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.

Adaptation to impacts of climate change is a key pillar of climate change policy, and local governments have historically played a major role in the design and implementation of these policies. An array of political, economic, institutional, social, and individual factors influence adaptation policy instrument choice. At the local government level, these choices also reflect inter-governmental dynamics that can constrain or support local efforts. We analyze eight hypothesized drivers of local adaptation policy instrument choice using fractional regression analysis and multilevel modelling. Local governments are pursuing diverse adaptation policy implementation styles that are associated with different levels of internal capacity, local political economies and problem perception. Dependence on national governments, the presence or absence of national adaptation mandates, national decision-making traditions, and national adaptation policy approaches may also influence local policy instrument choices.

Constraints and limits to adaptation are critical to understanding the extent to which human and natural systems can successfully adapt to climate change. We conduct a systematic review of 1,682 academic studies on human adaptation responses to identify patterns in constraints and limits to adaptation for different regions, sectors, hazards, adaptation response types, and actors. Using definitions of constraints and limits provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), we find that most literature identifies constraints to adaptation but that there is limited literature focused on limits to adaptation. Central and South America and Small Islands generally report greater constraints and both hard and soft limits to adaptation. Technological, infrastructural, and ecosystem-based adaptation suggest more evidence of constraints and hard limits than other types of responses. Individuals and households face economic and socio-cultural constraints which also inhibit behavioral adaptation responses and may lead to limits. Finance, governance, institutional, and policy constraints are most prevalent globally. These findings provide early signposts for boundaries of human adaptation and are of high relevance for guiding proactive adaptation financing and governance from local to global scales.

Over 1 billion people are living at the frontlines of climate change in mountain areas, where warming rates outpace the global average and are driving significant changes in environments and ecosystem services. These changes are exacerbating socioeconomic difficulties faced by many mountain communities, and are already intensifying vulnerabilities across mountain areas globally. The situation is indicative of pervasive and consequential deficits in adaptation, and calls attention to the need for a better understanding of existing adaptation efforts, as well as the prospects for increasing the quantity and quality of adaptation action in mountain regions. In response, this MountainAgenda article introduces a conceptual framework for adaptation gaps. It then uses data from 2 major global-scale adaptation reviews to shed light on the nature and true magnitude of the adaptation gap in mountains. It reveals shortcomings in available adaptation options, deficits in the uptake of existing adaptation support, and a general lack of coherence between existing adaptations and keystone global agreements relevant to climate change adaptation. These shortcomings are largely related to soft limits to adaptation that constrain responses across mountain areas. In this article, we provide recommendations for closing the adaptation gap in mountains and suggest that this will require deeply collaborative efforts that are rooted in local needs, aspirations, and ways of knowing, but that are also supported by external capacity building and implementation resources. In many instances, this will resemble a transformative approach to adaptation. The conceptual framework presented here is broadly applicable and can also be utilized to identify and close adaptation gaps in social-ecological contexts beyond mountains.

Comparative research on climate change adaptation policy struggles with robust conceptualization and measurement of adaptation policy. Using a policy mixes approach to address this challenge, we characterize adaptation policy based on a general model of how governments govern issues of societal interest. We argue that this approach allows for context-sensitive measurement of adaptation policy, while being both comparable and parsimonious. This approach is tested in a study of adaptation policies adopted by 125 local governments located in Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK. Using a systematic data collection protocol, a total of 3328 adaptation policies were identified from local council archives between the periods of January 2010 and May 2017. Results of this analysis suggest that there is structured variation emerging in how local governments govern climate change adaptation, which justifies calls for comparative adaptation research to use measurements that capture the totality of adaptation policies being adopted by governments rather than focusing on specific types of adaptation policy. We conclude with a discussion of key issues for further developing of this approach.

