their long-term interests anymore to continue extracting and producing fossil fuels.
And that is a complicated argument, but it's not untrue. The evidence is consistently showing us, particularly for countries in the global South, it's not in their interest to extract fossil fuels. And I know a lot of OCI's work also shows us that, but we need to make that case in as plain language as we can with economic argument as much as the moral argument. Because most folks that you talk to, whether they're from a big
petroleum exporting state or whether they're from a small island state, will acknowledge that the climate crisis is there and will acknowledge that there's an agreement under Paris to move away from the situation that we're in. But there needs to be the political conditions to enable that. So we're working really hard on that and environmental incentives are almost like the carrot to draw in. I mentioned the debt crisis because when you speak to governments, particularly in Africa, which is really suffering with debt injustice,
Latin America, the Caribbean. Because they're not accessing financing, which many of our colleagues are campaigning hard about, there's been such a poor response of responsible governments transferring the finance that they have committed to the global South. They can't actually take those steps, many of them, away from fossil fuels. And many of them can access financing for fossil fuels at interest rates.
that are much lower than accessing financing for renewable energy and economic diversification initiatives, whether that's from international financial institutions or in bilateral deals. For many of the countries they're saying the debt crisis and climate action should not be compounding each other. It should be the other way around. So we should be able to take action to move away from fossil fuels and take climate action that also reduces our debt crisis. And that's not what the system is set up to do at the moment.
So we're working on mechanisms around how can we support nations to reduce their debt and how can we support nations to access more fair finance for transition activities? How can we support them to build guardrails around the activities to ensure that they are in line with long-term social justice, development agendas and economic sovereignty? Because many of the big deals out there, as you said earlier, are
There are major risks around green colonialism, for the capture of land, financial resources, political agendas in the global South from outside.
Shady Khalil (18:57)
When we speak about green colonialism, can you explain it to our listeners more? What does it really entail in that sense?
Amiera Sawas (19:06)
Well, obviously, you look at how economies of the Global South, why are they struggling now with issues around debt and unequal exchange? It's because the large majority of countries that were colonized, their economic systems were set up by this kind of extraction of raw resources to be imported to the North for our lifestyles, basically. So the raw materials get exported to the North and then they get produced and manufactured here and sitting in the UK. ⁓
businesses and governments in the North get to benefit from that. But that sort of degrades their environments and makes it very difficult for them to become economically sovereign. So when the green projects come in, unless there's something different about how they're conceptualized and implemented, you're going to have the same pattern of extraction and profit in the North, which is dispossessing from the South. if we look at, for example,
Some of the minerals which are necessary for renewable energy technologies, lithium, think cobalt, copper, many of the countries that actually possess those resources are in the global south. And so it's a great interest for countries in the north to go in there and get deals and get that stuff out so that we can build our smartphones and our electric cars and say that we're doing climate action. But also a lot of the land on which you find those resources is indigenous lands.
as well, where there's customary land rights. And this is something I worked on in Pakistan and Kenya and some other places. A lot of the land laws in those countries that were formerly colonized are still colonial era land laws, which allows governments to just take the land. Right? ⁓ And so they can make a big deal. They can make a big mega project saying, we'll have a big lithium mine. But that could displace many, many people. And there aren't.
rules necessarily around labor laws. So I've looked at big mega projects, for example, in the South where the funding comes from external actors and they don't have to comply with any labor laws in the implementation of those projects because they've made an international bilateral deal with that government. they can, sometimes they bring in prisoners from other countries to do the work. Sometimes they make local people work for ridiculous, in ridiculous conditions. So they're not only
extracting the land in this place and people that also not, they're violating people's rights.
Shady Khalil (21:33)
I remember in one of the conferences I had the most provocative presentation where I've seen a German organization having the map of Egypt and putting solar panel on the entirety of the desert in Egypt and saying, imagine if this entire area was covered in solar panel, it will be able to power Germany. And I was like, this is not an empty land. There is biodiversity here. There are communities here. Desert is not an empty land. And I feel it's crazy how those things are being perceived as solutions because at end of the day, it's not benefiting the people. It's going to only be used like in terms, as you've mentioned, land grab, how the global South is still perceived and looked at as an extractive pool of resources. We just like extract to develop and get rich. And this is one of the key things that actually caused climate change. Amiera, one of the things that I've seen you circulating this and talking about it, which is petromasculinity and it's very connected towards this. It's idea that we, there are strong links between fossil fuel and patriarchal tendencies and as extractive models of how new colonial powers and colonial powers have extracted from the global South and how it's really connected. You have touched upon this and everything you've actually said, but how can we envision a future out of this?
