Search

Populations that are reliant on subsistence farming are particularly vulnerable to climatic effects on crop yields. However, empirical evidence on the role of the timing of exposure to crop yield deficits in early-life development is limited. We examined the relationship between child survival and annual crop yield reductions at different stages of early-life development in a subsistence farming population in Burkina Faso. Using shared frailty Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for confounders, we analyzed 57,288 children under 5 years of age followed by the Nouna Health and Demographic Surveillance System (1994–2016) in relation to provincial food-crop yield levels experienced in 5 nonoverlapping time windows (12 months before conception, gestation, birth–age 5.9 months, ages 6.0 months–1.9 years, and ages 2.0–4.9 years) and their aggregates (birth–1.9 years, first 1,000 days from conception, and birth–4.9 years). Of the nonoverlapping windows, point estimates were largest for child survival related to food-crop yields for the time window of 6.0 months–1.9 years: The adjusted mortality hazard ratio was 1.10 (95% confidence interval: 1.03, 1.19) for a 90th-to-10th percentile yield reduction. These findings suggest that child survival in this setting is particularly vulnerable to cereal-crop yield reductions during the period of nonexclusive breastfeeding.

Carbon pricing is considered an important instrument in the fight against climate change (World Bank, 2022). In particular, many experts and stakeholders have called for the implementation of carbon pricing as a part of ambitious climate policy agendas (Hepburn et al., 2020). This requires consideration of the interactions of carbon pricing with other policies, as well as of the societal outcomes of carbon pricing. In particular, carbon pricing has been found to have potentially large health impacts, leading to important co-benefits as well as potentially some trade-offs (Parry et al., 2014), (Hasegawa et al., 2018). Information on health impacts of carbon pricing, their distribution and how they are affected by policy design is necessary in order to progress towards more socially sustainable and politically feasible policy design. Recent reviews have focussed on various aspects of carbon pricing design and outcomes, synthesizing evidence on its effectiveness, equity impacts or societal perception (Boyce, 2018), (Green, 2021), (Maestre-Andrés et al., 2019). Others have reviewed the evidence on health co-benefits of mitigation, but do not analyse specific policies or issues of policy design Gao et al.(2018). This review will narratively synthesize the evidence on the health impacts of carbon pricing between 2010 and 2021 and identify gaps in the literature. We will use a framework synthesis approach to analyse different categories of policy-relevant information in contexts where carbon pricing is implemented as part of wider, coordinated policy agendas or complex policy mixes. This includes for example impacts on health inequalities and how health co-benefits are affected by issues of policy design and policy interactions.

Executive summary. The 2022 report of the Lancet Countdown is published as the world confronts profound and concurrent systemic shocks. Countries and health systems continue to contend with the health, social, and economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, while Russia's invasion of Ukraine and a persistent fossil fuel overdependence has pushed the world into global energy and cost-of-living crises. As these crises unfold, climate change escalates unabated. Its worsening impacts are increasingly affecting the foundations of human health and wellbeing, exacerbating the vulnerability of the world's populations to concurrent health threats...

The Lancet Countdown is an international collaboration, established to provide an independent, global monitoring system dedicated to tracking the emerging health profile of the changing climate. The 2020 report presents 43 indicators across five sections: climate change impacts, exposures, and vulnerability; adaptation, planning, and resilience for health; mitigation actions and health co-benefits; economics and finance; and public and political engagement. This report represents the findings and consensus of the 35 leading academic institutions and UN agencies that make up the Lancet Countdown, and draws on the expertise of climate scientists, geographers, and engineers; of energy, food, and transport experts; and of economists, social and political scientists, data scientists, public health professionals, and doctors.

