Assessing the Human

Health Benefts of Climate

Mitigation, Pollution
Prevention, and Biodiversity
Preservation ORIGINAL RESEARCH

PHILIP J. LANDRIGAN JENNA MU

MICHAEL BRITT ISABELLA RIZZO
SAMANTHA FISHER ANNA SATHER
AMELIA HOLMES AROUB YOUSUF
MANASI KUMAR PUSHPAM KUMAR
*Author affliations can be found in the back matter of this article

ABSTRACT CORRESPONDING AUTHOR:

Philip J. Landrigan, MD, MSc
Background: Since the Industrial Revolution, humanity has amassed great wealth and Global Observatory on
achieved unprecedented material prosperity. These advances have come, however, at Planetary Health, Boston
great cost to the planet. They are guided by an economic model that focuses almost College, Chestnut Hill, MA, US;
exclusively on short-term gain, while ignoring natural capital and human capital. They Centre Scientifque de Monaco,
MC
have relied on the combustion of vast quantities of fossil fuels, massive consumption of
the earth’s resources, and production and environmental release of enormous quantities [email protected]

of chemicals, pesticides, fertilizers, and plastics. They have caused climate change,
pollution, and biodiversity loss, the “Triple Planetary Crisis”. They are responsible for more
than 9 million premature deaths per year and for widespread disease – impacts that fall KEYWORDS:
disproportionately upon the poor and the vulnerable. climate change; pollution;
biodiversity loss; Triple Planetary
Goals: To map the human health impacts of climate change, pollution, and biodiversity Crisis; Global Burden of Disease
loss. To outline a framework for assessing the health benefts of interventions against (GBD) study; co-benefts
these threats.
TO CITE THIS ARTICLE:
Findings: Actions taken by national governments and international agencies to mitigate
Landrigan PJ, Britt M, Fisher
climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss can improve health, prevent disease, S, Holmes A, Kumar M, Mu J,
save lives, and enhance human well-being. Yet assessment of health benefts is largely Rizzo I, Sather A, Yousuf A,
absent from evaluations of environmental remediation programs. This represents a lost Kumar P. Assessing the Human
opportunity to quantify the full benefts of environmental remediation and to educate Health Benefts of Climate
policy makers and the public. Mitigation, Pollution Prevention,
and Biodiversity Preservation.
Recommendations: We recommend that national governments and international Annals of Global Health. 2024;
agencies implementing interventions against climate change, pollution, and biodiversity 90(1): 1, 1–23. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.5334/aogh.4161
loss develop metrics and strategies for quantifying the health benefts of these
interventions. We recommend that they deploy these tools in parallel with assessments
 of ecologic and economic benefts. Health metrics developed by the Global Burden of Landrigan et al. 2
Annals of Global Health
Disease (GBD) study may provide a useful starting point. DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161

Incorporation of health metrics into assessments of environmental restoration will require

building transdisciplinary collaborations. Environmental scientists and engineers will need
to work with health scientists to establish evaluation systems that link environmental and
economic data with health data. Such systems will assist international agencies as well as
national and local governments in prioritizing environmental interventions.

INTRODUCTION
Human health and the health of planet earth – our Common Home – are inextricably linked [1].
All humans depend on the planet’s resources for food, fuel, shelter, drinking water, breathable air,
a temperate climate, and mental and spiritual sustenance [2]. The global economy also relies on
the planet. An estimated two-thirds of the world’s economic activity depends directly or indirectly
on resources and services provided by the planetary environment [3]. Harms done to the health of
the planet ultimately harm human health, and actions taken to protect the planet by mitigating
climate change, preventing pollution, and preserving biological diversity beneft human health and
well-being.

Humans of our species, Homo sapiens, have inhabited the earth for an estimated 100,000–200,000
years, but it is only in the 11,000 years since the last Ice Age – the Holocene era – that humans have
prospered. This unique fourishing is directly attributable to the highly favorable environmental
conditions that have characterized this era. The most unique feature of the Holocene has been
a temperate climate that has been stably sustained across many millennia and allowed humans
to move beyond the exigencies of day-to-day survival and cultivate crops, domesticate animals,
build cities, and develop civilizations [4].

The favorable conditions of the Holocene and the agrarian, the industrial, and most recently,
the technological revolutions have produced unprecedented gains. Humans have amassed
unprecedented wealth. We have created art, composed symphonies, decoded the genome,
explored the farthest reaches of the planet, and ventured into space. We have reduced poverty.
The proportion of people living in extreme poverty has fallen from 63% of the global population
in 1950 to 10% in 2017, today, despite growth of the global population from 2.5 billion to 7.3
billion [5]. We have improved health. Life expectancy in high-income countries has increased from
40–50 years in 1900, to more than 80 years today. Child mortality in almost all nations has fallen
dramatically [6].

However, humanity has made these advances at great cost to the planet. We have recklessly
consumed the earth’s resources and given little thought to the consequences. We have burned
massive quantities of fossil fuels. We have released great and growing quantities of chemicals,
pesticides, fertilizers, and plastics – many of them toxic – into the earth’s environment. We have
destroyed habitats and greatly accelerated the extinction of living species.

To provide a framework for mapping anthropogenic damage to the planet’s life-support

systems, Rockström et al. developed the concept of Planetary Boundaries [7]. They argue that
human infuence on the planetary environment is at or near the point of transgressing several
of the boundaries that defne a safe operating space for humanity. For the 11,000 years of
the Holocene Era, these support systems have operated within safe boundaries. They have
maintained a temperate climate, provided clean breathable air, recycled nutrients such as
nitrogen and phosphorus, and regulated the world’s water cycle, providing freshwater for
drinking and sanitation [7]. Now, the boundaries for several planetary support systems –
climate, biodiversity, the nitrogen cycle, and pollution by synthetic chemicals and plastics –
appear to have been transgressed. We may be approaching a point where the damage can no
longer be reversed [8].
METHODS Landrigan et al.
Annals of Global Health
3

DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
To map the physical and mental health impacts of current planetary changes, we conducted a
scoping review using the search terms “Climate Change”, “Pollution”, “Biodiversity Loss”, and “Triple
Planetary Threat” with particular emphasis on review articles and publications by international
agencies that linked these threats to physical and/or mental health.

To examine the potential benefts for physical and mental health of investments in climate
mitigation, pollution prevention, and preservation of biological diversity, we studied selected
fagship projects implemented by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), Green Climate Fund
(GCF) and the UN Environment Programme (UNEP).

FINDINGS
HEALTH EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
Climate change poses grave threats to human health and to the stability of modern societies [9].
The main driver is a sharp increase in emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse
gases resulting from massive combustion of fossil fuels. Land-use changes such as deforestation
place additional pressures on the climate by reducing the capacity of ecosystems to absorb and
store atmospheric carbon dioxide [1].

With climate change, the mean temperature of the earth’s surface has warmed by approximately
1.2 degrees centigrade since 1880, and the rate of increase has accelerated since 1970. Sixteen
of the 17 world’s warmest years have occurred since 2000 [9]. This increase in mean surface
temperature is not evenly distributed. In some parts of the world, temperature has increased little
or not at all, but other places, especially the circumpolar regions, have experienced increases as
great as 2–3 degrees Celsius [10, 11].

Extreme Weather Events and Health

Climate change resulted in increased frequency of severe heat waves and heat-related illness.
It has increased the frequency and severity of extreme weather events including hurricanes and
cyclones of enormous destructive capacity, all of which cause great harm to human health [12,
13, 14].

Flooding and Health

Climate-related fooding occurs across a range of environments, including mountainous regions,
where it is the consequence of fuvial fooding from heavy rainfall and snowmelt, and coastal
regions where storm surges, tsunamis, and high tides cause damage, especially ink major port
cities, and increase disease risks [15–17].

Diverse, healthy ecosystems ameliorate the intensity of foods. Floodplains and wetlands provide
spaces to retain water surplus, decreasing the severity of fooding. Forests provide natural food
hazard mitigation by absorbing large amounts of water from rainfall, thus reducing surface runoff
and river discharge. Forests reduce wind velocity, a contributing factor to snow melt. Mangrove
forests protect coastlines [18].

With global climate change, fooding will increase in frequency and intensity. Anthropogenic land-
use change will further exacerbate these effects. All of these impacts are intensifed by poverty
and are most harmful in LMICs [19].

Vector-Borne Diseases and Health

Climate change increases risk of infection by vector-borne diseases [20, 21], including diseases
carried by mosquitoes (malaria, West Nile virus, and yellow fever) [22] and ticks (Lyme disease)
[23]. Many temperate regions are beginning to see increasing incidence rates of diseases previously
confned to warmer regions (e.g., malaria in Europe, dengue in the southern United States, and
poleward expansion of Lyme disease).
Water Scarcity and Health Landrigan et al. 4
Annals of Global Health
Climate change and loss of natural ecosystems exacerbate water scarcity. Water scarcity is further DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
aggravated by unsustainable water extraction for agriculture across vast areas of China, India, and
the United States. The potential consequences include food shortages, social unrest, migration,
and confict [24].

HEALTH EFFECTS OF POLLUTION

Pollution is the largest environmental cause of disease and premature death in the world today
[25]. It arises from the same sources that drive climate change. It was responsible in 2019 for an
estimated 9 million deaths worldwide [26, 27], including one million deaths in children [28]. In
many regions, ambient air pollution and chemical pollution, the forms of pollution most closely
associated with urbanization and modern industrial development are worsening.

