Introduction. Climate change projections indicate that droughts will become more intense in the 21 century in some areas of the world. The El Niño Southern Oscillation is associated with drought in some countries, and forecasts can provide advance warning of the increased risk of adverse climate conditions. The most recent available data from EMDAT estimates that over 50 million people globally were affected by drought in 2011. Documentation of the health effects of drought is difficult, given the complexity in assigning a beginning/end and because effects tend to accumulate over time. Most health impacts are indirect because of its link to other mediating circumstances like loss of livelihoods. Methods. The following databases were searched: MEDLINE; CINAHL; Embase; PsychINFO, Cochrane Collection. Key references from extracted papers were hand-searched, and advice from experts was sought for further sources of literature. Inclusion criteria for papers summarised in tables include: explicit link made between drought as exposure and human health outcomes; all study designs/methods; all countries/contexts; any year of publication. Exclusion criteria include: drought meaning shortage unrelated to climate; papers not published in English; studies on dry/arid climates unless drought was noted as an abnormal climatological event. No formal quality evaluation was used on papers meeting inclusion criteria. Results. 87 papers meeting the inclusion criteria are summarised in tables. Additionally, 59 papers not strictly meeting the inclusion criteria are used as supporting text in relevant parts of the results section. Main categories of findings include: nutrition-related effects (including general malnutrition and mortality, micronutrient malnutrition, and anti-nutrient consumption); water-related disease (including E coli, cholera and algal bloom); airborne and dust-related disease (including silo gas exposure and coccidioidomycosis); vector borne disease (including malaria, dengue and West Nile Virus); mental health effects (including distress and other emotional consequences); and other health effects (including wildfire, effects of migration, and damage to infrastructure). Conclusions. The probability of drought-related health impacts varies widely and largely depends upon drought severity, baseline population vulnerability, existing health and sanitation infrastructure, and available resources with which to mitigate impacts as they occur. The socio-economic environment in which drought occurs influences the resilience of the affected population. Forecasting can be used to provide advance warning of the increased risk of adverse climate conditions and can support the disaster risk reduction process. Despite the complexities involved in documentation, research should continue and results should be shared widely in an effort to strengthen drought preparedness and response activities.

While seasonal outlooks have been operational for many years, until recently the extended‐range timescale referred to as subseasonal‐to‐seasonal (S2S) has received little attention. S2S prediction fills the gap between short‐range weather prediction and long‐range seasonal outlooks. Decisions in a range of sectors are made in this extended‐range lead time; therefore, there is a strong demand for this new generation of forecasts. International efforts are under way to identify key sources of predictability, improve forecast skill and operationalize aspects of S2S forecasts; however, challenges remain in advancing this new frontier. If S2S predictions are to be used effectively, it is important that, along with science advances, an effort is made to develop, communicate and apply these forecasts appropriately. In this study, the emerging operational S2S forecasts are presented to the wider weather and climate applications community by undertaking the first comprehensive review of sectoral applications of S2S predictions, including public health, disaster preparedness, water management, energy and agriculture. The value of applications‐relevant S2S predictions is explored, and the opportunities and challenges facing their uptake are highlighted. It is shown how social sciences can be integrated with S2S development, from communication to decision‐making and valuation of forecasts, to enhance the benefits of ‘climate services’ approaches for extended‐range forecasting. While S2S forecasting is at a relatively early stage of development, it is concluded that it presents a significant new window of opportunity that can be explored for application‐ready capabilities that could allow many sectors the opportunity to systematically plan on a new time horizon.

No abstract

No abstract

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (SFDRR) is the first global policy framework of the United Nations' post-2015 agenda. It represents a step in the direction of global policy coherence with explicit reference to health, development, and climate change. To develop SFDRR, the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) organized and facilitated several global, regional, national, and intergovernmental negotiations and technical meetings in the period preceding the World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR) 2015 where SFDRR was adopted. UNISDR also worked with representatives of governments, UN agencies, and scientists to develop targets and indicators for SFDRR and proposed them to member states for negotiation and adoption as measures of progress and achievement in protecting lives and livelihoods. The multiple efforts of the health community in the policy development process, including campaigning for safe schools and hospitals, helped to put people's mental and physical health, resilience, and well-being higher up the disaster risk reduction (DRR) agenda compared with the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015. This article reviews the historical and contemporary policy development process that led to the SFDRR with particular reference to the development of the health theme.