Context: It is now widely accepted that the climate is changing, and that societal response will need to be rapid and comprehensive to prevent the most severe impacts. A key milestone in global climate governance is to assess progress on adaptation. To-date, however, there has been negligible robust, systematic synthesis of progress on adaptation or adaptation-relevant responses globally. Aim: The purpose of this review protocol is to outline the methods used by the Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative (GAMI) to systematically review human adaptation responses to climate-related changes that have been documented globally since 2013 in the scientific literature. The broad question underpinning this review is: Are we adapting to climate change? More specifically, we ask ‘what is the evidence relating to human adaptation-related responses that can (or are) directly reducing risk, exposure, and/or vulnerability to climate change?’ Methods: We review scientific literature 2013-2019 to identify documents empirically reporting on observed adaptation-related responses to climate change in human systems that can directly reduce risk. We exclude non-empirical (theoretical & conceptual) literature and adaptation in natural systems that occurs without human intervention. Included documents were coded across a set of questions focused on: Who is responding? What responses are documented? What is the extent of the adaptation-related response? What is the evidence that adaptation-related responses reduce risk, exposure and/or vulnerability? Once articles are coded, we conduct a quality appraisal of the coding and develop ‘evidence packages’ for regions and sectors. We supplement this systematic mapping with an expert elicitation exercise, undertaken to assess bias and validity of insights from included/coded literature vis a vis perceptions of real-world adaptation for global regions and sectors, with associated confidence assessments. Related protocols: This protocol represents Part 3 of a 5-part series outlining the phases of this initiative. Part 3 outlines the methods used to extract data on adaptation from documents (coding), as well as procedures for data quality assurance. See Figure 1.

Context: It is now widely accepted that the climate is changing, and that societal responses will need to be rapid and comprehensive to prevent the most severe impacts. A key milestone in global climate governance is to assess progress on adaptation. To-date, however, there has been negligible robust, systematic synthesis of progress on adaptation or adaptation-relevant responses globally. Aim: The purpose of this review protocol is to outline the methods used by the Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative (GAMI) to systematically review human adaptation responses to climate-related changes that have been documented globally since 2013 in the scientific literature. The broad question underpinning this review is: Are we adapting to climate change? More specifically, we ask ‘what is the evidence relating to human adaptation-related responses that can (or are) directly reducing risk, exposure, and/or vulnerability to climate change?’ This work responds to the recognition of the need for high-level syntheses of adaptation research to inform global and regional climate assessments.Methods: We review scientific literature 2013-2019 to identify documents empirically reporting on observed adaptation-related responses to climate change in human systems that can directly reduce risk. We exclude non-empirical (theoretical & conceptual) literature and adaptation in natural systems that occurs without human intervention. Included documents were coded across a set of questions focused on: Who is responding? What responses are documented? What is the extent of the adaptation-related response? What is the evidence that adaptation-related responses reduce risk, exposure and/or vulnerability? Once articles are coded, we conduct a quality appraisal of the coding and develop ‘evidence packages’ for regions and sectors. We supplement this systematic mapping with an expert elicitation exercise, undertaken to assess bias and validity of insights from included/coded literature vis a vis perceptions of real-world adaptation for global regions and sectors, with associated confidence assessments. Related protocols: This protocol represents Part 1 of a 5-part series outlining the phases of methods for this initiative. Part 1 provides an introduction to the Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative (GAMI) and an overview of methods.

Context: It is now widely accepted that the climate is changing, and that societal response will need to be rapid and comprehensive to prevent the most severe impacts. A key milestone in global climate governance is to assess progress on adaptation. To-date, however, there has been negligible robust, systematic synthesis of progress on adaptation or adaptation-relevant responses globally. Aim: The purpose of this review protocol is to outline the methods used by the Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative (GAMI) to systematically review human adaptation responses to climate-related changes that have been documented globally since 2013 in the scientific literature. The broad question underpinning this review is: Are we adapting to climate change? More specifically, we ask ‘what is the evidence relating to human adaptation-related responses that can (or are) directly reducing risk, exposure, and/or vulnerability to climate change?’ Methods: We review scientific literature 2013-2019 to identify documents empirically reporting on observed adaptation-related responses to climate change in human systems that can directly reduce risk. We exclude non-empirical (theoretical & conceptual) literature and adaptation in natural systems that occurs without human intervention. Included documents were coded across a set of questions focused on: Who is responding? What responses are documented? What is the extent of the adaptation-related response? What is the evidence that adaptation-related responses reduce risk, exposure and/or vulnerability? Once articles are coded, we conduct a quality appraisal of the coding and develop ‘evidence packages’ for regions and sectors. We supplement this systematic mapping with an expert elicitation exercise, undertaken to assess bias and validity of insights from included/coded literature vis a vis perceptions of real-world adaptation for global regions and sectors, with associated confidence assessments. Related protocols: This protocol represents Part 2 of a 5-part series outlining the phases of methods for this initiative. Part 2 outlines the methods used to conduct keyword searches and implement machine-assisted screening of documents based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. See Figures 1 and 2.