Air Pollution and Health

The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study estimates that, in 2019, ambient air pollution was
responsible for approximately 7 million deaths worldwide [27, 29]. Ambient air pollution is
worsening as climate change progresses. The number of deaths attributable to ambient air
pollution has increased by 51% since 1990 and continues to rise [30]. Sharpest increases are
seen in the rapidly growing cities of low- and middle-income countries [31]. (Figure 1) Without
aggressive intervention, the number of deaths attributable to ambient air pollution could double
by 2050 [32].

Figure 1 Death rate from

ambient particulate air
pollution by country, 2019.
Source: IHME [14].

Climate change and air pollution are intimately linked [26]. Fuel combustion – fossil fuel combustion
in high-income and middle-income countries and biomass burning in low income countries – is
responsible for 80% of the greenhouse gases and short-lived climate pollutants that drive climate
change. Additionally, fuel combustion creates 85% of airborne particulate pollution and almost all
air pollution is associated with sulfur and nitrogen oxides (SOX and NOX) [26].
Chemical and Plastic Pollution and Health Landrigan et al. 5
Annals of Global Health
Chemical and plastic pollution is a great and growing global problem [27]. More than 325,000 DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
new chemicals and chemical mixtures have been synthesized since 1950 [33]. At the same time,
more than 8 Gigatons of plastic have been produced [34]. More than 98% of these materials are
produced from coal, oil, and gas. Production of petrochemicals and plastics is an important driver
of both climate change and air pollution.

Synthetic chemicals and plastics have become widely dispersed in the global environment. They
are responsible for nearly universal human exposure and widespread disease [34].

Water Pollution and Health

In 2015, an estimated 1.3 million deaths were caused by unsafe water sources [26]. Water
pollution is a mix of human waste, animal waste, agricultural run-off, and chemical discharges.
The principal diseases linked to water pollution are acute and chronic gastrointestinal diseases
– diarrheal diseases (70% of deaths), typhoid fever (8%), paratyphoid fever (20%), and lower
respiratory tract infections (2%). Polluted water is linked, additionally, to a range of parasitic
infections.

Substantial progress has been made in reducing water pollution and waterborne disease. Between
1990 and 2015, 2.6 billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources. In this time,
the number of children dying from diarrheal diseases decreased from approximately 1.5 million
deaths in 1990 to slightly greater than 0.6 million in 2012 [26].

Ocean Pollution and Health

Ocean pollution is a critically important but underrecognized component of global pollution. It
has multiple direct and indirect impacts on human health. The nature and magnitude of these
impacts are only beginning to be quantifed [35].

Sea surface warming and worsening marine pollution result in expanding geographic ranges
of marine pathogenic bacteria. The result is that bacteria such as Vibrio species are moving
poleward into cold, previously unpolluted waters to cause previously unseen, life-threatening
infections [36].

Absorption into the oceans of increasing amounts of atmospheric CO2 causes ocean acidifcation
that in turn destroys coral reefs and marine microorganisms. These events contribute to reduction
of fsh stocks and increased risk of malnutrition, especially in coastal communities in low-income
and middle-income countries [37].

HEALTH EFFECTS OF BIODIVERSITY LOSS

Biological diversity is a hallmark of healthy, functioning ecosystems. Healthy ecosystems support
ecosystem services such as pollination, healthy soils, and fresh water that are critical to human
health and the sustainability of modern societies [38].

Climate change, pollution, land-use change, and habitat destruction all threaten biodiversity.
These pressures have greatly accelerated the rate of species extinction, which is estimated to be
100-1000 times greater today than a millennium ago [39] and is projected to worsen still further
over the next 50 years [40]. Species currently facing extinction include 12% of all birds, 32% of
amphibians, 23% of mammals, 31% of gymnosperms, and 33% of corals (of those assessed by
the IUCN Red List) [41–43] (Figure 2).

Accelerating biodiversity loss destabilizes ecosystems, reduces ecosystem productivity, impedes

the ability of ecosystems to decompose waste and recycle biologically essential nutrients.
Heightened risks of disease and death are among the consequences [44–47].
 Landrigan et al. 6
Annals of Global Health
DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161

Figure 2 The Red List Index

(RLI) of species survival for
mammals, birds, amphibians,
reef-forming corals and cycads.
The blue line indicates the
overall RLI for all the taxa
combined. Coral species are
moving towards increased
extinction risk most rapidly,
while amphibians are, on
average, the most threatened
animal group.
Source: IUCN [41].

Biodiversity, Food Production, and Health

Global food security is highly dependent on rich biological diversity [48]. Healthy ecosystems
provide humans with food and nutrition from multiple sources that include highly managed
systems such as crops, aquaculture, and livestock as well as wild sources such as capture fsheries,
game and wild plants [49].

Biodiversity, Soil Degradation, and Health

Modern chemically intensive, commodity-oriented agriculture has diminished soil quality in many
places, thus reducing soil fertility [50, 51]. It has also increased soil loss through wind and water
erosion faster than it can be replenished. Loss of between 1 and 12 million hectares of agricultural
land is occurring annually [52]. In many regions, nutrient depletion of soils has led to declines in
agricultural output [53].

Biodiversity, Agrochemical Inputs, and Health

Nitrogen- and phosphorus-containing fertilizers are produced in massive quantities and used
extensively in agriculture [50]. Wide use of these chemical fertilizers has led to accumulations
of phosphorus and nitrogen in aquatic ecosystems, with resulting eutrophication, harmful algal
blooms, and fsh ‘die-offs’ [54–56].

Pesticides further damage ecosystems and contribute to biodiversity loss [57, 58]. Pesticides also
directly harm human health resulting each year in thousands of acute poisoning episodes [59] as
well as reduced male fertility [60], birth defects [61], cancers, and respiratory disease [62].

Traditional and integrative agricultural systems, which lessen dependence on agrochemicals,

may be expected to decrease incidence of pesticide-related diseases, while at the same time
enhancing soil quality, increasing crop yields, and reducing farmers’ out-of-pocket costs [63, 64].
An example is seen in the scaling up of Zero Budget Natural Farming in India [65].
Biodiversity, Pollination, and Health Landrigan et al. 7
Annals of Global Health
Insect pollination is essential for the reproductive cycles of over 87 of the leading global food DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
crops [66]. Honeybees alone pollinate over 20,000 plant species and butterfies, fies, moths,
wasps, beetles, birds, bats, and other animals that contribute further. Pollinators are critical for
horticulture, orchard, and forage production [67]. Fiber and root crops rely on pollinators for the
production of seed [68]. Approximately 80% of all fowering plant species, and more than 75%
of global food crops, including fruits and vegetables and some of the most important cash crops,
such as coffee, cocoa and almonds, rely on animal pollination.

Reductions are reported in numbers and diversity of both wild and domestic pollinators [69]. Loss
of pollinating insects poses a grave threat to food production and thus to global food security.
Neonicotinoid insecticides are strongly implicated in pollinator decreases [70]. Reductions
in honeybee populations can lead to increased exposure of food crops to pests and parasites,
reduced genetic diversity and other environmental stressors [71–73].

Biodiversity, Pollution Control, and Health

Healthy ecosystems reduce pollution by absorbing, processing, sequestering, and detoxifying
wastes, thus reducing the concentrations of harmful substances that threaten human health [74].

Vegetation in urban areas plays an essential role in regulating air quality by mitigating particulate
pollutants such as dust, ash, pollen, and smoke as well as absorbing toxic gases like ozone,
sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide [75]. Trees and forests in the conterminous US removed an
estimated 17.4 million tons of pollution from the air in 2010 [76]. Natural ecosystems can mitigate
temperature extremes in both warm and cold seasons and in turn reduce pollution emissions from
power-generating facilities [77].

Water purifcation is an ecosystem service provided by forests, wetlands, and grasslands, which
slow the movement of water from source to destination and thus flter the water [78]. Healthy
ecosystems containing diverse microbial assemblages provide diverse purifcation services that
include detoxifying pesticides and removing heavy metals [79].

Ocean Biodiversity and Health

Global food security is dependent on the health of fsheries. An estimated 3 billion people obtain
20% or more of their protein intake from fsh [80]. Due to overfshing, global warming, marine
habitat degradation, ocean pollution, and ocean acidifcation, fsh stocks are declining worldwide
and multiple fsheries are in jeopardy [81].

Biodiversity and Medicine

Healthy functioning ecosystems provide many medicines and chemical compounds used
by humans [40], and more than 60,000 species of plants, animals, fungi and microbes are
utilized to make medicines and other benefcial products [2]. An estimated 4 billion people
rely primarily on natural medicines for their health care [82, 83]. Higher levels of biodiversity
in natural ecosystems increase the probability of discovering new natural compounds with
potential medicinal uses [84, 85].

The International Union for Conservation of Nature red list indicates that more than 13% of the
5,000 currently known medicinal plants are classifed as under threat [41]. Unless urgent action
is taken to protect biological diversity, more species will be lost, and the genetic and biological
secrets these organisms hold will be gone forever.

