Jinghong Gao1, Sari Kovats2, Sotiris Vardoulakis3, Paul Wilkinson4, Alistair Woodward5, Jing Li6, Shaohua Gu7, Xiaobo Liu8, Haixia Wu9, Jun Wang10, Xiaoqin Song11, Yunkai Zhai12, Jie Zhao13, Qiyong Liu14. 1. State Key Laboratory of Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, National Institute for Communicable Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China; The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450052, Henan, China; National Engineering Laboratory for Internet Medical Systems and Applications, Zhengzhou 450052, Henan, China. 2. NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Environmental Change and Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), 15-17 Tavistock Place, WC1H 9SH London, UK. Electronic address: sari.kovats@lshtm.ac.uk. 3. Institute of Occupational Medicine, Edinburgh EH14 4AP, UK. Electronic address: sotiris.vardoulakis@iom-world.org. 4. Department of Social and Environmental Health Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, WC1H 9SH London, UK. Electronic address: paul.wilkinson@lshtm.ac.uk. 5. School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand. Electronic address: a.woodward@auckland.ac.nz. 6. Changping District Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 102200, China. 7. Ningbo Municipal Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Ningbo, China. 8. State Key Laboratory of Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, National Institute for Communicable Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China. Electronic address: liuxiaobo@icdc.cn. 9. State Key Laboratory of Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, National Institute for Communicable Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China. Electronic address: wuhaixia@icdc.cn. 10. State Key Laboratory of Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, National Institute for Communicable Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China. Electronic address: wangjun@icdc.cn. 11. The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450052, Henan, China; National Engineering Laboratory for Internet Medical Systems and Applications, Zhengzhou 450052, Henan, China. 12. The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450052, Henan, China; National Engineering Laboratory for Internet Medical Systems and Applications, Zhengzhou 450052, Henan, China; Engineering Laboratory of Henan Province for Internet Medical E-commerce and Active Health Services, Zhengzhou 450001, Henan, China. Electronic address: zhaiyunkai@zzu.edu.cn. 13. The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450052, Henan, China; National Engineering Laboratory for Internet Medical Systems and Applications, Zhengzhou 450052, Henan, China. Electronic address: zhaojie@zzu.edu.cn. 14. State Key Laboratory of Infectious Disease Prevention and Control, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, National Institute for Communicable Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China. Electronic address: liuqiyong@icdc.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Public health co-benefits from curbing climate change can make greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation strategies more attractive and increase their implementation. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence of these health co-benefits to improve our understanding of the mitigation measures involved, potential mechanisms, and relevant uncertainties. METHODS: A comprehensive search for peer-reviewed studies published in English was conducted using the primary electronic databases. Reference lists from these articles were reviewed and manual searches were performed to supplement relevant studies. The identified records were screened based on inclusion criteria. We extracted data from the final retrieved papers using a pre-designed data extraction form and a quality assessment was conducted. The studies were heterogeneities, so meta-analysis was not possible and instead evidence was synthesized using narrative summaries. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies were identified. We identified GHG mitigation strategies in five domains - energy generation, transportation, food and agriculture, households, and industry and economy - which usually, although not always, bring co-benefits for public health. These health gains are likely to be multiplied by comprehensive measures that include more than one sectors. CONCLUSIONS: GHG mitigation strategies can bring about substantial and possibly cost-effective public health co-benefits. These findings are highly relevant to policy makers and other stakeholders since they point to the compounding value of taking concerted action against climate change and air pollution.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Public health co-benefits from curbing climate change can make greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation strategies more attractive and increase their implementation. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence of these health co-benefits to improve our understanding of the mitigation measures involved, potential mechanisms, and relevant uncertainties. METHODS: A comprehensive search for peer-reviewed studies published in English was conducted using the primary electronic databases. Reference lists from these articles were reviewed and manual searches were performed to supplement relevant studies. The identified records were screened based on inclusion criteria. We extracted data from the final retrieved papers using a pre-designed data extraction form and a quality assessment was conducted. The studies were heterogeneities, so meta-analysis was not possible and instead evidence was synthesized using narrative summaries. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies were identified. We identified GHG mitigation strategies in five domains - energy generation, transportation, food and agriculture, households, and industry and economy - which usually, although not always, bring co-benefits for public health. These health gains are likely to be multiplied by comprehensive measures that include more than one sectors. CONCLUSIONS: GHG mitigation strategies can bring about substantial and possibly cost-effective public health co-benefits. These findings are highly relevant to policy makers and other stakeholders since they point to the compounding value of taking concerted action against climate change and air pollution.
Authors: Sheila E Fleischhacker; Catherine E Woteki; Paul M Coates; Van S Hubbard; Grace E Flaherty; Daniel R Glickman; Thomas R Harkin; David Kessler; William W Li; Joseph Loscalzo; Anand Parekh; Sylvia Rowe; Patrick J Stover; Angie Tagtow; Anthony Joon Yun; Dariush Mozaffarian Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Paul Lester Chua; Miguel Manuel Dorotan; Jemar Anne Sigua; Rafael Deo Estanislao; Masahiro Hashizume; Miguel Antonio Salazar Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-07-23 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Mary Fox; Christopher Zuidema; Bridget Bauman; Thomas Burke; Mary Sheehan Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-09-04 Impact factor: 3.390