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.

Investments in adaptation are required to reduce vulnerability and strengthen the resilience of food systems to the impacts of climate change. For low-income nations, international financing plays a central role in supporting adaptation. In this article, we document and examine adaptation projects targeting food systems financed through funding bodies of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). We find that between 2004 and 2015, 3% (n = 96) of adaptation projects supported through the UNFCCC explicitly focused on the production, processing, distribution, preparation and/or consumption of food, with US$546 m mobilized through funding bodies directly and US$1.44bn through co-financing. Agriculture is the most common sector supported, with extreme weather events the primary climate change-related impact motivating nations to apply for adaptation financing. The majority of actions are documented to adapt the food production component of food systems, with limited focus with...

Although governments are developing and implementing policies to adapt to the impacts of climate change, it remains unclear which factors shape how states are developing these policies. This paper aims to assess whether or not administrative traditions matter for the formation of national climate change adaptation policy in 32 high-income countries. We operationalize administrative traditions based on five structural criteria: vertical dispersion of authority, horizontal coordination, interest mediation between state-society, role of public administrator, and how ideas enter bureaucracy. We construct a unique adaptation policy dataset that includes 32 high-income countries to test seven hypotheses. Our results indicate that countries’ adaptation policies align to some extent with their administrative structure, particularly dispersion of authority and horizontal coordination. However, we find limited evidence that other public bureaucracy factors are related to national adaptation policy. We conclude that administrative traditions matter, but that their influence should not be overestimated.

After the Paris Agreement that put stronger emphasis on the development of climate change adaptation policies and on the definition of financing mechanisms, there is a patent need to track whether actual planning efforts are proving sufficient. This entails the development of assessment methods and metrics as plans are drafted and actions implemented. To this end, this paper explores the concept of credibility as a critical issue in climate policy and develops an Adaptation Policy Credibility (APC) conceptual and operational assessment framework for helping to allocate public funding and private investments, and for implementing and catalysing climate policy. Through a pilot testing in four early-adopting cities (Copenhagen, Durban, Quito and Vancouver), a clear potential for large-n tracking and assessment exercises of local climate adaptation plans is envisaged. The APC approach might also be useful to guide individual cities that aim to improve their adaptation planning and policy-making processes. © 2019, © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor and Francis Group. This work was supported by the European Commission [653522];Eusko Jaurlaritza [POS_2016_1_0089];Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) [FPDI-2013-16631,IJCI-2016-28835]; This study has received funding from the European Union?s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 653522 (RESIN - Climate Resilient Cities and Infrastructures project). MO acknowledges funding from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) (FPDI-2013-16631 and IJCI-2016-28835). ESM?s Postdoctoral Fellowship is supported by the Basque Government (POS_2016_1_0089)

Rapid growth over the past two decades in digitized textual information represents untapped potential for methodological innovations in the adaptation governance literature that draw on machine learning approaches already being applied in other areas of computational social sciences. This Focus Article explores the potential for text mining techniques, specifically topic modeling, to leverage this data for large‐scale analysis of the content of adaptation policy documents. We provide an overview of the assumptions and procedures that underlie the use of topic modeling, and discuss key areas in the adaptation governance literature where topic modeling could provide valuable insights. We demonstrate the diversity of potential applications for topic modeling with two examples that examine: (a) how adaptation is being talked about by political leaders in United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; and (b) how adaptation is being discussed by decision‐makers and public administrators in Canadian municipalities using documents collected from 25 city council archives. This article is categorized under: Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change > Institutions for Adaptation

For international adaptation finance to reduce vulnerability to climate change, global funds must be technically adequate, where available finance responds to the adaptation needs of developing countries. The purpose of this article is to analyse if the United Nations Framework and Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the financial entities that fall under it are designed in such a way that allows them to respond to the adaptation needs of developing countries. The results presented here are based on an examination of all projects (n = 114) accepted and rejected for financing by the Adaptation Fund (AF), and indicate that the AF is technically inadequate when it comes to responding to the needs of developing countries in regard to adaptation priorities, due primarily to the nature of the design of the guidance. We supplement our analysis with interviews with the AF Secretariat and AF Implementing Agencies that are responsible for AF project applications. The results indicate that non-adherence to guidance is perceived by the AF Secretariat as the Fund adapting to adaptation needs that have arisen outside of the COP and CMP context, while applicants have felt that non-adherence can present an obstacle to accessing funding.