Biodiversity and Disease Control

Zoonoses are a growing challenge to human health [46]. They include diseases caused by bacteria,
fungi, parasites, viruses, and prions [86]. An estimated 60% of emerging infectious diseases are
zoonotic in origin, including Ebola, Zika and Nipah encephalitis and almost all known pandemics
such as infuenza [87], HIV/AIDS and more recently COVID-19 [88]. Annually around 2.7 million
deaths are attributed to zoonotic infections [89].
The risk of novel zoonotic disease outbreaks is increasing, owing to anthropogenic environmental Landrigan et al. 8
Annals of Global Health
changes [90]. Human activities such as land use change (logging, mining) and monoculture DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
agriculture that increase human contact with previously sequestered species and increase the
frequency of zoonotic “spillover” events [91] (Figure 3). Over 50 per cent of the emerging infections
of zoonotic origin between 1940 and 2000 are attributed to human drivers [46, 92, 93].

Figure 3 Estimated risk of

zoonotic emerging infectious
disease events.
Source: (Allen et al., 2017) [95].
License: https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/
by/4.0/legalcode

With ecosystem destruction and loss of wild habitats, species that act as buffers against disease
transmission may be reduced in number or even become locally extinct. This loss of biodiversity
is especially problematic for human health when the species lost are those that effectively
“sequester” infectious diseases due to their extremely robust immune systems and low rates
of reproduction. With increased ecosystem disruption, species with high fecundity and weaker
immunity can move in to occupy niches previously flled by buffering species.

The concept that high ecosystem biodiversity results in a lower abundance of competent hosts
and higher abundance of less competent hosts connects biodiversity with a decreased risk of
epidemics, and is called the “dilution effect hypothesis” [93].

BOX: DILUTION EFFECT OF BIODIVERSITY; CASE STUDY ON

LYME DISEASE
Lyme Disease (caused by B. burgdorferi) in Northeastern and Midwestern North America
is spread primarily via the blacklegged tick. Biodiversity has been observed to reduce
transmission of Lyme disease to humans.

Schmidt and Ostfeld [94] used empirical and modeling approaches to measure the dilution
effect across New York State. They found that as species richness increased, the prevalence
of Lyme disease in feld-collected ticks decreased. They concluded that an increase in
species richness reduces risk of Lyme disease transmission, providing evidence for a dilution
effect. Similar patterns have been observed in Europe.

Efforts aimed at early detection and response to emerging pathogens have gained
traction in recent years, particularly given the ongoing devastation caused by the
COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging infectious disease modeling has assessed global
distribution of emerging infectious disease risk (Figure 4). Regions identifed as having an
elevated risk for disease emergence are tropical regions, particularly those undergoing
rapid encroachment of human settlement and agriculture into previously intact forest
ecosystems [95].
 Landrigan et al. 9
Annals of Global Health
DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161

Figure 4 Land-use induced

spillover of zoonotic infections.
Source: Plowright et al. [46].

MENTAL HEALTH EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE, POLLUTION, AND

BIODIVERSITY LOSS
Healthy, non-polluted ecosystems provide multiple benefts to human well-being and mental
health including aesthetic enjoyment of nature, recreation, spiritual experiences, and physical and
mental health benefts [96]. Activities such as recreation and ecotourism allow people to immerse
in the natural environment through camping, hiking, and nature study. For many communities and
cultures, nature also holds signifcant spiritual and religious value.

Conversely, environmental disruptions such as climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss
have powerfully negative impacts on mental health [97, 98]. These impacts are particularly
prevalent in LMICs that are experiencing rapid epidemiological and demographic changes, such
as the rise of megacities. They are exacerbated by food and water scarcity, diminished income,
housing insecurity and inadequate healthcare systems and further aggravated by uncontrolled
population growth, shifting demographics, urbanization, and greater consumption of natural
resources.
Mental Health Effects of Climate Change Landrigan et al. 10
Annals of Global Health
Climate change negatively affects mental health through numerous pathways including exposure DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
to extreme heat and high temperatures, extreme weather-related events, and natural disasters
[98]. Exposure to extreme heat and high temperatures are associated with increased deaths by
suicide and increased admissions for inpatient psychiatric treatment. Heat waves are associated
also with increased aggression [99]. Droughts, foods, and violent storms are associated with
depression, anxiety, psychological distress, and suicide [100–103].

Mental Health Effects of Pollution

Air pollution is known to increase the risk of new onset of mental disorders and to exacerbate
the severity of existing mental disorders [104]. A series of panel studies in China found that air
pollution is associated with an increase in severe mental illness as well as with nearly $23 billion in
health expenditures due to treatment [105].

Pollution by toxic metals and manufactured chemicals is a powerful and preventable cause of brain
damage and mental disorder. Early-life exposures to pollutants have been linked to decreased
cognitive function, reduced IQ, shortened attention span, and increased risk for attention-defcit
hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) [106].

Chemical pollution and air pollution tend to concentrate in poor, minority, and marginalized
communities and in LMICs – a classic example of environmental injustice – and can magnify the
negative impacts of social disadvantage on mental health [107].

Lack of green spaces, particularly in urban built environments, has been shown to be associated
with depression, anxiety, and stress. Conversely, the inclusion of green spaces in the living
environment improves mood and well-being [108]. Green spaces include urban forests, “green
design” buildings, green exercise space, and water bodies or “blue spaces” [109–111].

Noise pollution includes road noise, traffc noise, and ambient noise exposure. Noise pollution is
associated with hyperactivity and inattention, irritability, anxiety symptoms, and depression [112,
113].

ASSESSING FLAGSHIP UN PROJECTS AND THEIR HEALTH AND

ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
To examine the strategies used by international agencies and national governments for assessing
the health benefts of their investments in climate change mitigation, pollution prevention, and
preservation of biological diversity, we examined fagship projects implemented by UNEP through
the Global Environment Fund (GEF) and the Green Climate Fund (GCF). Additionally, we examined
the Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) program hosted by UNEP.

The goal of these analyses was to determine what strategies are currently used by international
agencies for assessing the health benefts of environmental interventions to see what works, to
understand could be upscaled, and to identify gaps.

THE GREEN CLIMATE FUND (GCF)

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) [114] is the fnancial arm of the UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change and is supported by the 194 countries that are Parties to this Convention. GCF
invests in low-emission and climate-resilient development. It focuses especially on regions highly
vulnerable to climate change, including Least Developed Countries (LDCs), Small Island Developing
States (SIDS), and various African states.

GCF strives to maximize its impact by diversifying its portfolio equally across both climate adaptation
and climate mitigation. It engages with both public and private fnancial sectors. It provides a wide
variety of fnancial products. It acknowledges the importance of developing nations’ integrating
GCF funds into their own national development plans. Since its founding in 2010, GCF has funded
143 projects and committed $6.2 billion to these investments.
THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FUND (GEF) Landrigan et al. 11
Annals of Global Health
The Global Environment Fund (GEF) [115] is a private equity fund that invests in corporations to DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161

promote green energy and sustainable use of the earth’s resources within the corporate sphere.
GEF operates on the premise that a sustainable and environmentally centered approach to fnance
holds the potential for an improved environment, economy, and quality of life.

GEF partners with companies that offer environmentally friendly products. Through an Operational
Due Diligence Process, it selects companies that ft their criteria of having a stable, proven,
and upward trajectory of revenue as well as having a high likelihood of improving the global
environment. To date, GEF has invested nearly $1.0 in environmentally friendly and effcient
energy and resource companies.

THE ECONOMICS OF ECOSYSTEMS AND BIODIVERSITY (TEEB)

TEEB is a global program funded by the International Climate Initiative and hosted by UNEP [116].
TEEB is focused on “making nature’s values visible”. Its objective is to incorporate valuations
of biodiversity and ecosystem services into decision-making at all levels. TEEB has conducted
projects in many countries, including Columbia, Kenya, Tanzania, and Thailand. It utilizes a three-
step approach to valuing biodiversity and ecosystem services:

• Recognizing cultural and spiritual value in ecosystems, including landscapes and species.
For example, the protection of sacred groves in some countries has helped to protect these
special areas and the biodiversity they contain.
• Quantifying the economic value of ecosystems. This information enables decision
makers to consider the full benefts of nature and the potential costs of lost ecosystem
services. It thus moves decision making beyond a narrow focus on the value of produced
goods and GDP. An example is calculation of the economic value of the food control
ecosystem services provided by wetlands, salt marshes, and mangrove forests compared
to the costs of destroying these natural systems and replacing them with concrete food
barriers.
• Introducing the economic values of ecosystems and biodiversity into decision making.
This can include providing incentives for preservation of ecosystem services, eliminating
environmentally harmful subsidies, or introducing tax breaks for conservation.

Advancement of Natural Capital Accounting is a major TEEB initiative. Unlike GDP, which examines
only the value of goods and services produced by human activity, Natural Capital Accounting
seeks to develop a broader and more comprehensive valuation of national wealth that includes
assessments of the economic worth of natural resources and ecosystem services. An example is
quantifcation of the economic value of the air fltration, carbon sequestration, food control and
climate modulation produced by forests.

Another TEEB initiative, Supporting Biodiversity and Climate-Friendly Land Management in

Agricultural Landscapes, applies systems thinking to the economics of agriculture. It identifes and
quantifes the huge but hidden and externalized costs of modern agricultural systems.

