Labour productivity and economic impacts of carbon mitigation: a modelling study and benefit-cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the emerging carbon neutrality pledges from different countries, it is still unclear how much these pledges would cost and how the costs would compare with the economic benefits. Comparisons at the country level are important for tightening country-specific emissions trajectories to keep the temperature limit targets outlined in the Paris Agreement within reach. We aimed to systematically estimate avoided heat-related labour productivity losses against the costs of climate change mitigation at country and regional levels. METHODS: In this modelling study, to address the above-mentioned research gaps, we first selected two representative climate change scenarios (Representative Concentration Pathway 6.0 [RCP6.0] scenario, a higher warming scenario representing limited mitigation pledges before the Paris Agreement with around 3°C warming by the end of this century; and RCP2.6 scenario, a lower warming scenario assuming global temperature rise is limited to 2°C) and estimated heat-related labour productivity loss using the exposure-response function at country and regional levels. By representing the direct heat-related labour productivity losses in a multiregional global computable general equilibrium model, we then did a benefit-cost analysis to quantify the economic benefits of avoided heat-related labour productivity losses as well as the estimated reduction in gross domestic product (GDP) related to carbon reduction. FINDINGS: By 2100, the overall economic losses due to heat-related labour productivity loss could range from about 1·5% of global GDP under the RCP6.0 scenario to about 0·1% of global GDP under the RCP2.6 scenario. The productivity losses will be highly concentrated in low-latitude regions, especially in southeast Asia, India, and the Middle East, implying the necessity of additional adaptation measures. By 2100, about 51·8% of global climate change mitigation costs could be offset by economic benefits from reduced labour productivity losses. Cumulatively, about 17·0% of climate change mitigation costs could be offset by the economic benefits between 2020 and 2100, when using a 2% social discounting rate. The costs and benefits of climate change mitigation will be distributed highly unevenly across regions due to their varying climate zones and economic structures. Regions with benefits from reduced productivity losses higher than mitigation costs are mainly low-latitude and tropical regions with lower income and lower emissions, such as southeast Asia, Brazil, and Mexico. More than half the climate change mitigation costs could be offset by the economic benefits by 2100 for the world's largest emitters, including the USA, China, the EU, and India. Low benefit-cost ratios are expected in economies that rely on fossil fuels, such as Canada, Russia, and the Middle East. INTERPRETATION: Although pledging carbon neutrality implies radical changes to most economies, substantial health and economic gains can be achieved by reduced heat-related labour productivity loss, even without accounting for other benefits. The benefit-cost analysis in this study shows the potential for choosing more stringent climate change mitigation pathways in some regions. Regions with low benefit-cost ratios need to restructure their economies to reduce mitigation costs as well as losses from declined fossil fuel exports. FUNDING: National Natural Science Foundation of China, Tsinghua-Toyota Joint Research Fund, the Wellcome Trust, Tsinghua University-China Three Gorges Corporation Joint Research Center for Climate Governance Mechanism and Green Low-carbon Transformation Strategy, the National Research Foundation, Prime Minister's Office, Singapore (Campus for Research Excellence and Technological Enterprise [CREATE] programme), and the Global Energy Interconnection Development and Coorperation Organization.

Tracking the impacts of climate change on human health via indicators: lessons from the Lancet Countdown.

BACKGROUND: In the past decades, climate change has been impacting human lives and health via extreme weather and climate events and alterations in labour capacity, food security, and the prevalence and geographical distribution of infectious diseases across the globe. Climate change and health indicators (CCHIs) are workable tools designed to capture the complex set of interdependent interactions through which climate change is affecting human health. Since 2015, a novel sub-set of CCHIs, focusing on climate change impacts, exposures, and vulnerability indicators (CCIEVIs) has been developed, refined, and integrated by Working Group 1 of the "Lancet Countdown: Tracking Progress on Health and Climate Change", an international collaboration across disciplines that include climate, geography, epidemiology, occupation health, and economics. DISCUSSION: This research in practice article is a reflective narrative documenting how we have developed CCIEVIs as a discrete set of quantifiable indicators that are updated annually to provide the most recent picture of climate change's impacts on human health. In our experience, the main challenge was to define globally relevant indicators that also have local relevance and as such can support decision making across multiple spatial scales. We found a hazard, exposure, and vulnerability framework to be effective in this regard. We here describe how we used such a framework to define CCIEVIs based on both data availability and the indicators' relevance to climate change and human health. We also report on how CCIEVIs have been improved and added to, detailing the underlying data and methods, and in doing so provide the defining quality criteria for Lancet Countdown CCIEVIs. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience shows that CCIEVIs can effectively contribute to a world-wide monitoring system that aims to track, communicate, and harness evidence on climate-induced health impacts towards effective intervention strategies. An ongoing challenge is how to improve CCIEVIs so that the description of the linkages between climate change and human health can become more and more comprehensive.