Introduction Extreme events and disasters, such as earthquakes and floods, cause distress and are associated with some people developing mental disorders. Primary stressors inherent in many disasters can include injuries sustained or watching someone die. The literature recognises the distress which primary stressors cause and their association with mental disorders. Secondary stressors such as a lack of financial assistance, the gruelling process of submitting an insurance claim, parents’ worries about their children, and continued lack of infrastructure can manifest their effects shortly after a disaster and persist for extended periods of time. Secondary stressors, and their roles in affecting people’s longer-term mental health, should not be overlooked. We draw attention in this review to the nature of secondary stressors that are commonly identified in the literature, assess how they are measured, and develop a typology of these stressors that often affect people after extreme events. Methods We searched for relevant papers from 2010 and 2011 using MEDLINE®, Embase and PsycINFO®. We selected primary research papers that evaluated the associations between secondary stressors and distress or mental disorders following extreme events, and were published in English. We extracted information on which secondary stressors were assessed, and used thematic analysis to group the secondary stressors into a typology. Results Thirty-two relevant articles published in 2010 and 2011 were identified. Many secondary stressors were poorly defined and difficult to differentiate from primary stressors or other life events. We identified 11 categories of secondary stressors, though some extend over more than one category. The categories include: economic stressors such as problems with compensation, recovery of and rebuilding homes; loss of physical possessions and resources; health-related stressors; stress relating to education and schooling; stress arising from media reporting; family and social stressors; stress arising from loss of leisure and recreation; and stress related to changes in people’s views of the world or themselves. Limitations in this review include its focus on studies published in 2010 and 2011, which may have led to some secondary stressors being excluded. Assumptions have been made about whether certain items are secondary stressors, if unclear definitions made it difficult to differentiate them from primary stressors. Conclusions This is the first review, to our knowledge, that has developed a typology of secondary stressors that occur following extreme events. We discuss the differing natures of these stressors and the criteria that should be used to differentiate primary and secondary stressors. Some secondary stressors, for example, are entities in themselves, while others are persisting primary stressors that exert their effects through failure of societal responses to disasters to mitigate their immediate impacts. Future research should aim to define secondary stressors and investigate the interacti...

Introduction Wildfires are common globally. Although there has been considerable work done on the health effects of wildfires in countries such as the USA where they occur frequently there has been relatively little work to investigate health effects in the United Kingdom. Climate change may increase the risk of increasing wildfire frequency, therefore there is an urgent need to further understand the health effects and public awareness of wildfires. This study was designed to review current evidence about the health effects of wildfires from the UK standpoint. Methods A comprehensive literature review of international evidence regarding wildfire related health effects was conducted in January 2012. Further information was gathered from authors’ focus groups. Results A review of the published evidence shows that human health can be severely affected by wildfires. Certain populations are particularly vulnerable. Wood smoke has high levels of particulate matter and toxins. Respiratory morbidity predominates, but cardiovascular, ophthalmic and psychiatric problems can also result. In addition severe burns resulting from direct contact with the fire require care in special units and carry a risk of multi – organ complications. The wider health implications from spreading air, water and land pollution are of concern. Access to affected areas and communication with populations living within them is crucial in mitigating risk. Conclusion This study has identified factors that may reduce public health risk from wildfires. However more research is needed to evaluate longer term health effects from wildfires. An understanding of such factors is vital to ensure preparedness within health care services for such events.

These concepts have clear relevance for public health and emergency planning. Resilient communities should be less dependent on external help in times of disaster. Many features of resilience also encompass the wider social and economic determinants of public health. Difficulties remain in defining and measuring resilience in the population health context.