Background Integrated metrics that account for resource use and human health are essential to help identify and support human development pathways that safeguard planetary health. We identify countries that achieved the highest levels of health and development at the lowest cost to Earth’s natural capital and report ecological within-country analyses of associations between indicators of environmental sustainability, human health, and development. Methods We used mixed-effects multiple linear regression models of Healthy Life Expectancy (HALE) and Human Capital (HC) related to Ecological Footprint (EF) and CO2 production emissions, controlling for Gini coefficient and population density applied to data of 216 countries from 1991-2016. We performed stratified analyses by country income level and used likelihood-ratio tests to test for interaction. Results Only Jamaica (1991) and Sri Lanka (2016) achieved high HALE at sustainable EF levels. Each 10% increase in EF was associated with 0·20 (95%CI 0·16,0·24) and 0·21 (95%CI 0·19,0·23) increases in HALE and HC respectively; increases in CO2 production emissions were also associated with increased HALE and HC. There was strong evidence for interaction by income level for each model (p2. Conclusions Countries with high health metrics at sustainable EF levels may offer valuable lessons for sustainable national development policies. Increased environmental footprint and CO2 emissions appear associated with higher levels of human health and development only up to a certain level of income.

Background: Effective and rapid actions are required to achieve global goals for climate change mitigation, and there is an opportunity to ensure that the actions taken are also positive for human health. However, little is known about the relative magnitude of the health co-benefits that can be achieved from mitigation actions, so robust and comprehensive syntheses of the evidence on the nature and effects of relevant actions are required. This paper presents a protocol for an interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral umbrella review of systematic reviews, synthesising modelled and empirical evidence on such actions. Methods: Nine bibliographic databases will be searched, capturing literature across a wide range of disciplines and sectors. Unique records retrieved by the searches will be screened by two independent reviewers. The quality of all the included systematic reviews will be assessed using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 critical appraisal tool. Data will be extracted on methodological and thematic characteristics of the reviews, nature of the actions, and their effects on greenhouse gas emission reduction, health, and its determinants, as well as any other reported effects and interactions across different actions. Results: Narrative and quantitative synthesis methods will be used to create a typology of relevant actions, map pathways to their impacts on health, compare the magnitude of health and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction impacts by selected characteristics of the actions and the nature of the evidence, as well as to identify gaps in evidence syntheses. Conclusion: This review will identify the most effective actions for global climate change mitigation and health based on the best available scientific evidence. This protocol has been registered in PROSPERO, Reg No.: CRD42021239292.

Background: It is crucial to understand the benefits to human health from decarbonisation to galvanise action among decision makers. Most of our existing evidence comes from modelling studies and little is known about the extent to which the health co-benefits of climate change mitigation actions are realised upon implementation. We aim to analyse evidence from mitigation actions that have been implemented across a range of sectors and scales, to identify those that can improve and sustain health, while accelerating progress towards a zero-carbon economy. Objectives: To understand the implementation process of actions and the role of key actors; explain the contextual elements influencing these actions; summarise what effects, both positive and negative, planned and unplanned they may have on emissions of greenhouse gases and health; and to summarise environmental, social, or economic co-benefits. Data: We will review evidence collected through partnership with existing data holders and an open call for evidence. We will also conduct a hand search of reference lists from systematic reviews and websites of organisations relevant to climate change mitigation. Screening: Screening will be done by two reviewers according to a pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Analysis: We will identify gaps where implementation or evaluation of implementation of mitigation actions is lacking. We will synthesise the findings to describe how actions were implemented and how they achieved results in different contexts, identifying potential barriers and facilitators to their design, implementation, and uptake. We will also synthesise their effect on health outcomes and other co-benefits. Quantitative synthesis will depend on the heterogeneity of outcomes and metrics. Conclusions: Findings will be used to identify lessons that can be learned from successful and unsuccessful mitigation actions, to make inferences on replicability, scalability, and transferability and will contribute to the development of frameworks that can be used by policy makers.

