Search

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 536 responses.

The purpose of this Consensus Statement is to provide a global, collaborative, representative and inclusive vision for educating an interprofessional healthcare workforce that can deliver sustainable healthcare and promote planetary health. It is intended to inform national and global accreditation standards, planning and action at the institutional level as well as highlight the role of individuals in transforming health professions education. Many countries have agreed to ‘rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes’ to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 45% within 10 years and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, including in healthcare. Currently, however, health professions graduates are not prepared for their roles in achieving these changes. Thus, to reduce emissions and meet the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), health professions education must equip undergraduates, and those already qualified, with the knowledge, skills, values, competence and confidence they need to sustainably promote the health, human rights and well-being of current and future generations, while protecting the health of the planet. The current imperative for action on environmental issues such as climate change requires health professionals to mobilize politically as they have before, becoming strong advocates for major environmental, social and economic change. A truly ethical relationship with people and the planet that we inhabit so precariously, and to guarantee a future for the generations which follow, demands nothing less of all health professionals. This Consensus Statement outlines the changes required in health professions education, approaches to achieve these changes and a timeline for action linked to the internationally agreed SDGs. It represents the collective vision of health professionals, educators and students from various health professions, geographic locations and cultures. ‘Consensus’ implies broad agreement amongst all individuals enga

People affected by conflict are particularly vulnerable to climate shocks and climate change, yet little is known about climate change adaptation in fragile contexts. While climate events are one of the many contributing drivers of conflict, feedback from conflict increases vulnerability, thereby creating conditions for a vicious cycle of conflict. In this study, we carry out a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature, taking from the Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative (GAMI) dataset to documenting climate change adaptation occurring in 15 conflict-affected countries and compare the findings with records of climate adaptation finance flows and climate-related disasters in each country. Academic literature is sparse for most conflict-affected countries, and available studies tend to have a narrow focus, particularly on agriculturerelated adaptation in rural contexts and adaptation by low-income actors. In contrast, multilateral and bilateral funding for climate change adaptation addresses a greater diversity of adaptation needs, including water systems, humanitarian programming, and urban areas. Even among the conflict-affected countries selected, we find disparity, with several countries being the focus of substantial research and funding, and others seeing little to none. Results indicate that people in conflict-affected contexts are adapting to climate change, but there is a pressing need for diverse scholarship across various sectors that documents a broader range of adaptation types and their results.

Extreme heat events impact people and ecosystems across the globe, and they are becoming more frequent and intense in a warming climate. Responses to heat span sectors and geographic boundaries. Prior research has documented technologies or options that can be deployed to manage extreme heat and examples of how individuals, communities, governments and other stakeholder groups are adapting to heat. However, a comprehensive understanding of the current state of implemented heat adaptations—where, why, how and to what extent they are occurring—has not been established. Here, we combine data from the Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative with a heat-specific systematic review to analyze the global extent and diversity of documented heat adaptation actions (n¼301 peer-reviewed articles). Data from 98 countries suggest that documented heat adaptations fundamentally differ by geographic region and national income. In high-income, developed countries, heat is overwhelmingly treated as a health issue, particularly in urban areas. However, in low- and middleincome, developing countries, heat adaptations focus on agricultural and livelihood-based impacts, primarily considering heat as a compound hazard with drought and other hydrological hazards. 63% of the heat-adaptation articles feature individuals or communities autonomously adapting, highlighting how responses to date have largely consisted of coping strategies. The current global status of responses to intensifying extreme heat, largely autonomous and incremental yet widespread, establishes a foundation for informed decision-making as heat impacts around the world continue to increase.

Climate change adaptation responses are being developed and delivered in many parts of the world in the absence of detailed knowledge of their effects on public health. Here we present the results of a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature reporting the effects on health of climate change adaptation responses in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The review used the 'Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative' database (comprising 1682 publications related to climate change adaptation responses) that was constructed through systematic literature searches in Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar (2013-2020). For this study, further screening was performed to identify studies from LMICs reporting the effects on human health of climate change adaptation responses. Studies were categorised by study design and data were extracted on geographic region, population under investigation, type of adaptation response and reported health effects. The review identified 99 studies (1117 reported outcomes), reporting evidence from 66 LMICs. Only two studies were ex ante formal evaluations of climate change adaptation responses. Papers reported adaptation responses related to flooding, rainfall, drought and extreme heat, predominantly through behaviour change, and infrastructural and technological improvements. Reported (direct and intermediate) health outcomes included reduction in infectious disease incidence, improved access to water/sanitation and improved food security. All-cause mortality was rarely reported, and no papers were identified reporting on maternal and child health. Reported maladaptations were predominantly related to widening of inequalities and unforeseen co-harms. Reporting and publication-bias seems likely with only 3.5% of all 1117 health outcomes reported to be negative. Our review identified some evidence that climate change adaptation responses may have benefits for human health but the overall paucity of evidence is concerning and represents

Climate change adaptation responses are being developed and delivered in many parts of the world in the absence of detailed knowledge of their effects on public health. Here we present the results of a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature reporting the effects on health of climate change adaptation responses in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The review used the 'Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative' database (comprising 1682 publications related to climate change adaptation responses) that was constructed through systematic literature searches in Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar (2013-2020). For this study, further screening was performed to identify studies from LMICs reporting the effects on human health of climate change adaptation responses. Studies were categorised by study design and data were extracted on geographic region, population under investigation, type of adaptation response and reported health effects. The review identified 99 studies (1117 reported outcomes), reporting evidence from 66 LMICs. Only two studies were ex ante formal evaluations of climate change adaptation responses. Papers reported adaptation responses related to flooding, rainfall, drought and extreme heat, predominantly through behaviour change, and infrastructural and technological improvements. Reported (direct and intermediate) health outcomes included reduction in infectious disease incidence, improved access to water/sanitation and improved food security. All-cause mortality was rarely reported, and no papers were identified reporting on maternal and child health. Reported maladaptations were predominantly related to widening of inequalities and unforeseen co-harms. Reporting and publication-bias seems likely with only 3.5% of all 1117 health outcomes reported to be negative. Our review identified some evidence that climate change adaptation responses may have benefits for human health but the overall paucity of evidence is concerning and represents

