Search

Climate variability has been shown to have adverse effects on morbidity and mortality. Less is known about its effects on psychological well-being, especially in developing countries with agriculture-based economies. In this paper, we test whether extreme temperature and precipitation in India have an effect on self-reported depression symptoms, cognitive and sleep difficulties, and ability to cope with and control life. We use time and geographic variation in weather and show that hot weather in the previous year worsens psychological well-being among rural, but not urban, Indian adults. We examine potential mechanisms and show that the effect is largely driven by hot temperatures during the agricultural season and could be partly attributed to a reduction in agricultural production. We further provide suggestive evidence that the effects of weather shocks could be mitigated with poverty reduction programs such as India’s National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. Poor mental health has been associated with low productivity and high healthcare expenditures and is a serious concern in India and many developing countries. The adverse impacts of climate change on rural, agriculture-based economies such as India are likely to increase over time. Given that nearly half of the global population lives in rural areas and is vulnerable to climate variability, understanding the effects of climate on psychological well-being and identifying potential resolutions is critical for insuring vulnerable populations and breaking the poverty cycle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights: [•] Protected area downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement (PADDD) is understudied. [•] With mixed methods, we assess PADDD in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and Caribbean. [•] We identified 543 instances of PADDD across 57 countries, affecting >503,591km2. [•] Primary causes are industrial-scale activities or local land pressures and claims. [•] Most PADDD suggests tradeoffs between conservation goals and other objectives. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Highlights: [•] We compare five common approaches to conservation monitoring and evaluation (M&E). [•] The five approaches complement each other by answering different M&E questions. [•] Each approach provides unique insights for conservation policy and practice. [•] Investing in impact evaluation and systematic review would strengthen conservation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]