Climate change is already affecting health in populations around the world, threatening to undermine the past 50 years of global gains in public health. Health is not only affected by climate change via many causal pathways, but also by the emissions that drive climate change and their co-pollutants. Yet there has been relatively limited synthesis of key insights and trends at a global scale across fragmented disciplines. Compounding this, an exponentially increasing literature means that conventional evidence synthesis methods are no longer sufficient or feasible. Here, we outline a protocol using machine learning approaches to systematically synthesize global evidence on the relationship between climate change, climate variability, and weather (CCVW) and human health. We will use supervised machine learning to screen over 300,000 scientific articles, combining terms related to CCVW and human health. Our inclusion criteria comprise articles published between 2013 and 2020 that focus on empirical assessment of: CCVW impacts on human health or health-related outcomes or health systems; relate to the health impacts of mitigation strategies; or focus on adaptation strategies to the health impacts of climate change. We will use supervised machine learning (topic modeling) to categorize included articles as relevant to impacts, mitigation, and/or adaptation, and extract geographical location of studies. Unsupervised machine learning using topic modeling will be used to identify and map key topics in the literature on climate and health, with outputs including evidence heat maps, geographic maps, and narrative synthesis of trends in climate-health publishing. To our knowledge, this will represent the first comprehensive, semi-automated, systematic evidence synthesis of the scientific literature on climate and health.

Kristine Belesova and colleagues argue that recovery from the covid-19 pandemic must safeguard the health of current and future generations in the face of the climate emergency

Background: Effective and rapid actions are required to achieve global goals for climate change mitigation, and there is an opportunity to ensure that the actions taken are also positive for human health. However, little is known about the relative magnitude of the health co-benefits that can be achieved from mitigation actions, so robust and comprehensive syntheses of the evidence on the nature and effects of relevant actions are required. This paper presents a protocol for an interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral umbrella review of systematic reviews, synthesising modelled and empirical evidence on such actions. Methods: Nine bibliographic databases will be searched, capturing literature across a wide range of disciplines and sectors. Unique records retrieved by the searches will be screened by two independent reviewers. The quality of all the included systematic reviews will be assessed using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 critical appraisal tool. Data will be extracted on methodological and thematic characteristics of the reviews, nature of the actions, and their effects on greenhouse gas emission reduction, health, and its determinants, as well as any other reported effects and interactions across different actions. Results: Narrative and quantitative synthesis methods will be used to create a typology of relevant actions, map pathways to their impacts on health, compare the magnitude of health and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction impacts by selected characteristics of the actions and the nature of the evidence, as well as to identify gaps in evidence syntheses. Conclusion: This review will identify the most effective actions for global climate change mitigation and health based on the best available scientific evidence. This protocol has been registered in PROSPERO, Reg No.: CRD42021239292.

The Lancet Countdown: tracking progress on health and climate change was established to provide an independent, global monitoring system dedicated to tracking the health dimensions of the impacts of, and the response to, climate change. The Lancet Countdown tracks 41 indicators across five domains: climate change impacts, exposures, and vulnerability; adaptation, planning, and resilience for health; mitigation actions and health co-benefits; finance and economics; and public and political engagement. This report is the product of a collaboration of 27 leading academic institutions, the UN, and intergovernmental agencies from every continent. The report draws on world-class expertise from climate scientists, ecologists, mathematicians, geographers, engineers, energy, food, livestock, and transport experts, economists, social and political scientists, public health professionals, and. doctors. The Lancet Countdown’s work builds on decades of research in this field, and was first proposed in the 2015 Lancet Commission on health and climate change,1 which documented the human impacts of climate change and provided ten global recommendations to respond to this public health emergency and secure the public health benefits available (panel 1).