Background. Climate change and climate variability interact with political, economic, social, demographic, and other environmental drivers to change the scale and patterns of human migration5. In the context of accelerating climate change and breaches to other planetary boundaries, there is an urgent need to better understand how migrant health can be protected and promoted in the context of a changing climate to manage safe and orderly migration6. While research has focused on the separate dyads of (i) climate change and migration and (ii) climate change and health, limited consideration has been given to the nexus between climate change, migration, and health. This assessment synthesizes research that has investigated this relationship since 1990. Methods. Following an a priori protocol and with the assistance of a subject librarian, systematic searches were conducted in four academic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Ovid Medline, and Global Health) and Google Scholar for empirical studies investigating migration and health in the context of climate change with any study design between 1990 and 2018. The search results underwent a two-stage screening process and the eligible studies were subjected to quality appraisal using a mixed methods appraisal tool. Data extraction and a meta-synthesis followed producing outputs deemed most useful for policy, practice, and further research. Findings. The registered protocol and search strategy revealed 1904 studies of which 180 were screened in full- text and 50 were included in the meta-synthesis. Overall, the methodological and reporting quality of the included studies was high. This assessment produced five main findings: (1) there is a paucity of empirical research investigating the climate-health-migration nexus; (2) the relationships between migration and health in the context of climate change are strongly heterogeneous and global findings are unlikely to emerge; (3) studies have examined diverse health issues associated wi

Climate Change is adversely affecting health by increasing human vulnerability and exposure to climate-related stresses. Climate change impacts human health both directly and indirectly, through extreme weather events, changing distribution of health risks, increased risks of undernutrition, population displacement, and greater risks of injuries, disease, and death (Ebi, K., Campbell-Lendrum, D., & Wyns, A. The 1. 5 health report. WHO. 2018). This risk amplification is likely to increase the need for humanitarian support. Recent projections indicate that under a business as usual scenario of sustained greenhouse gas emissions, climate change could double the demand for humanitarian assistance by 2050 (World Health Organization. Operational Framework for building climate-resilient health systems. WHO. 2015). Humanitarian assistance is currently not meeting the existing needs, therefore, any additional burden is likely to be highly challenging. Global health advocates, researchers, and policymakers are calling for urgent action on climate change, yet there is little clarity on what that action practically entails for humanitarian organizations. While some humanitarian organizations may consider themselves well designed to respond, climate change as a transversal threat requires the incorporation of a resilience approach to humanitarian action and policy responses. By bringing together authors from two historically disparate fields - climate change and health, and humanitarian assistance - this paper aims to increase the capacity of humanitarian organizations to protect health in an unstable climate by presenting an adapted framework. We adapted the WHO operational framework for climate-resilient health systems for humanitarian organizations and present concrete case studies to demonstrate how the framework can be implemented. Rather than suggest a re-design of humanitarian operations we recommend the application of a climate-lens to humanitarian activities, or what is

Humans have a long history of mobility on a spectrum from voluntary migration to forced displacement in response to social, political and environmental change. While many migration drivers exist, climate change is likely to amplify the environmental drivers of migration. At least 1.5°C of warming above pre-industrial levels between 2030 and 2052 are projected if global warming continues to increase at the current rate.1 The associated impacts are diverse and include temperature and precipitation extremes in most inhabited regions and increased probability of drought and flood.1 Migration can be an important and useful adaptive response to climate impacts when it increases household resilience and reduces socio-economic vulnerabilities,2 and yet can also have negative health consequences. The climate–migration–health nexus entails complex interactions including the following: first, climate-related risks to health faced by migrants at all stages of the migration journey. Second, the impacts of migration itself on health with possible specific health implications of climate-related migration. This article provides a brief overview of climate-related migration, identifies climate hotspots where substantial migration and displacement are anticipated and explores the health implications of climate-related migration

Background The circular economy framework for human production and consumption is an alternative to the traditional, linear concept of ‘take, make, and dispose’. Circular economy (CE) principles comprise of ‘design out waste and pollution’, ‘retain products and materials in use’, and ‘regenerate natural systems’. This commentary considers the risks and opportunities of the CE for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), acknowledging that LMICs must identify their own opportunities, while recognising the potential positive and negative environmental health impacts. Main body The implementation of the CE in LMICs is mostly undertaken informally, driven by poverty and unemployment. Activities being employed towards extracting value from waste in LMICs are imposing environmental health risks including exposure to hazardous and toxic working environments, emissions and materials, and infectious diseases. The CE has the potential to aid towards the achievement of the SDGs, in particular SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities). However, since SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being) is critical in the pursuit of all SDGs, the negative implications of the CE should be well understood and addressed. We call on policy makers, industry, the health sector, and health-determining sectors to address these issues by defining mechanisms to protect vulnerable populations from the negative health impacts that may arise in LMICs as these countries domesticate the CE. Conclusion Striving towards a better understanding of risks should not undermine support for the CE, which requires the full agency of the public and policy communities to realise the potential to accelerate LMICs towards sustainable production and consumption, with positive synergies for several SDGs