Search

We propose a general framework for estimating long-term health and economic effects that takes into account four time-related aspects. We apply it to a reduction in exposure to air pollution in the Canton of Geneva. Methodological developments on the evaluation of long-term economic and health benefits, with an empirical illustration. We propose a unified framework—the comprehensive impact assessment (CIA)—to assess the long-term effects of morbidity and mortality in health and economic terms. This framework takes full account of four time-related issues: cessation lag, policy/technical implementation timeframe, discounting and time horizon. We compare its results with those obtained from standard quantitative health impact assessment (QHIA) in an empirical illustration involving air pollution reduction in the canton of Geneva. We find that by neglecting time issues, the QHIA estimates greater health and economic benefits than the CIA. The overestimation is about 50% under reasonable assumptions and increases ceteris paribus with the magnitude of the cessation lag and the discount factor. It decreases both with the time horizon and with the implementation timeframe. A proper evaluation of long-term health and economic effects is an important issue when they are to be used in cost-benefit analyses, particularly for mortality, which often represents the largest fraction. We recommend using the CIA to calculate more accurate values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: We estimated the health and economic impacts of chronic exposure to air pollution for the Swiss part of the Greater Geneva area from 2016 to 2018. Materials and methods: We extracted from fine-scale modelled concentration maps for two pollutant indicators, particulate matter PM2.5 and nitrogen dioxide. Then, we performed a quantitative health impact assessment of the health burden attributable to anthropogenic-origin air pollution, and estimated the benefits of compliance with the federal Ordinance on Air Pollution Control (OAPC) limit values. Finally, we computed the economic impacts of these health effects. Results: Exposure to fine particles of anthropogenic origin was responsible for 7.5% of annual mortality (280 deaths or 5,900 life years lost), for 14 lung cancers and for 68 strokes annually in the Canton of Geneva. Compliance with the OAPC limit value of 10 µg/m3 as an annual average would reduce annual mortality by 1.5% (62 deaths avoided or 1,300 life years gained). Exposure to anthropogenic-origin NO2 was associated with 5.3% of annual deaths (approximately 200 deaths per year). The estimated total negative economic impacts of anthropogenic-origin fine particles were at least CHF2017 1.3 billion per year, whereas compliance with the OAPC limit values would result in annual economic benefits of at least CHF2017 290 million. Conclusion: We confirmed that air quality remains a health issue on which stakeholder mobilisation is vital. Action plans should tackle emissions from freight and personal mobility, heating, industry and agriculture, while seeking to improve knowledge on health risks from air pollution exposure.

Environmental health impact assessment models are subjected to great uncertainty due to the complex associations between environmental exposures and health. Quantifying the impact of uncertainty is important if the models are used to support health policy decisions. We conducted a systematic review to identify and appraise current methods used to quantify the uncertainty in environmental health impact assessment. In the 19 studies meeting the inclusion criteria, several methods were identified. These were grouped into random sampling methods, second-order probability methods, Bayesian methods, fuzzy sets, and deterministic sensitivity analysis methods. All 19 studies addressed the uncertainty in the parameter values but only 5 of the studies also addressed theuncertainty in the structure of the models. None of the articles reviewed considered conceptual sources of uncertainty associated with the framing assumptions or the conceptualisation of the model. Future research should attempt to broaden the way uncertainty is taken into account in environmental health impact assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As construction noise has become one of the most harmful pollutants for nearby residents, it is essential to quantify the health impacts of noise exposure to reduce them and reduce the number of resident disputes. Accordingly, this study aims to propose a method to assess the quantitative health impact of construction noise exposure on nearby residents and optimize noise barriers based on this health impact. To this end, the health impact of construction noise exposure on nearby residents was quantified as a health damage cost by estimating the environmental burden of disease (EBD) and its economic value based on noise simulations. The results show that the estimated health damage cost reflects the health impact of construction noise exposure on nearby residents within a feasible range of compensation costs compared with the existing compensation criteria. In addition, the optimal noise barrier heights reduce the health damage cost on a nearby region by 8.8% (USD 7213), and the barrier installation cost is also reduced by 0.7% (USD 1409). The proposed method can help the general contractor establish a noise mitigation plan to reduce the health impact of construction noise exposure on nearby residents as well as to prevent additional expenses for disputes or compensations. Furthermore, it can help the government reduce the social cost of solving disputes related to construction noise by providing a quantitative metric for compensation criteria based on the health impact of construction noise exposure. • The health impact of construction noise exposure on nearby residents was assessed. • Optimization of noise barriers to minimize the health impact was conducted. • Existing compensations for the noise exposure did not fully reflect health impact. • The health damage cost was a feasible metric as compensations for the noise exposure. • The optimal noise barriers reduced the health damage cost of residents by 8.8%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]