This project has identifed agricultural practices that beneft the environment and human health,
developed metrics and techniques to assess the economic value of these practices, and used this
information to leverage policy changes and legislative reforms. UNEP is currently supporting the
implementation of TEEB AgriFood initiatives in 10 countries, in collaboration with national and
local government agencies, and local research institutions.

The following are case studies that highlight some of UNEP’s work in protecting human health by
safeguarding the earth’s environment.
 Landrigan et al. 12
Annals of Global Health
CASE STUDY 1. DEVELOPING CORE CAPACITY TO ADDRESS DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN PRODUCTIVE COASTAL
ZONES IN TANZANIA [117]
Tanzania’s coastline is vital to the country’s economy. Rising sea levels resulting from global
climate change pose a signifcant threat to coastal and island communities as well as
to biological diversity. Without action, rising sea level is projected to cost the Tanzanian
economy upwards of $200 million per year in the next 30 years and the resulting foods
threaten $5.3 billion in assets.

In collaboration with the Division of Environment of the Vice President’s Offce of Tanzania,
UNEP, Global Environment Fund, and the Adaptation Fund, various stakeholders have worked
to implement ecosystem-based adaptations throughout major population centers along the
Tanzanian coast, including the rapidly expanding metropolis of Dar es Salaam. To combat the
effects of rising sea levels, offcials rooted their efforts in natural and structural improvements.
For example, numerous seawalls, groynes, and dikes were built to limit the erosion and
structural damage caused by the sea. Offcials also restored local coral and mangrove
habitats, which have been proven to protect against storm surges. Mangrove habitats were
designated as “no-take zones” in order to reduce deforestation. Community initiatives were
established, including a network of 87 local groups tasked with managing and protecting the
regrowing mangrove sites. In addition, approximately 3,000 effcient stoves were distributed
to households in areas that have traditionally relied on mangroves for fuel.

This initiative has proven highly successful, and it has benefted the Tanzanian environment
and nearly one million Tanzanians, both directly and indirectly. Furthermore, 3,000 m2 of
coral reefs and 1,000 ha of mangrove forest have been restored. Community members were
trained in maintaining these resources, with at least 100 people being trained in coastal and
climate vulnerability mapping techniques. Through this work, UNEP and partner associations
are fostering a culture of sustainable and intergenerational change, and by providing
necessary skills and building capacity in individuals and local communities, this change is
likely to be long-lasting and sustainable.

Excellent strides have been made in restoring natural resources that mitigate climate change
and protect against sea level rise, while advancements in infrastructure contributed further
to protection against environmental disasters. These efforts also reduce risk of death and
injury from environmental disasters in the areas where interventions have been successfully
implemented.

A detailed analysis of this initiative revealed certain limitations and areas for future
improvement. According to the UN Environment GEF PIR Fiscal Year 2019 project document,
the effciency and success of this project were slightly hindered by a small overall budget in
comparison to the magnitude of the project’s outputs and by a delay in the Tanzanian audit
procedure. However, the project successfully overcame these challenges and remained
on track for fnancial closure. There were also some cultural and community challenges
with certain community associations advocating for advance payments to manage the
mangroves and by a lack of female participation in the project due to cultural norms on the
Tanzanian coast that women do not participate in outdoor activities. Lastly, due to a budget
cut, the number of boreholes constructed in a specifc region was reduced from 17 to 10,
and a road food delayed completion of a portion of the work.

This careful review provided a series of suggestions to improve the quality of the outputs
for future UNEP projects. Specifcally, this analysis noted the need for improvements in the
thoroughness of the vulnerability assessments, for more coastal-oriented GIS training for
district offcers, and for greater use of already implemented district software.
 Landrigan et al. 13
Annals of Global Health
CASE STUDY 2. LARGE-SCALE ECOSYSTEM-BASED ADAPTATION DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
IN THE GAMBIA: DEVELOPING A CLIMATE-RESILIENT,
NATURAL-RESOURCE-BASED ECONOMY [118]
UNEP has partnered with the Ministry of Environment, Climate Change, and Natural Resources
of The Gambia to address the implications of climate change on local communities, taking
an individualized approach.

One-third of the land mass of The Gambia lies less than 10 meters above sea level, and
about 20% of this land is fooded seasonally. Thus, large areas of the country are at high
risk for rising sea levels. To develop novel strategies to prevent this situation from worsening,
offcials plan to restore degraded forests, develop ecologically sustainable businesses, and
create home and community gardens that would diversify food sources. A further challenge
is that climate change is projected to bring erratic rainfall and droughts, which could greatly
damage the economy of The Gambia’s agricultural sector, resulting in lower crop yields and
a “hunger season” extending throughout the summer months.

To execute these plans, offcials planted multi-purpose plant species that provided value to
the economy and also augmented climate resilience. Additionally, enrichment planting was
undertaken to reduce the impacts of soil erosion. Mangrove areas were established as buffer
zones along the coast to decrease the impact of storm surges. Climate-resilient, natural-
resource-based businesses were established to help foster the growth of the economy,
while providing local residences with herbs, shrubs, and trees.

As a result of these actions, 13,400 hectares of previously degraded forests, farmland, and
wildlife areas were revitalized, 46,200 households directly benefted, and 166 natural-
resource-based businesses were established. The combination of environmental, economic,
and cultural cultivation improvements was crucial in the long-term success of this program. To
date, this is the largest natural resource development project ever undertaken in The Gambia.

Furthermore, this drastic revitalization of natural resources accomplished through this

project has benefted human health and well-being and has enhanced the quality of life for
many Gambians. This project has reduced the percentage of the population suffering from
hunger due to increased quantity and variety of food sources. The project has also lowered
anxiety levels stemming from concerns about food insecurity and thus has produced a
mental health beneft that complements the improvements in physical health.

CASE STUDY 3. ENHANCING CLIMATE CHANGE RESILIENCE

OF RURAL COMMUNITIES LIVING IN PROTECTED AREAS OF
CAMBODIA [119]
A striking feature of the Cambodian landscape is the Mekong River, along whose banks
approximately 80% of the population of this Southeast Asian nation resides. The low-
lying central plains that surround the river are highly dependent on rainfall for agricultural
production. As a result of climate change, rainfall has become erratic, and the frequency
of torrential rains has increased. This has led to erosion, crop failures, and damaged
infrastructure. To deal with the loss of income resulting from decreased agricultural
production, locals have engaged in illegal logging. This has reduced tree cover, which has
resulted in decreased rain cloud cover and further increased rainfall and fooding.

Cambodian offcials determined that the best strategy for approaching these issues would
be to reforest natural land, halt illegal logging, create home gardens, and implement an
early warning climate system to guide farmers’ decisions on planting and harvesting.
 Landrigan et al. 14
Annals of Global Health
To accomplish these goals, build climate adaptation and strengthen ecosystems, multi-use DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
native tree species were planted in heavily deforested areas. New varieties of crop seeds were
distributed to farmers, such as drought-resistant rice strains, and the planting of traditional
crops was encouraged. At the same time, home gardens were established containing a wide
array of vegetables and other sources of nutrition such as chicken and cricket coops. Finally,
community patrol groups were organized to work actively against illegal logging and to
protect farmers’ livelihoods.

As a result of these initiatives, 1,875 hectares of community forests were improved and
restored. This has improved air quality because the newly planted trees absorb air pollutants
and produce more oxygen. Over 1,900 families benefted from increased agricultural yields,
and 80% of these 1,900 families reported that they had increased access to safe drinking
water. By the conclusion of this project in 2019, more than 900,000 trees had been planted.
This project is estimated to have produced a 20% decrease in the climate change vulnerability
index across all intervention sites in Cambodia, directly benefted approximately 10,000
people, and indirectly benefted many more.

This case study demonstrates that strategies designed to increase climate resilience and
reduce soil erosion in high-risk communities can also increase access to safe drinking water,
restore natural crops, improve nutrition, reduce food insecurity, strengthen local economies
and improve human physical health and mental well-being.

CASE STUDY 4. THE GREAT GREEN WALL: IMPLEMENTATION

STATUS AND WAY AHEAD TO 2030 [120]
The Great Green Wall Initiative (GGWI) is a massive, African-led multinational effort to
establish a “green barrier” to combat the effects of desertifcation and land degradation
and combat drought across Africa from East to West along the southern edge of the Sahara
Desert. The GGWI was endorsed and initiated in 2007 through a partnership formed by
political leaders of the Sahara and Sahel regions of Africa, including Senegal, Burkina Faso,
Nigeria, Sudan, and Egypt. The Great Green Wall will ultimately span 8,000 km across the
African continent, with interventions occurring in 15 km units.

Trees are being planted along the GGWI line, which is already 15% complete. As these trees
grow, ecosystems are fourishing, climate change mitigation and adaptation are occurring,
oxygen is being produced through photosynthesis, soil erosion is diminishing, habitats are
being revitalized, and food and water security are improving in local communities. The
ultimate goals of the Great Green Wall Initiative are to reduce poverty and to empower
local Sahara and Sahel communities to manage the land by harnessing the power of
natural resources. Business partners, including the eco-friendly search engine Ecosia, have
collaborated with various countries, such as Burkina Faso to assist in the implementation of
the Great Green Wall by helping plant trees. Senegal and Ethiopia have been successful in
planting 11 million trees and restoring 37 million acres of land.