It is increasingly evident that adaptation will figure prominently in the post-2015 United Nations climate change agreement. As adaptation obligations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change evolve, more rigorous approaches to measuring adaptation progress among parties will be critical. In this Letter we elaborate on an emerging area of research referred to as ‘adaptation tracking’, which has potential to inform development of a global adaptation monitoring framework. We evaluate this potential by presenting evidence on policy change for 41 high-income countries between 2010 and 2014. We examine whether countries that were in early stages of adaptation planning in 2010 are making progress to close adaptation gaps, and how the landscape of adaptation in these countries has evolved. In total we find an 87% increase in reported adaptation policies and measures, and evidence that implementation of concrete adaptation initiatives is growing. Reflecting on the strengths and challenges of this early methodology, we further discuss how adaptation tracking practices could guide development of a robust framework for monitoring global adaptation progress and inform future research on policy change across countries.

Climate change adaptation research is dominated by in-depth, qualitative, single- or small-n case studies that have resulted in rich and in-depth understanding on adaptation processes and decision making in specific locations. Recently, the number of comparative adaptation policy cases has increased, focusing on examining, describing, and/or explaining how countries, regions, and vulnerable groups are adapting across a larger sample of contexts and over time. There are, however, critical empirical, conceptual and methodological choices and challenges for comparative adaptation research. This article systematically captures and assesses the current state of larger-n (n≥20 cases) comparative adaptation policy literature. We systematically analyze 72 peer-reviewed articles to identify the key choices and challenges authors face when conducting their research. We find among others that almost all studies use nonprobability sampling methods, few existing comparative adaptation datasets exist, most studies use easy accessible data which might not be most appropriate for the research question, many struggle to disentangle rhetoric from reality in adaptation, and very few studies engage in critical reflection of their conceptual, data and methodological choices and the implications for their findings. We conclude that efforts to increase data availability and use of more rigorous methodologies are necessary to advance comparative adaptation research. This article is categorized under: Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change > Learning from Cases and Analogies

That the climate is changing and societies will have to adapt is now unequivocal, with adaptation becoming a core focus of climate policy. Our understanding of the challenges, needs, and opportunities for climate change adaptation has advanced significantly in recent years yet remains limited. Research has identified and theorized key determinants of adaptive capacity and barriers to adaptation, and more recently begun to track adaptation in practice. Despite this, there is negligible research investigating whether and indeed if adaptive capacity is translating into actual adaptation action. Here we test whether theorized determinants of adaptive capacity are associated with adaptation policy outcomes at the national level for 117 nations. We show that institutional capacity, in particular measures of good governance, are the strongest predictors of national adaptation policy. Adaptation at the national level is limited in countries with poor governance, and in the absence of good governance other presumed determinants of adaptive capacity show limited effect on adaptation. Our results highlight the critical importance of institutional good governance as a prerequisite for national adaptation. Other elements of theorized adaptive capacity are unlikely to be sufficient, effective, or present at the national level where national institutions and governance are poor.

Our understanding of whether adaptive capacity on a national level is being translated into adaptation policies, programs, and projects is limited. Focusing on health adaptation in Annex I Parties to the UNFCCC, we examine whether statistically significant relationships exist between regulatory, institutional, financial, and normative aspects of national-level adaptive capacity and systematically measured adaptation. Specifically, we (i) quantify adaptation actions in Annex I nations, (ii) identify potential factors that might impact progress on adaptation and select measures for these factors, and (iii) calculate statistical relationships between factors and adaptation actions across countries. Statistically significant relationships are found between progress on adaptation and engagement in international environmental governance, national environmental governance, perception of corruption in the public sector, population size, and national wealth, as well as between responsiveness to health vulnerabilities, population size and national wealth. This analysis contributes two key early empirical findings to the growing literature concerning factors facilitating or constraining adaptation. While country size and wealth are necessary for driving higher levels of adaptation, they may be insufficient in the absence of policy commitments to environmental governance. Furthermore, governance and/or incentive frameworks for environmental governance at the national level may be an important indicator of the strength of national commitments to addressing health impacts of climate change.