Amiera Sawas (23:00)
Yeah. Just to explain petromasculinity, so this is the idea that authoritarian masculine patriarchal desire, which we're seeing emerge very violently in front of our eyes in many spaces across the world, is tied up with a resistance to climate action and gender justice. And fossil fuels is the kind of strongest vehicle of that resistance. So for example, Trump, his
drill, baby drill mentality comes from a kind of like pushback to the notion that we should be transitioning the world to a safer place. And we can do that in a way which is more just for everybody. That is a resistance to that. It's a saying, no, we're going to keep control and our resources are going to do that. You also see, you know, there are many countries across the world that are so deeply reliant on fossil fuels. And there are also connections in that to
you know, lack of democratic regimes, violations of human rights, like particularly gender justice violations. So a lot of the resistance against extractivism came from feminist movements on the ground in different countries, standing up against whether it's mining. So there are a famous case in India of a mining corporation being the frontline defenders against them taking the indigenous land where indigenous women, and we see this everywhere. So
What we don't see, which is part of the problem, is the response of the climate movement and the response of philanthropy and the response of governments that say they care about addressing inequalities, injustices, climate issues. They're not putting their money where their mouth is when it comes to solutions. So if you look at overseas development aid, which of course that has been reducing and there are issues we can talk about with that, but less than 1 % of that globally goes to feminist organizations. So those who are saying we need to address climate and gender justice together are not receiving funding. ⁓ Less than 2.3 % of international climate finance has gone to projects with gender as a principal objective. So where you're seeing there being a rise in climate and gender and that bilateral donors and climate finance funders are talking about it, it's usually like an add-on. So it's not central. It's not like a transformative approach that addresses patriarchy.
Yeah, so, we'll have a workshop with some women and it's just not, know, women are 51 % of the world and it's not just about women, right? It's about gender minorities. It's about people who don't fit within the binaries, the best step for them by the norms. But the other thing that's happening now, which is connected to this thing of, you know, authoritarian masculine rule is a pullback even on that funding.
And so if you look at women's rights organizations, many of them are in crisis at the moment. The UN put a report out saying that over 90 % of 400 organizations they polled are six months away from going under. like the frontline defenders who have been the ones that have come up with the most transformative ideas a lot of the time on climate justice are the ones who are having that funding called. And we're not doing enough, I think, as a global movement to redirect our own resources.
and to call on decision makers to fund them.
Shady Khalil (26:20)
Amiera, as you have mentioned, this kind of work is really not only about representation, but it's really about the vision and what the feminist work actually brings on the table. And ⁓ one of the things that were tackled in the previous episodes is the knowledge. Whose knowledge counts? And how some, I would say, sci-fi technologies around the transition, energy transition, like come in count as more valuable.
than what's considered by feminists, for example, like community, like community knowledge, like how women, indigenous communities have actually mobilized and have solutions every day. And they carry this knowledge. But those knowledge are not Western. They don't have the credentials. So they don't get the space on the table to be mainstream, to be actually applied in that sense, and how it's important to reclaim that narrative and shape the solutions as being put in the table. So if you can tell us about like, this point around knowledge and how can knowledge like in the concept of just transition of indigenous people of communities can actually come in the front and forefront specifically of the just energy transition.
Amiera Sawas (27:30)
I mean, I do really believe that knowledge is power, but as you say, when the institutions are set up to privilege some form of knowledge over the other, becomes very challenging. So what I've seen at a grassroots level is there are coalitions of feminist organizations who started taking control of the evidence base and the knowledge, and that is having an impact for sure on decision-making. So I remember many years ago, like probably 15 years ago now, there was a feminist
Climate justice activist Mira, her name is Mira Ghani from Pakistan, and she was talking about climate and care. Before anybody else that I knew was talking about it, she was talking about the fact that there's this care economy, women and girls and other marginalized people are doing so much to hold up society with their free labor. And that's being decimated additionally by climate impacts, worsening their exclusion. So we need to address this.
Now that is on the agenda. The UN's put out reports on the climate and care economy more recently. If I look at some of my other colleagues in Pakistan, Kharachi Urban Lab, which is a brilliant women-led institute, it's like a research policy institute. They've been talking about extreme heat and mitigating extreme heat and having meaningful transition policies away from fossil fuels for over 10 years now.
No one was talking about that before, but now it's on the agenda. So there's so many examples I can talk about. If you look at the African continent, there are feminist macroeconomists who, like Nowe Collective, Femnet, in the Middle East, MENA FEM and others, who've been talking about the need to connect debt, austerity, women's experiences, and then these plans, these big transition projects, like, for example, the Lobito Corridor.
in Angola, that cuts across Angola and DRC, which has many Western interests and many men at the forefront, you have the feminists saying, look, we need to evaluate whether this is actually in the interests of local people and what say have they had in the development of this idea. So I think there's this kind of groundswell of feminist expertise at the grassroots level, which is shifting how we look at the issues for sure over the long term. But where I am seeing the most, I guess,
We're in feeling the most hope and it's coming back to resources again in such a constrained resource environment is some of the feminist climate justice funders. For example, there's an organization called Global Alliance for Green and Gender Action, DAGA, and they are directly funding feminist movements at the grassroots level to do stuff, whether that's policy advocacy, whether that's programming. They're directing resources and putting the money where their mouth is. And I really feel that's what
needs to be amplified because I think the solutions and the knowledge, they're being generated anyway, but a lot of people are doing it great expense. A lot of them are doing a lot of free labor and that is just not in line with what a just transition would actually look like.