Important unanswered questions as the program moves into its next decade are whether
individual countries will be able to maintain their contributions and whether the trees, being
used to mitigate desertifcation will survive.
These case studies demonstrate that the UN Environment Programme has made substantial Landrigan et al. 15
Annals of Global Health
progress in developing and deploying strategies and metrics within its GEF/GCF funded projects for DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
measuring ecologic impacts and for quantifying the economic losses associated with ecosystem
destruction, climate change and loss of biodiversity. UNEP has been a leader also in developing
and deploying strategies for quantifying the economic benefts of climate change mitigation,
ecosystem restoration and biodiversity preservation. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity
(TEEB) program [116] lies at the heart of this endeavor. Specifc examples of the methodology’s
application to ecologic and economic assessment are the following:

• In Case Study #1, Developing Core Capacity to Address Adaptation to Climate Change in
Productive Coastal Zones in Tanzania [117], mangrove and other marine plant communities
are being restored to promote adaptation and climate resilience in coastal communities,
where approximately 25% of the nation’s population, 75% of the nation’s industries, and
32% of the nation’s income are located. Through this initiative, 3,000 m2 of coral reefs and
1,000 hectares of mangrove forest have been restored. Community members have been
trained in maintaining these resources, with at least 100 people being trained in coastal and
climate vulnerability mapping techniques. This project strengthens marine communities,
primarily mangrove, and coral habitats that provide the foundation for further biodiversity.
• In Case Study #3, Enhancing Climate Resilience of Rural Communities Living in Protected Areas
of Cambodia [119], approximately 2,000 hectares of land have be restored, an estimated
1,900 families have benefted from increased agricultural yields and 80% of these families
obtained increased access to safe drinking water. This project is estimated to have produced
a 20% decrease in the climate change vulnerability index across all intervention sites in
Cambodia, which in turn in turn had direct benefts for approximately 10,000 people.
• In Case Study #4, The Great Green Wall, being implemented in 20 different countries across
Africa, the overarching goal is to reclaim and restore 100 million hectares of land across
the Sahel region through planting millions of trees. To date, Senegal and Ethiopia have
succeeded in planting 11 million trees and restoring 37 million acres of land. Arid land is
being made fertile once again through these restoration processes, biodiversity is increasing,
and food has become more plentiful [120].

Absent, however, from these presentations is systematic or standardized quantifcation of their

benefts to human health. No attempts were made to estimate the number of deaths or the
number of Disability-Adjusted Life-years [DALYs] averted by these interventions. In addition, no
attempt appears to have been made to assess the economic value of the health improvements
that resulted from these interventions.

The 2015 UNEP/WHO/Convention on Biological Diversity report, Connecting Global Priorities:

Biodiversity and Human Health [2], speaks extensively about the negative impacts of environmental
degradation on human health. It discusses the need to use common metrics and frameworks to
measure the health benefts of biodiversity. This report notes the value of the disease, disability
and death metrics developed by the Global Burden of Disease study [121].

CONCLUSION
National and international agencies have made important progress under UNEP leadership in
mitigating climate change, improving biodiversity, and reducing pollution through GEF- and GCF-
funded projects. The UNEP team have developed sophisticated indicators through the TEEB program
[116] to measure the ecological and economic benefts of these interventions. UNEP has lagged,
however, in developing a systematic strategy for quantifying the health benefts of its work.

Quantifcation of the health benefts of environmental interventions will strengthen national

and international agencies’ ability to educate policy makers and the global public that these
interventions have real value for people in their daily lives.
RECOMMENDATIONS Landrigan et al.
Annals of Global Health
16

DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
Our main recommendation is that national governments and international agencies develop
metrics and strategies and for quantifying the health benefts of interventions against climate
change, pollution, and biodiversity loss. We recommended that agencies deploy health beneft
assessments in parallel with assessments of environmental and economic benefts.

The metrics of disease, disability, and premature death that have developed by the Global Burden
of Disease (GBD) study may provide a useful starting point for health beneft assessment [14,
121, 122].These metrics are well-validated. They are increasingly used by the World Health
Organization and many ministries of health [123]. Like all metrics, they have shortcomings. They
fail, for example, to capture some of the broader aspects of human health and well-being such
as cognitive function and happiness that are encompassed in the WHO defnition of health [124].

Nonetheless, the GBD metrics have the great advantage that they are highly standardized. They
enable comparisons of disease burden within and between countries, and because they now
span several decades, they enable examination of time trends in patterns of disease and death.
They are used in many countries to quantify the positive and negative health impacts of many
interventions and to set funding priorities.

Failure to quantify the negative health impacts of environmental degradation and the health
benefts of environmental improvements is a lost opportunity. It means that health benefts are
not considered in many policy decisions.

We recommend that all environmental intervention projects measure health benefts using the
key GBD metrics of Years of Life Lost (YLL) Years lived with Disability (YLD) and Disability-Adjusted
Life Years (DALYs) [14, 121, 122]. Agencies may wish to add additional tools and metrics to gauge
human health benefts and detriments. These could include risk factor analyses, environmental
hazard analyses, nutritional assessments, the identifcation of determinants, vulnerability and
adaptation measurements, tools to identify inequities and disparities in health, health impact
assessments, and the seascape change and landscape modeling. However, the deployment of
GBD-based methodologies should not be delayed while other indicators are being developed.

Incorporation of health metrics into assessments of environmental restoration projects will require
that environmental scientists work with health scientists and that agencies establish integrated
data collection and information management systems that systematically collect health data and
integrate these data with environmental and economic data.

SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Health Beneft Assessments – Health benefts assessments should be a core component of

all program evaluations undertaken by national and international environmental agencies.
They should be incorporated into programs and projects from the beginning and undertaken
in parallel with ecological and economic assessments. Inclusion of health metrics can
improve program planning by anticipating the positive and negative health impacts of
proposed interventions and avoiding negative outcomes.

2. Incorporate Health Assessments into Climate Risk Evaluations – Prior to the start
of each new climate mitigation or adaptation project, it is important to assess a
community’s climate-related health risks. Indigenous peoples’ knowledge (traditional
ecological knowledge) may serve as an important input to such assessments [125].
Coupled with periodic follow-up health assessments across the project timeline, such
evaluation will enable quantifcation of a project’s positive and negative consequences for
human health.

3. Incorporate Health Assessments into Biodiversity Risk Evaluations – All programs and
projects undertaken by national and international agencies to preserve biological diversity
and restore habitats need to include assessments of health impacts. From their beginning,
these projects should include strategies for improving community health as integral program
 components. Indigenous peoples’ knowledge may serve as an important input to such Landrigan et al. 17
Annals of Global Health
assessments [125]. Particularly important will be quantifcation of reductions in risk of DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
disease spillover events resulting from biodiversity preservation programs [46].

4. Build Infrastructure to Support health Beneft Assessments – To build the capacity

necessary to incorporate GBD-based health assessments into environmental improvement
projects implemented by national agencies and by international organizations such as
UNDP, UNEP and the World Bank, it will be necessary to establish integrated surveillance and
information management systems that systematically collect health data and link health
assessments to environmental and economic assessments [126, 127].
Development of such integrated systems will require building interdisciplinary capacity, cross-
disciplinary raining programs, and fostering collaborations among environmental scientists,
economists, and health scientists.

Once built, these systems will enable agencies to develop, validate and deploy standardized tools and
protocols for holistic data collection, collation, analysis and interpretation [128]. These tools could be
used to undertake planning processes that can assist governments to prioritize interventions based
on full assessment of economic, health, and environmental performance indicators [129, 130].

5. Comprehensive Planning and Communication – Health risk assessments will be most

effective and will add maximal value to environmental intervention projects when they
are incorporated into projects from the earliest stages of planning, incorporate in-depth
consultations with affected communities, are periodically updated over the course of a
project, and make their fndings known to policy makers and the public at project conclusion.

FUNDING INFORMATION
United Nations Environment Programme.

COMPETING INTERESTS
The authors have no competing interests to declare.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
PJL worked with PK to plan and conceptualize the project and was involved in writing and
editing all sections of the paper. MB contributed to the analysis and development of case studies
(Part 2), formation of recommendations (Part 3), and general formatting. SF contributed to the
literature review and writing, analysis of case studies and general structure. AH contributed to
the literature review and writing (Part 1), analysis of case studies (Part 2) and general structure.
MK helped with literature review and drafting some sections on health outcomes especially
mental health associated outcomes. JM proofread the paper, making suggestions regarding
grammar, and ensuring that each sentence was supported with a citation. JM also supplemented
various sections with additional research articles, as well as assisted with general formatting.
IR and AS contributed to case study analysis in Part 2, and in writing recommendations in Part
3. AKY assisted in writing the abstract and introduction, as well as formatting and structuring
the entire paper. PK led the concept development, framed the narrative, and developed the
analytical approach. He synthesized the policy-relevant conclusions and recommendations.

All authors had access to the data and contributed to writing the manuscript.

