Search

Summary Growing evidence suggests that climate adaptation responses that do not incorporate equity considerations may worsen inequality and increase vulnerability. Using data from a systematic review of peer-reviewed empirical research on adaptation responses to climate change (n = 1,682), we present an assessment of how social equity is considered in adaptation across regions, sectors, and social groups. Roughly 60% of peer-reviewed literature on adaptation responses considers social equity by reporting on which marginalized groups were involved in planning or implementation. Articles on responses in Africa and Asia and those focusing on poverty reduction most frequently considered social equity. Equity was less likely to be considered in adaptation responses in Europe, Australasia, and North America, as well as in literature focused on cities. Income-based inequity was more frequently considered than gender, age, or Indigenous status. Ethnic and racial minorities, migrants, and people with disabilities were rarely considered. Attention to the levels and forms in which equity is integrated into adaptation research and practice is needed to ensure just adaptation.

Background Climate change is a defining issue and grand challenge for the health sector in North America. Synthesizing evidence on climate change impacts, climate-health adaptation, and climate-health mitigation is crucial for health practitioners and decision-makers to effectively understand, prepare for, and respond to climate change impacts on human health. This protocol paper outlines our process to systematically conduct a literature review to investigate the climate-health evidence base in North America. Methods A search string will be used to search CINAHL®, Web of Science™, Scopus®, Embase® via Ovid, and MEDLINE® via Ovid aggregator databases. Articles will be screened using inclusion/exclusion criteria by two independent reviewers. First, the inclusion/exclusion criteria will be applied to article titles and abstracts, and then to the full articles. Included articles will be analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methods. Discussion This protocol describes review methods that will be used to systematically and transparently create a database of articles published in academic journals that examine climate-health in North America.

In this Personal View, we explain the ways that climatic risks affect the transmission, perception, response, and lived experience of COVID-19. First, temperature, wind, and humidity influence the transmission of COVID-19 in ways not fully understood, although non-climatic factors appear more important than climatic factors in explaining disease transmission. Second, climatic extremes coinciding with COVID-19 have affected disease exposure, increased susceptibility of people to COVID-19, compromised emergency responses, and reduced health system resilience to multiple stresses. Third, long-term climate change and prepandemic vulnerabilities have increased COVID-19 risk for some populations (eg, marginalised communities). The ways climate and COVID-19 interact vary considerably between and within populations and regions, and are affected by dynamic and complex interactions with underlying socioeconomic, political, demographic, and cultural conditions. These conditions can lead to vulnerability, resilience, transformation, or collapse of health systems, communities, and livelihoods throughout varying timescales. It is important that COVID-19 response and recovery measures consider climatic risks, particularly in locations that are susceptible to climate extremes, through integrated planning that includes public health, disaster preparedness, emergency management, sustainable development, and humanitarian response.

We present the first systematic, global stocktake of the academic literature on human adaptation. We screen 48,316 documents and identify 1,682 articles that present empirical research documenting human efforts to reduce risk from climate change and associated hazards. Coding and synthesizing this literature highlights that the overall extent of adaptation across global regions and sectors is low. Adaptations are largely local and incremental rather than transformative. Behavioural adjustments by individuals and households are more prevalent than any other type of response, largely motivated by drought and precipitation variability. Local governments and civil society are engaging in risk reduction across all sectors and regions, particularly in response to flooding. Urban technological and infrastructural adaptations to flood risk are prevalent in Europe, while shifts in farming practices dominate reporting from Africa and Asia. Despite increasing evidence of adaptation responses, evidence that these responses are reducing risks (observed and projected) remains limited.

Assessing global progress on human adaptation to climate change is an urgent priority. Although the literature on adaptation to climate change is rapidly expanding, little is known about the actual extent of implementation. We systematically screened >48,000 articles using machine learning methods and a global network of 126 researchers. Our synthesis of the resulting 1,682 articles presents a systematic and comprehensive global stocktake of implemented human adaptation to climate change. Documented adaptations were largely fragmented, local and incremental, with limited evidence of transformational adaptation and negligible evidence of risk reduction outcomes. We identify eight priorities for global adaptation research: assess the effectiveness of adaptation responses, enhance the understanding of limits to adaptation, enable individuals and civil society to adapt, include missing places, scholars and scholarship, understand private sector responses, improve methods for synthesizing different forms of evidence, assess the adaptation at different temperature thresholds, and improve the inclusion of timescale and the dynamics of responses. Determining progress in adaptation to climate change is challenging, yet critical as climate change impacts increase. A stocktake of the scientific literature on implemented adaptation now shows that adaptation is mostly fragmented and incremental, with evidence lacking for its impact on reducing risk.