Shady Khalil (30:29)
Thank you so much, Amiera, for shedding light on this because it's something that brings a lot of frustration to me. Whenever we speak about women, it's either about representation or them being a victim of the climate crisis. It's crazy because there is a lot of solutions coming out from family school, from women specifically in communities. If you study this kind of work, you would know that they're all the strategists of the communities in terms of curating solutions and really...
like even within climate crisis is if you look really, really close and you and you see what happens, you understand that they are really leading the transition and they are the key resource when it comes to this. It's not really a checkbox of like having women on the table. I think it's essential and it's really, really around the solution. And despite this, you see a lot of men dominating the decision making process around the transition specifically. And yet, as I've mentioned, like on community level, you see them like
leading on local organizing. So I see a lot of differentiation. Decision-making and policy-making, it's the men, it's hyper-masculine space of men, and then community slapped by women. How can we transform this? How can we have a different dynamic within the policy-making processes? I know it's a big question, but it really frustrates me.
Amiera Sawas (31:49)
Yeah, me too. I think we have to address our own patriarchy internally. Like, it's just about intersectionality, isn't it? Like, the idea that class privilege or class oppression, racialized oppression, and gendered oppression are overlapping. And that's why our movement is trying, but we still end up in a situation where there's a few voices that dominate, men get a lot of space.
that then influences the advocacy ideas that are out there. The feminist ideas, like I said, people come around to them eventually. But if we just listen the first time about the care economy, if we just listen the first time about decentralized community-based renewable energy, which feminists have been talking about forever, if we just listen the first time about the role of gender norms in local decision-making dynamics, like...
If we listen to the link between climate change and security or the transition and security, feminist research has been talking about this forever and saying, let's not, you know, let's think about how we interact with each other and let's think about the norms in our society and how power is distributed and let's not compound that and make it worse. So I think we have to listen and we have to platform the work. And sometimes the way that feminists work and publish is different and we have to accept different styles.
Like I've noticed over the years when I've worked with feminist organizations, a lot of their activists, especially younger ones, they want to use art, they want to use creativity, they want to do zines, they want to do music. And I've seen that that stuff doesn't get taken as seriously as like your standard report with the organizational logo. Yeah. But like the ideas are fundamental. So we should interrogate our own white, because this is white supremacy playing out. Like what do we value? What do we think?
is a good piece of research. So I think that's the first thing. We have to do it internally. And then second thing is we have to celebrate the contributions when they happen, because I don't think we do fully. Like if you look at the breakthroughs, even at the global level, like where are the best ideas coming from or where are the ideas coming from that are actually cutting through? Even if you look at the most privileged climate space, the negotiators, senior government officials, it's people like Mia Motley, right? Who are coming up and saying we need
break. And I'm not saying I fully agree with the whole Bridgetown Initiative proposal, but it's people like that who are standing up saying this is unacceptable. if you look at Columbia, of course President Petro is key, so is Susanna Muhammad. It's often the women who are willing to say what the others won't say. And I can bring this to a very present issue, which is the issue of genocide, right? Which is connected to all of these issues, because that's another exposition or
exposure or like outcome of just the most vile forms of systemic oppression. It's often women like Francesca Albanese and others who are willing to put themselves on the line and say this is what's happening. And it's often men, especially privileged men who decide to step back and preserve themselves. we're so used to experiencing, especially women of color, we're so used to experiencing exclusion and oppression that it's just path for the course, right? So we just think, no, we're going to say it anyway.
Shady Khalil (35:03)
Being labeled angry, irrational, all of those labels.
Amiera Sawas (35:05)
We're
so hysterical and so aggressive, but in the end, five years down the line, you're going to agree with us anyway. I think platforming and really engaging is one and putting money into their work because the majority of feminist organizations don't get core funding. So what are they doing? They're going project to project. They're getting little crumbs from philanthropy. mean, again, philanthropy is only giving, I think, less than 2 % globally if philanthropy is going to feminist climate justice work.
How are they supposed to flourish without any resources?
Shady Khalil (35:39)
Thank you so much, Amiera. And thank you so much for giving us this light of hope and with the work that you're leading. And as you have mentioned, the treaty is really, really providing a way forward in that sense. But it's not only about the way forward, it's about the how of getting there. And this what you have been presenting throughout this amazing interview that makes me proud to call you a colleague ⁓ and a friend. It has been an honor having you with us on this episode of Burned: The Price of Oil.
Thanks so much for joining us for this episode of Burned: The Price of Oil. Subscribe and stay tuned for the next episode for more conversations uncovering the hidden cost of fossil fuels and imagining the just energy future that we want. Don't forget to rate us and review us on whatever app you get your podcast on. For more information you can always check our website at oilchange.org and follow us on social media @Priceofoil.
Thanks a lot for listening.