AUTHOR AFFILIATIONS
Philip J. Landrigan, MD, MSc orcid.org/0000-0002-0150-6914
Global Observatory on Planetary Health, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, US; Centre Scientifque de Monaco,
MC
 Landrigan et al. 18
Michael Britt, BS orcid.org/0009-0005-3190-8294
Annals of Global Health
Global Observatory on Planetary Health, Boston College Chestnut Hill, MA, US DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
Samantha Fisher, MPH
City University of New York, Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, NY, US
Amelia Holmes, MSc
The Lifescape Project, UK
Manasi Kumar, MSc, PhD orcid.org/0000-0002-9773-8014
Department of Psychiatry, University of Nairobi, Kenya; Institute for Excellence in Health Equity, New York
University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, US
Jenna Mu, BS
Global Observatory on Planetary Health, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, US
Isabella Rizzo, BA orcid.org/0009-0005-0226-5533
The George Washington University, Elliot School of International Affairs, Washington D.C., US
Anna Sather, BS orcid.org/0009-0008-8657-9717
Global Observatory on Planetary Health, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, US
Aroub Yousuf, BA orcid.org/0000-0002-7894-324X
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, US
Pushpam Kumar, PhD
United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, KE

REFERENCES
1. Whitmee S, Haines A, Beyrer C, et al. Safeguarding human health in the Anthropocene epoch: Report
of The Rockefeller Foundation-Lancet Commission on planetary health. Lancet Lond Engl. 2015;
386(10007): 1973–2028. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60901-1
2. World Health Organization, Convention on Biological Diversity. Connecting Global Priorities: Biodiversity
and Human Health: A State of Knowledge Review. World Health Organization; 2015. https://apps.who.int/
iris/handle/10665/174012. Accessed April 24, 2023.
3. Contestabile M. Measuring for sustainability. Nat Sustain. 2020; 3(8): 576–576. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.1038/s41893-020-0570-1
4. McMichael AJ, Woodward A, Muir C. Climate Change and the Health of Nations: Famines, Fevers, and the
Fate of Populations. Oxford University Press; 2017.
5. Myers SS. Planetary health: protecting human health on a rapidly changing planet. The Lancet. 2017;
390(10114): 2860–2868. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32846-5
6. World Health Organization. Children: Improving survival and well-being. www.who.int/news-room/fact-
sheets/detail/children-reducing-mortality. Accessed April 20, 2023.
7. Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, et al. Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for
humanity. Ecol Soc. 2009; 14(2). https://www.jstor.org/stable/26268316. Accessed October 6, 2022.
8. Persson L, Carney Almroth BM, Collins CD, et al. Outside the safe operating space of the planetary
boundary for novel entities. Environ Sci Technol. 2022; 56(3): 1510–1521. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/
acs.est.1c04158
9. IPCC, 2023: Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the
Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, H. Lee
and J. Romero (eds.)]. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC, pp. 35–115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-
9789291691647
10. Portner HO, Roberts D, Masson-Delmotte V, et al. The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A
Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC; 2019. www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/
uploads/sites/3/2019/12/SROCC_FullReport_FINAL.pdf. Accessed July 31, 2023.
11. British Antarctic Survey. Impacts of climate change. Discovering Antarctica. https://da.w.coop/
challenges/sustainability/impacts-of-climate-change/ Accessed May 18, 2023.
12. Rosenzweig C, Iglesias A, Yang XB, Epstein PR, Chivian E. Climate change and extreme weather
events: Implications for food production, plant diseases, and pests. Glob Change Hum Health. 2001; 2(2):
90–104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015086831467
13. Hansen J, Sato M, Hearty P, et al. Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: Evidence from paleoclimate
data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2°C global warming could be dangerous.
Atmospheric Chem Phys. 2016; 16(6): 3761–3812. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3761-2016
14. Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. GBD Compare. http://vizhub.healthdata.org/gbd-compare.
Accessed April 25, 2023.
15. Andersen TK, Marshall Shepherd J. Floods in a changing climate. Geogr Compass. 2013; 7(2): 95–115. Landrigan et al. 19
Annals of Global Health
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12025
DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
16. Alderman K, Turner LR, Tong S. Floods and human health: A systematic review. Environ Int. 2012; 47:
37–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2012.06.003
17. Hanson S, Nicholls R, Ranger N, et al. A global ranking of port cities with high exposure to climate
extremes. Clim Change. 2011; 104(1): 89–111. doi.org/10.1007/s10584-010-9977-4
18. Talbot CJ, Bennett EM, Cassell K, et al. The impact of fooding on aquatic ecosystem services.
Biogeochemistry. 2018; 141(3): 439–461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-018-0449-7
19. Barbier EB, Hochard JP. Land degradation and poverty. Nat Sustain. 2018; 1(11): 623–631. DOI: https://
doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0155-4
20. Lafferty KD. The ecology of climate change and infectious diseases. Ecology. 2009; 90(4): 888–900. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1890/08-0079.1
21. Altizer S, Ostfeld RS, Johnson PTJ, Kutz S, Harvell CD. Climate change and infectious diseases: From
evidence to a predictive framework. Science. 2013; 341(6145): 514–519. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/
science.1239401
22. Reiter P. Climate change and mosquito-borne disease. Environ Health Perspect. 2001; 109(suppl 1):
141–161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.01109s1141
23. Bouchard C, Beauchamp G, Leighton PA, Lindsay R, Bélanger D, Ogden NH. Does high biodiversity
reduce the risk of Lyme disease invasion? Parasit Vectors. 2013; 6(1): 195. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.1186/1756-3305-6-195
24. Rosa L, Chiarelli DD, Rulli MC, Dell’Angelo J, D’Odorico P. Global agricultural economic water scarcity.
Sci Adv. 2020; 6(18): eaaz6031. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz6031
25. World Bank. Pollution. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/pollution, Accessed May 18, 2023.
26. Landrigan PJ, Fuller R, Acosta NJR, et al. The Lancet Commission on pollution and health. The Lancet.
2018; 391(10119): 462–512. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32345-0
27. Fuller R, Landrigan PJ, Balakrishnan, K, et al. Pollution and health: A progress update. Lancet Planet
Health 2022 Jun; 6(6): e535–e547. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(22)00090-0
28. Landrigan PJ, Fuller R, Fisher S, et al. Pollution and children’s health. Sci Total Environ. 2019; 650: 2389–
2394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.375
29. Academy of South Africa, Brazilian Academy of Sciences, German National Academy of Sciences
Leopoldina, US National Academy of Medicine, US National Academy of Science. Air Pollution and
Health – A Science-Policy Initiative. Ann Glob Health. 2019; 85(1): 140 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/
aogh.2656
30. World Health Organization. Air pollution levels rising in many of the world’s poorest cities. https://
www.who.int/news/item/12-05-2016-air-pollution-levels-rising-in-many-of-the-world-s-poorest-cities.
Accessed May 18, 2023.
31. Katoto PDMC, Byamungu L, Brand AS, et al. Ambient air pollution and health in Sub-Saharan Africa:
Current evidence, perspectives and a call to action. Environ Res. 2019 Jun; 173: 174–188. DOI: https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2019.03.029.
32. Lelieveld J, Evans JS, Fnais M, Giannadaki D, Pozzer A. The contribution of outdoor air pollution sources
to premature mortality on a global scale. Nature. 2015; 525: 367–71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/
nature15371.
33. Wang Z, Walker GW, Muir DCG, Nagatani-Yoshida K. Toward a global understanding of chemical
pollution: A frst comprehensive analysis of national and regional chemical inventories. Environ Sci
Technol. 2020 Mar 3; 54(5): 2575–2584. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b06379
34. Landrigan PJ, Raps H, Cropper M, et al. The Minderoo-Monaco Commission on Plastics and Human
Health. Ann Glob Health. 2023 Mar 21; 89(1): 23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4056
35. Landrigan PJ, Stegeman JJ, Fleming LE, et al. Human health and ocean pollution. Ann Glob Health.
2020; 86(1): 151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.2831
36. Deeb R, Tufford D, Scott GI, Moore JG, Dow K. Impact of climate change on Vibrio vulnifcus abundance
and exposure risk. Estuaries Coasts J Estuar Res Fed. 2018; 41(8): 2289–2303. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12237-018-0424-5
37. Hoegh-Guldberg O, Mumby PJ, Hooten AJ, et al. Coral reefs under rapid climate change and ocean
acidifcation. Science. 2007; 318 (5857): 1737–1742. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1152509
38. Stuart SN, Wilson EO, McNeely JA, Mittermeier RA, Rodríguez JP. Ecology. The barometer of life.
Science. 2010 Apr 9; 328(5975): 177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1188606
39. Pimm SL, Jenkins CN, Abell R, et al. The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction,
distribution, and protection. Science. 2014; 344(6187): 1246752. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/
science.1246752
40. Chivian E, Bernstein A. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, United Nations Landrigan et al. 20
Annals of Global Health
Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme, IUCN–The World Conservation
DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
Union, eds. Sustaining Life: How Human Health Depends on Biodiversity. Oxford University Press; 2008.
41. International Union for Conservation of Nature. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. https://www.
iucnredlist.org/en. Accessed April 24, 2023.
42. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). “Data Reporting Tool for MEAs – DaRT”. https://dart.