Highlights • To safeguard human and planetary health, urban transformation is needed. • Urban transformation must be at a pace and scale not previously undertaken. • It requires ambitious, integrative city-level actions for health and the environment. • Changes in political, social and economic systems will be necessary to accelerate city actions. • System science, urban structures and processes are needed to drive innovative action., Transformational change is urgently needed to address planetary health challenges in cities. Through an interdisciplinary overview of the literature, we consider how to frame and unpack city-level transformation towards synergistic benefits for urban health and environmental sustainability. By describing the characteristics of a ‘healthy sustainable city’ and by bringing together the ideas underlying frameworks for health and sustainability, we develop a conceptual understanding of how cities may progress towards achieving significant improvements in health and the environment. We investigate how urban change works, and build a theoretical understanding of how urban change may be directed to integrate health and sustainability. We conclude that urban transformation needs to be a multi-scalar process across city sectors to meet the scale, speed and form of change required. We propose that this can best be achieved in practice through a composition of mechanisms, including strengthening city governance, enabling technological and social innovations, applying sustainable urban planning and infrastructure development, and impelling social behaviour change; supported by systems-driven policy and practice-focused scientific evidence.

In subsistence farming populations of sub-Saharan Africa reliant on rainfed agriculture, years of low crop yields result in poorer child nutrition and survival. Estimates of such impacts are critical for their reduction and prevention. We developed a model to quantify such health impacts, and the degree to which they are attributable to weather variations, for a subsistence farming population in the Nouna district of Burkina Faso (89,000 people in 2010). The method combines data from a new weather-crop yield model with empirical epidemiological risk functions. We quantify the child mortality impacts for 1984-2012 using observed weather data and estimate potential future burdens in 2050 and 2100 using daily weather data generated by global climate models parameterized to simulate global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. For 1984-2012, crop yields below 90% of the period average were estimated to result in the total of 109.8 deaths per 10,000 children

To tackle global challenges, research collaborations need to integrate multiple disciplinary perspectives and connect with local practices to find solutions that are sustainable and impactful. This paper discusses how participatory action research (PAR) is used as a framework for transdisciplinary collaboration to integrate different disciplines and identify healthy and sustainable housing solutions appropriate for local development practices and policy. By analyzing a transdisciplinary research collaboration investigating housing interventions for low‐income settlements in Delhi, reflections and recommendations are provided for other projects wishing to use a similar methodology. It is found that the PAR framework has successfully guided the integration of contrasting methods and improved the impact of research outcomes, resulting in the emergence of new shared practices. However, it proves to be challenging and requires heightened communication and engagement to achieve understanding between all disciplines and practices. It is recommended that focus is given to developing relationships and effective communication channels and that time should be preallocated for reflection. The work provides insights for integrating academic disciplines, the community, and relevant stakeholders in the cocreation of evidence that is paramount to formulate effective solutions to global challenges.

Background/Aim: Year to year variation in crop yields may adversely affect nutrition, health, and survival of subsistence farming populations, particularly under climate change. However, empirical ...