Climate change disproportionately affects marginalized groups in society. Growing evidence suggests that adaptation responses without equity considerations may worsen inequality and increase vulnerability. Using data from a systematic review of peer-reviewed empirical research on adaptation responses to climate change (n=1682), we present a large-n assessment of how social equity is integrated into adaptation across regions, sectors, and social groups. Roughly 60% of peer-reviewed literature on adaptation responses addressed social equity by documenting how historically marginalized groups were involved in planning, or targeted in implementation. Responses in Africa and those focusing on poverty reduction most frequently integrated social equity. Equity was less likely to be addressed in adaptation responses in Europe, Australasia, and North America, and in the urban sector. Income-based inequity was more frequently considered than gender, age, or Indigenous status. Ethnic and racial minorities, migrants, and people with disabilities were rarely considered. Renewed and rigorous attention to equity in adaptation research, policy, planning and implementation is needed to fill key gaps in knowledge and to ensure a more fair and just adaptation process and outcome.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 5th Assessment Report (2014) assessed the state of climate change and health knowledge, globally through the Human Health: Impacts, Adaptation, and Co-Benefits Chapter and regionally through chapters, such as the North America Chapter. With IPCC's 6th Assessment Report scheduled to be released in 2021-22, we asked: how has climate change and health research in North America advanced since the IPCC's 5th Assessment Report in 2014? Specifically, we systematically identified and examined trends in the extent, range, and nature of climate-health research conducted in North America. We used a scoping review methodology to systematically identify literature and map publication trends. A search string was used to search five academic databases. Two independent reviewers first screened titles and abstracts, and then the full texts of articles for relevance. Research articles and reviews using systematic methods published since 2013 were eligible for inclusion, and no language restrictions were applied. To be included, articles had to measure and link climatic variables or hazards to health outcomes in North America. Relevant articles were analysed using descriptive statistics to explore publication trends. The number of climate-health articles has significantly increased since the last IPCC Assessment Report. Published research about climate change impacts, heat-related mortality and morbidity, and respiratory illness taking place in urban centres and in the USA continue to dominate the North American climate-health literature, reflected by the high proportion of articles published. Important research gaps on previously neglected climate-sensitive health outcomes, however, are beginning to be filled, including climate change impacts on mental health, nutrition, and foodborne disease. We also observed progress in research that included future projections of climate-health risks; however, projection research is still relatively nascent and under-studied for many climate-sensitive health outcomes in North America, and would benefit from considering social and demographic variables in models. Important research disparities in geographical coverage were noted, including research gaps in Canada and Mexico, and in rural and remote regions. Overall, these publication trends suggest an improved understanding of exposure-response relationships and future projections of climate-health risks for many climate-sensitive health outcomes in North America, which is promising and provides an evidence-base to inform the IPCC 6th Assessment Report. Despite these advancements and considering the urgent policy and practice implications, more research is needed to deepen our understanding of climate-sensitive health outcomes, as well as examine new arising issues that have limited evidence-bases. In particular, transdisciplinary and cross-sector research, that includes the social sciences, examining current and future climate-health adaptation, mitigation, and the adaptation-mitigation nexus should become a top priority for research, given the urgent need for this evidence to inform climate change policies, actions, and interventions.

We reviewed the nature, range, and extent of literature on drinking water and human health outcomes in the context of climate change in the Circumpolar North. We used a systematic process to identify and synthesize articles. While the number of climate-water-health articles increased recently, this topic remains under-studied despite the transformational changes that the Circumpolar North has already experienced due to climate change. Of the climate-focused articles, most considered climate change to a major extent and discussed waterborne infections. Research examining and evaluating adaptation options and future impacts at the climate-water-health nexus is absent in the Circumpolar North. Responding to this research gap should become a top priority for research, given the urgent need for this evidence to inform climate change policies, actions, and interventions.