informea.org/about. Accessed October 17, 2023.
43. United Nations Development Program (UNDP). United Nations Biodiversity Lab. https://
unbiodiversitylab.org/en/. Accessed October 17, 2023.
44. Cardinale BJ, Duffy JE, Gonzalez A, et al. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature. 2012;
486(7401): 59–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11148
45. Mora C, McKenzie T, Gaw IM, et al. Over half of the pathogenic diseases confronted by humanity can
be aggravated by climate change: A systematic review. Nature Climate Change; 2022. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.1038/s41558-022-01426-1
46. Plowright RK, Reaser JK, Locke H, et al. A call to action: Understanding land use-induced zoonotic
spillover to protect environmental, animal, and human health. Lancet Planetary Health; 2021 March 5.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00031-0
47. Reaser JK, Hunt BE, Ruiz-Aravena M, et al. Fostering landscape immunity to protect human health: A
science-based rationale for shifting conservation policy paradigms. Conservation Letters. 2022; 15(3).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12869
48. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The State of Food and Agriculture 2021. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.4060/cb4476en
49. Cappelli SL, Domeignoz-Horta LA, Loaiza V, Laine AL. Plant biodiversity promotes sustainable
agriculture directly and via belowground effects. Trends Plant Sci. 2022; 27(7): 674–687. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.tplants.2022.02.003
50. US Environmental Protection Agency. The Sources and Solutions: Agriculture. https://www.epa.gov/
nutrientpollution/sources-and-solutions-agriculture. Accessed May 19, 2023.
51. Gomiero T. Soil degradation, land scarcity and food security: Reviewing a complex challenge.
Sustainability. 2016; 8(3): 281. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su8030281
52. United Nations. Every Year, 12 Million Hectares of Productive Land Lost, Secretary-General Tells
Desertifcation Forum, Calls for Scaled-up Restoration Efforts, Smart Policies | UN Press. https://press.
un.org/en/2019/sgsm19680.doc.htm. Accessed May 19, 2023.
53. Tan ZX, Lal R, Wiebe KD. Global soil nutrient depletion and yield reduction. J Sustain Agric. 2005; 26(1):
123–146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1300/J064v26n01_10
54. Yang X, Wu X, Hao H lin, He Z li. Mechanisms and assessment of water eutrophication. J Zhejiang Univ
Sci B. 2008; 9(3): 197–209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.B0710626
55. National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administartion (NOOA). Harmful Algal Blooms (Red Tide). https://
oceanservice.noaa.gov/hazards/hab/. Accessed May 19, 2023.
56. Rabalais NN, Turner RE. Gulf of Mexico hypoxia: Past, present, and future. Limnol Oceanogr Bull. 2019;
28(4): 117–124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/lob.10351
57. European Environment Agency. How pesticides impact human health and ecosystems in Europe. https://
www.eea.europa.eu/publications/how-pesticides-impact-human-health. Accessed December 3, 2023.
58. Allen-Wardell G, Bernhardt P, Bitner R, et al. The potential consequences of pollinator declines on the
conservation of biodiversity and stability of food crop yields. Conserv Biol. 1998; 12(1): 8–17.
59. Boedeker W, Watts M, Clausing P, et al. The global distribution of acute unintentional pesticide
poisoning: Estimations based on a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2020; 20: 1875. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.1186/s12889-020-09939-0
60. Roeleveld N, Bretveld R. The impact of pesticides on male fertility. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2008;
20(3): 229–233. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0b013e3282fcc334
61. Petit C, Chevrier C, Durand G, et al. Impact on fetal growth of prenatal exposure to pesticides due
to agricultural activities: A prospective cohort study in Brittany, France. Environ Health Glob Access Sci
Source. 2010; 9: 71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-9-71
62. Negatu B, Vermeulen R, Mekonnen Y, Kromhout H. Neurobehavioural symptoms and acute pesticide
poisoning: A cross-sectional study among male pesticide applicators selected from three commercial
farming systems in Ethiopia. Occup Environ Med. 2018; 75(4): 283–289. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/
oemed-2017-104538
63. Altieri MA, Merrick L. In situ conservation of crop genetic resources through maintenance of traditional
farming systems. Econ Bot. 1987; 41(1): 86–96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02859354
64. Jarvis A, Lau C, Cook S, et al. An integrated adaptation and mitigation framework for developing Landrigan et al. 21
Annals of Global Health
agricultural research: Synergies and trade-offs. Exp Agric. 2011; 47: 185–203. DOI: https://doi.
DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
org/10.1017/S0014479711000123
65. Government of India. Zero Budget Natural Farming. Published December 17, 2021. https://pib.gov.in/
FactsheetDetails.aspx?Id=148598. Accessed May 19, 2023.
66. van der Sluijs JP, Vaage NS. Pollinators and global food security: The need for holistic global
stewardship. Food Ethics. 2016; 1(1): 75–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-016-0003-z
67. Klein AM, Vaissière BE, Cane JH, et al. Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops.
Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2006; 274(1608): 303–313. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2006.3721
68. Das A, Sau S, Pandit MK, Saha K. A review on: Importance of pollinators in fruit and vegetable
production and their collateral jeopardy from agro-chemicals. J Entomol Zool Studies. 2018; 6: 1586–
1591. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.18277.24807
69. Food and Agriculture Organization. Pollinators vital to our food supply under threat. https://www.fao.
org/news/story/en/item/384726/icode/. Accessed May 19, 2023.
70. Fairbrother A, Purdy J, Anderson T, Fell R. Risks of neonicotinoid insecticides to honeybees. Environ
Toxicol Chem Setac. 2014; 33(4): 719–731. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.2527
71. Chivian E, Bernstein AS. Embedded in nature: human health and biodiversity. Environ Health Perspect.
2004 Jan; 112(1): A12–3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.112-a12.
72. Brittain C, Kremen C, Garber A, Klein AM. Pollination and plant resources change the nutritional quality
of almonds for human health. PLoS ONE. 2014; 9(2): e90082. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0090082
73. Salgotra RK, Chauhan BS. Genetic diversity, conservation, and utilization of plant genetic resources.
Genes (Basel). 2023 Jan 9; 14(1): 174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/genes14010174.
74. Ojuederie OB, Babalola OO. Microbial and plant-assisted bioremediation of heavy metal polluted
environments: A review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017; 14(12): 1504. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph14121504
75. Leung DYC, Tsui JKY, Chen F, Yip WK, Vrijmoed LLP, Liu CH. Effects of urban vegetation on urban air
quality. Landsc Res. 2011; 36(2): 173–188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2010.547570
76. Nowak DJ, Hirabayashi S, Bodine A, Greenfeld E. Tree and forest effects on air quality and human
health in the United States. Environ Pollut. 2014; 193: 119–129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envpol.2014.05.028
77. Meehl GA, Karl T, Easterling DR, et al. An introduction to trends in extreme weather and climate events:
Observations, socioeconomic impacts, terrestrial ecological impacts, and model projections. Bull Am
Meteorol Soc. 2000; 81 (3): 413–416. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(2000)081<0413:AITTIE>2.
3.CO;2
78. United Nations. Water and Ecosystems. https://www.unwater.org/water-facts/water-and-ecosystems.
Accessed July 31, 2023.
79. Bala S, Garg D, Thirumalesh BV, et al. Recent strategies for bioremediation of emerging pollutants: A
review for a green and sustainable environment. Toxics. 2022; 10(8): 484. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/
toxics10080484
80. Marine Stewardship Council. World missing out on nutrition for 72 million due to overfshing. https://
www.msc.org/media-centre/press-releases/press-release/world-missing-out-on-nutrition-for-72-
million-due-to-overfshing. Accessed May 20, 2023.
81. Vié JC, Hilton-Taylor C, Stuart SN. Wildlife in a Changing World: An Analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List
of Threatened Species. IUCN; 2009. https://portals.iucn.org/library/efles/documents/rl-2009-001.pdf.
Accessed July 31, 2023.
82. Ekor M. The growing use of herbal medicines: Issues relating to adverse reactions and challenges in
monitoring safety. Front Pharmacol. 2014; 4: 177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2013.00177
83. Corvalan C, Hales S, McMichael A. Ecosystems and human well-being: health synthesis: A report of the
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2005. https://apps.who.int/iris/
handle/10665/43354. Accessed July 31, 2023.
84. McCauley DJ, Pinsky ML, Palumbi SR, Estes JA, Joyce FH, Warner RR. Marine defaunation:
Animal loss in the global ocean. Science. 2015; 347(6219). http://science.sciencemag.org/content/
sci/347/6219/1255641.full.pdf. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1255641
85. Howes MJR, Quave CL, Collemare J, et al. Molecules from nature: Reconciling biodiversity conservation
and global healthcare imperatives for sustainable use of medicinal plants and fungi. Plants People
Planet. 2020; 2(5): 463–481. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10138
86. Rahman MdT, Sobur MdA, Islam MdS, et al. Zoonotic diseases: Etiology, impact, and control.
Microorganisms. 2020; 8(9): 1405. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8091405
87. Salyer SJ, Silver R, Simone K, Barton Behravesh C. Prioritizing zoonoses for global health capacity Landrigan et al. 22
Annals of Global Health
building—Themes from one health zoonotic disease workshops in 7 countries, 2014–2016. Emerg Infect
DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
Dis. 2017; 23(Suppl 1): S55–S64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2313.170418
88. United Nations Environment Programme and International Livestock Research Institute. Preventing
