Suchergebnisse

More than half of the global population now live in urban settings. Urbanization can and should be beneficial for health. In general, nations with high life expectancies and low infant mortality rates are those where city governments address the key social determinants of health. Better housing and living conditions, access to safe water and good sanitation, efficient waste management systems, safer working environments and neighbourhoods, food security and access to services such as education, health, welfare, public transportation and child care are examples of social determinants of health that can be addressed through good urban governance. Failure of governance in today's cities has resulted in the growth of informal settlements and slums that constitute unhealthy living and working environments for one billion people. A credible health agenda is one that benefits all people in cities, especially the urban poor who live in informal settlements. International agreements calling for urgent action to reduce poverty, such as the Millennium Development Goals, can only be met through national strategies that include both urban and rural commitments and involve local governments and the poor themselves. Health inequalities in urban areas need to be addressed in countries at all income levels. Urban development and town planning are key to creating supportive social and physical environments for health and health equity. Achieving healthy urbanization in all countries is a shared global responsibility. Eliminating deprived urban living conditions will require resources - aid, loans, private investments - from more affluent countries in the order of US$ 200 billion per year, no more than 20 per cent of the annual increase in GDP in high-income countries. Creating global political support for a sustained and well-funded effort for social, economic and health equity is one of the greatest challenges of this generation.

More than half of the global population now live in urban settings. Urbanization can and should be beneficial for health. In general, nations with high life expectancies and low infant mortality rates are those where city governments address the key social determinants of health. Better housing and living conditions, access to safe water and good sanitation, efficient waste management systems, safer working environments and neighbourhoods, food security and access to services such as education, health, welfare, public transportation and child care are examples of social determinants of health that can be addressed through good urban governance. Failure of governance in today's cities has resulted in the growth of informal settlements and slums that constitute unhealthy living and working environments for one billion people. A credible health agenda is one that benefits all people in cities, especially the urban poor who live in informal settlements. International agreements calling for urgent action to reduce poverty, such as the Millennium Development Goals, can only be met through national strategies that include both urban and rural commitments and involve local governments and the poor themselves. Health inequalities in urban areas need to be addressed in countries at all income levels. Urban development and town planning are key to creating supportive social and physical environments for health and health equity. Achieving healthy urbanization in all countries is a shared global responsibility. Eliminating deprived urban living conditions will require resources - aid, loans, private investments - from more affluent countries in the order of US$ 200 billion per year, no more than 20 per cent of the annual increase in GDP in high-income countries. Creating global political support for a sustained and well-funded effort for social, economic and health equity is one of the greatest challenges of this generation.

BACKGROUND The observational evidence of the impacts of climate conditions on human health is accumulating. A variety of direct, indirect, and systemically mediated health effects have been identified. Excessive daily heat exposures create direct effects, such as heat stroke (and possibly death), reduce work productivity, and interfere with daily household activities. Extreme weather events, including storms, floods, and droughts, create direct injury risks and follow-on outbreaks of infectious diseases, lack of nutrition, and mental stress. Climate change will increase these direct health effects. Indirect effects include malnutrition and under-nutrition due to failing local agriculture, spread of vector-borne diseases and other infectious diseases, and mental health and other problems caused by forced migration from affected homes and workplaces. Examples of systemically mediated impacts on population health include famine, conflicts, and the consequences of large-scale adverse economic effects due to reduced human and environmental productivity. This article highlights links between climate change and non-communicable health problems, a major concern for global health beyond 2015. DISCUSSION Detailed regional analysis of climate conditions clearly shows increasing temperatures in many parts of the world. Climate modelling indicates that by the year 2100 the global average temperature may have increased by 34°C unless fundamental reductions in current global trends for greenhouse gas emissions are achieved. Given other unforeseeable environmental, social, demographic, and geopolitical changes that may occur in a plus-4-degree world, that scenario may comprise a largely uninhabitable world for millions of people and great social and military tensions. CONCLUSION It is imperative that we identify actions and strategies that are effective in reducing these increasingly likely threats to health and well-being. The fundamental preventive strategy is, of course, climate change mitigation by significantly reducing global greenhouse gas emissions, especially long-acting carbon dioxide (CO(2)), and by increasing the uptake of CO(2) at the earth's surface. This involves urgent shifts in energy production from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, energy conservation in building design and urban planning, and reduced waste of energy for transport, building heating/cooling, and agriculture. It would also involve shifts in agricultural production and food systems to reduce energy and water use particularly in meat production. There is also potential for prevention via mitigation, adaptation, or resilience building actions, but for the large populations in tropical countries, mitigation of climate change is required to achieve health protection solutions that will last. ; Funding was provided from research funds at Umea University and Australian National University.

