Period Poverty, Pioneers and Laggards. Case Study: Scotland and New Zealand vs Romania

This article explores the topic of period poverty, a global phenomenon affecting roughly 500 million (Marshall & Norman, 2022; Michel et al., 2022; Miller et al., 2024; Parkinson et al., 2024) out of the 1.8-1.9 billion menstruating women worldwide (Dave et al., 2022; Mendonça Carneiro, 2021; Miller et al., 2024), with a negative impact on health, education, self-esteem and equality between the two sexes. The study starts from a theoretical perspective that highlights the link between limited access to menstrual products, menstrual stigmatisation and socio-economic inequalities. The objective of the research is to analyse the structural barriers that hinder the fight against period poverty and to identify effective ways to improve the accessibility of menstrual hygiene products, with a focus on their subsidization. This article employs the comparative case study method, comparing the approaches in Scotland and New Zealand, pioneer countries in implementing top-down public policies, with Romania’s situation, where bottom-up initiatives remain limited. The sources used throughout this article include the academic literature, government reports and data provided by non-governmental organisations. The main conclusions underline the success of top-down public policies in tackling period poverty, highlighting the need to subsidise menstrual products and menstrual hygiene education. The article argues that integrated approaches involving governments, organisations and communities are essential to ensure universal access to the resources needed to manage menstruation in a dignified and healthy manner.