Background Private practitioners are the preferred first point of care in a majority of low and middle-income countries and in this position, best placed for the surveillance of diseases. However their contribution to routine surveillance data is marginal. This systematic review aims to explore evidence with regards to the role, contribution, and involvement of private practitioners in routine disease data notification. We examined the factors that determine the inclusion of, and the participation thereof of private practitioners in disease surveillance activities. Methods Literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Web of Knowledge, WHOLIS, and WHO-IRIS databases to identify peer-reviewed and gray full-text documents in English with no limits for year of publication or study design. Forty manuscripts were reviewed. Results The current participation of private practitioners in disease surveillance efforts is appalling. The main barriers to their participation are inadequate knowledge leading to unsatisfactory attitudes and misperceptions that influence their practices. Complicated reporting mechanisms with unclear guidelines, along with unsatisfactory attitudes on behalf of the government and surveillance program managers also contribute to the underreporting of cases. Infrastructural barriers especially the availability of computers and skilled human resources are critical to improving private sector participation in routine disease surveillance. Conclusion The issues identified are similar to those for underreporting within the Integrated infectious Disease Surveillance and Response systems (IDSR) which collects data mainly from public healthcare facilities. We recommend that surveillance program officers should provide periodic training, supportive supervision and offer regular feedback to the practitioners from both public as well as private sectors in order to improve case notification. Governments need to take leadership and foster collaborative partnerships between the public and private sectors and most importantly exercise regulatory authority where needed. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2476-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Lancet Countdown: Tracking Progress on Health and Climate Change is an international, multi-disciplinary research collaboration between academic institutions and practitioners across the world. It follows on from the work of the 2015 Lancet Commission, which concluded that the response to climate change could be “the greatest global health opportunity of the 21st century”. The Lancet Countdown aims to track the health effects of climate change; health resilience and adaptation; health co-benefits of mitigation; climate economics and finance; and political and broader engagement. These focus areas form the five thematic working groups of the Lancet Countdown and represent different aspects of the complex relationships between health and climate change. These thematic groups will provide indicators for a global overview of health and climate change; national case studies highlighting countries leading the way or going against the trend; and engagement with a range of stakeholders. The Lancet Countdown ultimately aims to report annually on a series of indicators across these five working groups. This paper outlines these potential indicators and indicator domains to be tracked by the collaboration, with suggestions on the methodologies, and data sets available to achieve this end. The proposed indicator domains require further refinement, and mark the beginning of an ongoing consultation process – from November 2016 to early 2017 – to develop these domains, identify key areas not currently covered, and change indicators where necessary. It will actively seek to engage with existing monitoring processes, such as the UN Sustainable Development Goals, and the World Health Organization’s Climate and Health Country Profiles. Additionally, the indicators will evolve throughout their lifetime through ongoing collaboration with experts and a range of stakeholders, and dependent on the emergence of new evidence and knowledge. During the course of its work, the Lancet Countdown will adopt a collaborative and iterative process, which aims to complement existing initiatives, welcome engagement with new partners, and be open to developing new research projects on health and climate change.

Background Reduction of child undernutrition is one of the Sustainable Development Goals for 2030. Achievement of this goal may be made more difficult in some settings by climate change through adverse impact on agricultural productivity. However, there is only limited quantitative evidence on the link between household crop harvests and child nutrition. We examined this link in a largely subsistence farming population in rural Burkina Faso. Methods Data on the middle-upper arm circumference (MUAC) of 975 children ≤5 years of age, household crop yields, and other parameters were obtained from the Nouna Health and Demographic Surveillance System. Multilevel modelling was used to assess the relationship between MUAC and the household crop harvest in the year 2009 estimated in terms of kilocalories per adult equivalent per day (kcal/ae/d). Results Fourteen percent of children had a MUAC

Introduction: Reduction of child malnutrition is one of the Sustainable Development Goals for 2030. In addition to the well-studied determinants of child malnutrition, climate change is identified ...

Climate change, urbanisation, chemical pollution and disruption of ecosystems, including biodiversity loss, affect our health and wellbeing. Research is crucial to be able to respond to the current and future challenges that are often complex and interconnected by nature. The HERA Agenda, summarised in this commentary, identifies six thematic research goals in the environment, climate and health fields. These include research to 1) reduce the effects of climate change and biodiversity loss on health and environment, 2) promote healthy lives in cities and communities, 3) eliminate harmful chemical exposures, 4) improve health impact assessment and implementation research, 5) develop infrastructures, technologies and human resources and 6) promote research on transformational change towards sustainability. Numerous specific recommendations for research topics, i.e., specific research goals, are presented under each major research goal. Several methods were used to define the priorities, including web-based surveys targeting researchers and stakeholder groups as well as a series of online and face-to-face workshops, involving hundreds of researchers and other stakeholders. The results call for an unprecedented effort to support a better understanding of the causes, interlinkages and impacts of environmental stressors on health and the environment. This will require breakdown of silos within policies, research, actors as well as in our institutional arrangements in order to enable more holistic approaches and solutions to emerge. The HERA project has developed a unique and exciting opportunity in Europe to consensuate priorities in research and strengthen research that has direct societal impact. The HERA project was funded from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 825417.