the Next Pandemic: Zoonotic Diseases and How to Break the Chain of Transmission; 2020. https://www.
unep.org/resources/report/preventing-future-zoonotic-disease-outbreaks-protecting-environment-
animals-and. Accessed July 31, 2023
89. United Nations Environment Programme. UNEP Frontiers 2016 Report: Emerging Issues of
Environmental Concern. UN; 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18356/4392feb8-en
90. Brookings Institution. Preventing pandemics through biodiversity conservation and smart wildlife
trade regulation. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/preventing-pandemics-through-biodiversity-
conservation-and-smart-wildlife-trade-regulation/. Accessed July 14, 2023.
91. Daszak P, Cunningham AA, Hyatt AD. Emerging infectious diseases of wildlife—Threats to
biodiversity and human health. Science. 2000; 287(5452): 443–449. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/
science.287.5452.443
92. Young HS, Wood CL, Kilpatrick AM, Lafferty KD, Nunn CL, Vincent JR. Conservation, biodiversity
and infectious disease: Scientifc evidence and policy implications. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2017;
372(1722): 20160124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2016.0124
93. Keesing F, Ostfeld RS. Dilution effects in disease ecology. Ecol Lett. 2021; 24(11): 2490–2505. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13875
94. Schmidt KA, Ostfeld RS. Biodiversity and the dilution effect in disease ecology. Ecology. 2001; 82(3):
609–619. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[0609:BATDEI]2.0.CO;2
95. Allen T, Murray KA, Zambrana-Torrelio C, et al. Global hotspots and correlates of emerging zoonotic
diseases. Nat Commun. 2017; 8(1): 1124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-00923-8
96. Lertzman R. Environmental Melancholia: Psychoanalytic Dimensions of Engagement. London: Routledge;
2015. ISBN: 978-0-415-72799-0.
97. Bourque F, Willox AC. Climate change: the next challenge for public mental health? Int Rev Psychiatry
Abingdon Engl. 2014; 26(4): 415–422. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/09540261.2014.925851
98. Cianconi P, Betrò S, Janiri L. The impact of climate change on mental health: A systematic descriptive
review. Front Psychiatry. 2020; 11: 74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00074
99. Thompson R, Hornigold R, Page L, Waite T. Associations between high ambient temperatures and
heat waves with mental health outcomes: A systematic review. Public Health. 2018; 161: 171–191. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2018.06.008
100. Seedat S, Stein DJ, Carey PD. Post-traumatic stress disorder in women. CNS Drugs. 2005; 19(5): 411–
427. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00023210-200519050-00004
101. Zhong S, Yang L, Toloo S, et al. The long-term physical and psychological health impacts of fooding:
A systematic mapping. Sci Total Environ. 2018; 626: 165–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2018.01.041
102. To P, Eboreime E, Agyapong VIO. The impact of wildfres on mental health: A scoping review. Behav Sci.
2021; 11(9): 126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/bs11090126
103. Makwana N. Disaster and its impact on mental health: A narrative review. J Fam Med Prim Care. 2019;
8(10): 3090–3095. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_893_19
104. Buoli M, Grassi S, Caldiroli A, et al. Is there a link between air pollution and mental disorders? Environ
Int. 2018; 118: 154–168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.05.044
105. Chen S, Oliva P, Zhang P. Air Pollution and Mental Health: Evidence from China. National Bureau of
Economic Research; 2018: w24686. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3386/w24686
106. Bondy SC, Campbell A. Developmental neurotoxicology. J Neurosci Res. 2005 Sep 1; 81(5): 605–12. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/jnr.20589
107. Wigand ME, Timmermann C, Scherp A, Becker T, Steger F. Climate change, pollution, deforestation,
and mental health: Research trends, gaps, and ethical considerations. GeoHealth. 2022; 6(11):
e2022GH000632. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GH000632
108. Callaghan A, McCombe G, Harrold A, et al. The impact of green spaces on mental health in urban
settings: A scoping review. J Ment Health Abingdon Engl. 2021; 30(2): 179–193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.10
80/09638237.2020.1755027
109. Beyer KMM, Kaltenbach A, Szabo A, Bogar S, Nieto FJ, Malecki KM. Exposure to neighborhood green
space and mental health: Evidence from the Survey of the Health of Wisconsin. Int J Environ Res Public
Health. 2014; 11(3): 3453–3472. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110303453
110. Siu AMH, Kam M, Mok I. Horticultural therapy program for people with mental illness: A mixed-method
evaluation. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020; 17(3): 711. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17030711
111. Besser L. Outdoor green space exposure and brain health measures related to Alzheimer’s disease: A Landrigan et al. 23
Annals of Global Health
rapid review. BMJ Open. 2021; 11(5): e043456. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043456
DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4161
112. Hegewald J, Schubert M, Freiberg A, et al. Traffc noise and mental health: A systematic review
and meta-analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020; 17(17): 6175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph17176175
113. Zare Sakhvidi F, Zare Sakhvidi MJ, Mehrparvar AH, Dzhambov AM. Environmental noise exposure and
neurodevelopmental and mental health problems in children: A systematic review. Curr Environ Health
Rep. 2018; 5(3): 365–374. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40572-018-0208-x
114. UN Environment Programme. Green Climate Fund (GCF). https://www.greenclimate.fund. Accessed May
30, 2023.
115. UN Environment Programme. Global Environment Fund (GEF). www.globalenvironmentfund.com/.
Accessed May 30, 2023.
116. UN Environment Programme. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. https://teebweb.org/our-
work/ Accessed May 30, 2023.
117. UN Environment Programme. Evaluation Offce. Terminal Evaluation of the UNEP – GEF Project:
Developing Core Capacity to Address Adaptation to Climate Change in Productive Coastal Zones of
Tanzania. Published online December 2019. https://wedocs.unep.org/xmlui/handle/20.500.11822/31109.
Accessed May 30, 2023.
118. UN Environment Programme. Global Climate Fund. FP011: Large-scale Ecosystem-based Adaptation in
The Gambia: developing a climate-resilient, natural resource-based economy. Green Climate Fund; 2016.
https://www.greenclimate.fund/project/fp011. Accessed May 30, 2023.
119. Mimura A. Enhancing Climate Resilience of Rural Communities Living in Protected Areas of Cambodia.
Adaptation Fund. https://www.adaptation-fund.org/project/enhancing-climate-resilience-of-rural-
communities-living-in-protected-areas-of-cambodia/. Accessed May 30, 2023.
120. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertifcation. The Great Green Wall: Implementation status
& way ahead to 2030. UNCCD, 2020. https://www.unccd.int/resources/publications/great-green-wall-
implementation-status-way-ahead-2030. Accessed May 30, 2023.
121. Murray CJL. The Global Burden of Disease Study at 30 years. Nat Med. 2022 Oct; 28(10): 2019–2026.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01990-1
122. GBD 2019 Viewpoint Collaborators. Five insights from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. TO CITE THIS ARTICLE:
2020 Oct 17; 396(10258): 1135–1159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31404-5 Landrigan PJ, Britt M, Fisher
S, Holmes A, Kumar M, Mu J,
123. World Health Organisation. New Memorandum of Understanding between WHO and IHME Brings
Rizzo I, Sather A, Yousuf A,
Better Data and Evidence for More Informed Decision-Making for Health. www.who.int/europe/news/
Kumar P. Assessing the Human
item/03-07-2018-new-memorandum-of-understanding-between-who-and-ihme-brings-better-data-
Health Benefts of Climate
and-evidence-for-more-informed-decision-making-for-health. Accessed 30 July 2023. Mitigation, Pollution Prevention,
124. World Health Organization. Constitution of the World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/about/ and Biodiversity Preservation.
governance/constitution. Accessed 30 July 2023. Annals of Global Health. 2024;
125. Vinyeta K, Lynn K. Exploring the role of traditional ecological knowledge in climate change initiatives. 90(1): 1, 1–23. DOI: https://doi.
Gen Tech Rep PNW-GTR-879 Portland US Dep Agric For Serv Pac Northwest Res Stn 37 P. 2013; 879. DOI: org/10.5334/aogh.4161
https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-879
126. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. NOAA and NSF to create research center in Submitted: 11 August 2023
response to insurance industry climate needs; 2023. https://www.noaa.gov/stories/noaa-and-nsf-to- Accepted: 04 December 2023
create-research-center-in-response-to-insurance-industry-climate-needs. Accessed May 30, 2023. Published: 05 Janaury 2024
127. Zhang Y, Drake W. Geographic Information Systems (GIS). In: Michalos AC, ed. Encyclopedia of Quality of
Life and Well-Being Research. Springer Netherlands; 2014: 2521–2524. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
COPYRIGHT:
94-007-0753-5_1159
© 2024 The Author(s). This is an
128. UN Environment Programme. Climate Action. https://www.unep.org/explore-topics/climate-action. open-access article distributed
Accessed May 31, 2023. under the terms of the Creative
129. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Decision -/CP.26, Glasgow Climate Pact. Commons Attribution 4.0
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. 2021. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/fles/ International License (CC-BY
resource/cop26_auv_2f_cover_decision.pdf. Accessed December 2, 2022. 4.0), which permits unrestricted
130. Council on Foreign Relations. Global Climate Agreements: Successes and Failures. https://www.cfr.org/ use, distribution, and
backgrounder/paris-global-climate-change-agreements. Accessed May 31, 2023. reproduction in any medium,
provided the original author
and source are credited. See
http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/4.0/.
Annals of Global Health is a peer-
reviewed open access journal
published by Ubiquity Press.