A protocol for analysing the effects on health and greenhouse gas emissions of implemented climate change mitigation actions

Abstract

Background: It is crucial to understand the benefits to human health from decarbonisation to galvanise action among decision makers. Most of our existing evidence comes from modelling studies and little is known about the extent to which the health co-benefits of climate change mitigation actions are realised upon implementation. We aim to analyse evidence from mitigation actions that have been implemented across a range of sectors and scales, to identify those that can improve and sustain health, while accelerating progress towards a zero-carbon economy. Objectives: To understand the implementation process of actions and the role of key actors; explain the contextual elements influencing these actions; summarise what effects, both positive and negative, planned and unplanned they may have on emissions of greenhouse gases and health; and to summarise environmental, social, or economic co-benefits. Data: We will review evidence collected through partnership with existing data holders and an open call for evidence. We will also conduct a hand search of reference lists from systematic reviews and websites of organisations relevant to climate change mitigation. Screening: Screening will be done by two reviewers according to a pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Analysis: We will identify gaps where implementation or evaluation of implementation of mitigation actions is lacking. We will synthesise the findings to describe how actions were implemented and how they achieved results in different contexts, identifying potential barriers and facilitators to their design, implementation, and uptake. We will also synthesise their effect on health outcomes and other co-benefits. Quantitative synthesis will depend on the heterogeneity of outcomes and metrics. Conclusions: Findings will be used to identify lessons that can be learned from successful and unsuccessful mitigation actions, to make inferences on replicability, scalability, and transferability and will contribute to the development of frameworks that can be used by policy makers.

Pathways to a healthy net-zero future: report of the Lancet Pathfinder Commission

“…To move from research to implementation it is imperative to understand the implementation process, including the contextual factors that influence the choice of actions to implement, and the impacts these actions might have, both positive and negative, planned and unplanned, on human health or exposures and risk factors for health. A separate search of peer-reviewed and grey literature was undertaken to identify further examples of implemented actions which had measured and reported both emission reductions and health impacts, 18 (see WebAppendix A2 for methods). These examples provide evidence on the realities of implementing mitigation actions in different geographical locations, socio-economic settings and at a variety of spatial scales.…”

“…The most frequently measured greenhouse gas was CO2 (measured for 101 actions), followed by CH4 (18), and N 2 O (11) with only 9 and 3 actions measuring black carbon and black smoke, respectively (note that some actions measured multiple gases and particles). The remaining 80 actions were measured in terms of the composite unit CO2eq.…”

“…The Commission's objectives are to i) map the pathways linking mitigation actions with health and assess the magnitude of potential health co-benefits and GHG mitigation impacts through synthesis of evidence (umbrella review) 17 ii) investigate and analyse evaluated examples of implemented GHG mitigation actions and, where possible, to understand the reasons for success or failure of such actions. 18 This report presents the findings on the health co-benefits of GHG mitigation by sector from an umbrella review (a review of systematic reviews) and gives summaries of evaluated examples of implemented actions (case studies). Both encompass a wide range of sectoral and intersectoral initiatives in energy, transport, the built environment (including cities), agrifood systems (including agriculture), industry, sanitation and nature-based solutions.…”

Breaking the Walls of Complex Systems Change in Cities: A Service Ecosystems and Psychological Perspective

“…Health was not an explicit theme of the 2018 Cities and Climate Change Science GRAA, though it was discussed in sessions in terms of the co-benefits of climate action. It is included as a cross cutting theme in this report to reflect the increasing importance of health within the cities and climate change agenda, as well as the associated challenges and research gaps (Hassan, 2021).…”

Quantifying the effectiveness and health co-benefits of climate change mitigation actions across sectors: a protocol for an umbrella review

“…Although the focus of the initiative is on climate change mitigation, the adaptation actions are in scope of our work as long as they also have a significant mitigation component. The Pathfinder Initiative will provide evidence on the important gaps in knowledge on which actions can help achieving the greatest benefits with minimal trade-offs for the climate and health in different contexts and how these actions can be effectively scaled-up ( Hassan et al , 2021 ).…”