This paper applies a systematic approach to measuring adaptation actions being undertaken by 117 parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) with the goal of establishing a baseline of global trends in adaptation. Data are systematically collected from National Communications prepared by Parties to the Convention and submitted periodically to the Secretariat. 4,104 discrete adaptation initiatives are identified and analyzed. Our findings indicate that while progress is being made on conducting impact and vulnerability assessments and adaptation research in nearly every country in the sample, translation of this knowledge into tangible adaptation initiatives is still limited. The largest number of reported adaptations falls under the category of infrastructure, technology, and innovation. Some types of vulnerability were more frequently reported across initiatives, including floods, drought, food and water safety and security, rainfall, infectious disease, and terrestrial ecosystem health. Notably, reporting on the inclusion of vulnerable sub-populations is low across all actions. Diffusion of adaptation across sectors remains underdeveloped, with the environment, water, and agricultural sectors emerging as the most active adaptors. Our analysis indicates that national communications provide a valuable source of information for global-scale adaptation tracking, but important gaps exist in the consistency of reporting that should be addressed, as these documents could greatly enhance efforts to monitor and evaluate adaptation progress.

The capacity to collect and analyze massive amounts of data is transforming research in the natural and social sciences (1). And yet, the climate change adaptation community has largely overlooked these developments. Here, we examine how “big data” can inform adaptation research and decision-making and outline what’s needed from the adaptation community to maximize this opportunity. We contend that careful application of big data could revolutionize our understanding of how to manage the risks of climate change.

Background Climate change is among the major challenges for health this century, and adaptation to manage adverse health outcomes will be unavoidable. The risks in Ontario – Canada’s most populous province – include increasing temperatures, more frequent and intense extreme weather events, and alterations to precipitation regimes. Socio-economic-demographic patterns could magnify the implications climate change has for Ontario, including the presence of rapidly growing vulnerable populations, exacerbation of warming trends by heat-islands in large urban areas, and connectedness to global transportation networks. This study examines climate change adaptation in the public health sector in Ontario using information from interviews with government officials. Methods Fifty-three semi-structured interviews were conducted, four with provincial and federal health officials and 49 with actors in public health and health relevant sectors at the municipal level. We identify adaptation efforts, barriers and opportunities for current and future intervention. Results Results indicate recognition that climate change will affect the health of Ontarians. Health officials are concerned about how a changing climate could exacerbate existing health issues or create new health burdens, specifically extreme heat (71%), severe weather (68%) and poor air-quality (57%). Adaptation is currently taking the form of mainstreaming climate change into existing public health programs. While adaptive progress has relied on local leadership, federal support, political will, and inter-agency efforts, a lack of resources constrains the sustainability of long-term adaptation programs and the acquisition of data necessary to support effective policies. Conclusions This study provides a snapshot of climate change adaptation and needs in the public health sector in Ontario. Public health departments will need to capitalize on opportunities to integrate climate change into policies and programs, while higher levels of government must improve efforts to support local adaptation and provide the capacity through which local adaptation can succeed.

Adapting to the health effects of climate change is one of the key challenges facing public health this century. Our knowledge of progress on adaptation, however, remains in its infancy. Using the Fifth National Communications of Annex I parties to the UNFCCC, 1912 initiatives are systematically identified and analyzed. 80% of the actions identified consist of groundwork (i.e. preparatory) action, with only 20% constituting tangible adaptations. No health vulnerability was recognized by all 38 Annex I countries. Furthermore, while all initiatives affect at least one health vulnerability, only 15% had an explicit human health component. Consideration for the special needs of vulnerable groups is uneven and underdeveloped. Climate change is directly motivating 71% of groundwork actions, and 61% of adaptation initiatives are being mainstreamed into existing institutions or programs. We conclude that the adaptation responses to the health risks of climate change remain piecemeal. Policymakers in the health sector must engage with stakeholders to implement adaptation that considers how climate change will impact the health of each segment of the population, particularly within those groups already considered most vulnerable to poor health outcomes.