BACKGROUND The observational evidence of the impacts of climate conditions on human health is accumulating. A variety of direct, indirect, and systemically mediated health effects have been identified. Excessive daily heat exposures create direct effects, such as heat stroke (and possibly death), reduce work productivity, and interfere with daily household activities. Extreme weather events, including storms, floods, and droughts, create direct injury risks and follow-on outbreaks of infectious diseases, lack of nutrition, and mental stress. Climate change will increase these direct health effects. Indirect effects include malnutrition and under-nutrition due to failing local agriculture, spread of vector-borne diseases and other infectious diseases, and mental health and other problems caused by forced migration from affected homes and workplaces. Examples of systemically mediated impacts on population health include famine, conflicts, and the consequences of large-scale adverse economic effects due to reduced human and environmental productivity. This article highlights links between climate change and non-communicable health problems, a major concern for global health beyond 2015. DISCUSSION Detailed regional analysis of climate conditions clearly shows increasing temperatures in many parts of the world. Climate modelling indicates that by the year 2100 the global average temperature may have increased by 34°C unless fundamental reductions in current global trends for greenhouse gas emissions are achieved. Given other unforeseeable environmental, social, demographic, and geopolitical changes that may occur in a plus-4-degree world, that scenario may comprise a largely uninhabitable world for millions of people and great social and military tensions. CONCLUSION It is imperative that we identify actions and strategies that are effective in reducing these increasingly likely threats to health and well-being. The fundamental preventive strategy is, of course, climate change mitigation by significantly reducing global greenhouse gas emissions, especially long-acting carbon dioxide (CO(2)), and by increasing the uptake of CO(2) at the earth's surface. This involves urgent shifts in energy production from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, energy conservation in building design and urban planning, and reduced waste of energy for transport, building heating/cooling, and agriculture. It would also involve shifts in agricultural production and food systems to reduce energy and water use particularly in meat production. There is also potential for prevention via mitigation, adaptation, or resilience building actions, but for the large populations in tropical countries, mitigation of climate change is required to achieve health protection solutions that will last. ; Funding was provided from research funds at Umea University and Australian National University.

The rapid rise in extreme heat events in Australia recently is already taking a health toll. Climate change scenarios predict increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events in the future, and population health may be significantly compromised for people who cannot reduce their heat exposure. Exposure to extreme heat presents a health hazard to all who are physically active, particularly outdoor workers and indoor workers with minimal access to cooling systems while working. At air temperatures close to (or beyond) the core body temperature of 37°C, body cooling via sweating is essential, and this mechanism is hampered by high air humidity. Heat exposure among elite athletes and the military has been investigated, whereas the impacts on workers remain largely unexplored, particularly in relation to future climate change. Workers span all age groups and diverse levels of fitness and health status, including people with higher than "normal" sensitivity to heat. In a hotter world, workers are likely to experience more heat stress and find it increasingly difficult to maintain productivity. Modeling of future climate change in Australia shows a substantial increase in the number of very hot days (>35°C) across the country. In this article, the authors characterize the health risks associated with heat exposure on working people and discuss future exposure risks as temperatures rise. Progress toward developing occupational health and safety guidelines for heat in Australia are summarized.

The rapid rise in extreme heat events in Australia recently is already taking a health toll. Climate change scenarios predict increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events in the future, and population health may be significantly compromised for people who cannot reduce their heat exposure. Exposure to extreme heat presents a health hazard to all who are physically active, particularly outdoor workers and indoor workers with minimal access to cooling systems while working. At air temperatures close to (or beyond) the core body temperature of 37°C, body cooling via sweating is essential, and this mechanism is hampered by high air humidity. Heat exposure among elite athletes and the military has been investigated, whereas the impacts on workers remain largely unexplored, particularly in relation to future climate change. Workers span all age groups and diverse levels of fitness and health status, including people with higher than "normal" sensitivity to heat. In a hotter world, workers are likely to experience more heat stress and find it increasingly difficult to maintain productivity. Modeling of future climate change in Australia shows a substantial increase in the number of very hot days (>35°C) across the country. In this article, the authors characterize the health risks associated with heat exposure on working people and discuss future exposure risks as temperatures rise. Progress toward developing occupational health and safety guidelines for heat in Australia are summarized.

Health impact assessment (HIA) and comparative risk assessment (CRA) are important tools with which governments and communities can compare and integrate different sources of information about various health impacts into a single framework for policy-makers and planners. Both tools have strengths that may be combined usefully when conducting comprehensive assessments of decisions that affect complex health issues, such as the health risks and impacts of transport policy and planning activities. As yet, however, HIA and CRA have not been applied widely to the area of transport. We draw on the limited experience of the application of these tools in the context of road transport to explore how comparative assessment of transport risks can contribute to HIA of transport policies.

Health impact assessment (HIA) and comparative risk assessment (CRA) are important tools with which governments and communities can compare and integrate different sources of information about various health impacts into a single framework for policy-makers and planners. Both tools have strengths that may be combined usefully when conducting comprehensive assessments of decisions that affect complex health issues, such as the health risks and impacts of transport policy and planning activities. As yet, however, HIA and CRA have not been applied widely to the area of transport. We draw on the limited experience of the application of these tools in the context of road transport to explore how comparative assessment of transport risks can contribute to HIA of transport policies.

Health impact assessment (HIA) and comparative risk assessment (CRA) are important tools with which governments and communities can compare and integrate different sources of information about various health impacts into a single framework for policy-makers and planners. Both tools have strengths that may be combined usefully when conducting comprehensive assessments of decisions that affect complex health issues, such as the health risks and impacts of transport policy and planning activities. As yet, however, HIA and CRA have not been applied widely to the area of transport. We draw on the limited experience of the application of these tools in the context of road transport to explore how comparative assessment of transport risks can contribute to HIA of transport policies.

Piroska Östlin and colleagues argue that a paradigm shift is needed to keep the focus on health equity within the social determinants of health research agenda.