Challenges in conducting epidemiological field studies evaluating associations between heat stress and renal health among workers in informal sectors: experiences from India.

Well-designed Environmental Epidemiological Studies (EES) play a crucial role in quantifying the influence of environmental exposures and their associated risks on health in the wider population. They provide critical research evidence for identifying and developing interventions to avert adverse health consequences from those exposures. However, uncertainty and variability inherent to any field based EES could hinder the nature and magnitude of association between an exposure and health outcome. This is particularly pronounced in resource limited settings and resource-tight research projects. The present study evaluated the association between occupational heat stress and renal health among informal work sectors in India which had some significant challenges. Informal workers exposed to chronic occupational heat stress had significantly higher adverse renal health outcomes than the unexposed workers. Our field challenges included gaining access and permissions to conduct the study, participant recalls bias and attrition, accurately estimating exposures, confounding from causes of both exposure and disease, and to a large extent tight-funding. Though opportunities are abundant, we must ensure field conditions are optimized to attain study objectives. A keen understanding and sensitivity towards the cultural and work settings is essential for successful project completion. Based on our experiences, we provide strategies to adopt to improve fieldwork and provide recommendations to help overcome the field challenges and achieve better results for future EES studies in developing country settings.

The 2020 report of The Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: responding to converging crises.

TRANSLATIONS: For the Chinese, French, German, and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Heat Stress and Thermal Perception amongst Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic in India and Singapore.

The need for healthcare workers (HCWs) to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic heightens their risk of thermal stress. We assessed the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of HCWs from India and Singapore regarding PPE usage and heat stress when performing treatment and care activities. One hundred sixty-five HCWs from India (n = 110) and Singapore (n = 55) participated in a survey. Thirty-seven HCWs from Singapore provided thermal comfort ratings before and after ice slurry ingestion. Differences in responses between India and Singapore HCWs were compared. A p-value cut-off of 0.05 depicted statistical significance. Median wet-bulb globe temperature was higher in India (30.2 °C (interquartile range [IQR] 29.1-31.8 °C)) than in Singapore (22.0 °C (IQR 18.8-24.8 °C)) (p < 0.001). Respondents from both countries reported thirst (n = 144, 87%), excessive sweating (n = 145, 88%), exhaustion (n = 128, 78%), and desire to go to comfort zones (n = 136, 84%). In Singapore, reports of air-conditioning at worksites (n = 34, 62%), dedicated rest area availability (n = 55, 100%), and PPE removal during breaks (n = 54, 98.2%) were higher than in India (n = 27, 25%; n = 46, 42%; and n = 66, 60%, respectively) (p < 0.001). Median thermal comfort rating improved from 2 (IQR 1-2) to 0 (IQR 0-1) after ice slurry ingestion in Singapore (p < 0.001). HCWs are cognizant of the effects of heat stress but might not adopt best practices due to various constraints. Thermal stress management is better in Singapore than in India. Ice slurry ingestion is shown to be practical and effective in promoting thermal comfort. Adverse effects of heat stress on productivity and judgment of HCWs warrant further investigation.

Heat Stress Impacts on Cardiac Mortality in Nepali Migrant Workers in Qatar.

BACKGROUND: Qatar is a major destination country for Nepali migrant workers (NMWs; main age range 25-35 years) in the construction trade. These 120,000+ NMWs are exposed to various occupational hazards, including excessive heat, and 3-4 workers die each week. Our study aimed to show whether heat exposure caused deaths. METHODS: The worker population and mortality data of NMWs were retrieved from government institutions in Nepal. Heat exposure was assessed by monthly estimates of daily wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT), for in-shade conditions, from data collected at the Doha weather station from 2009 to 2017. Working in the sun during the middle of the day would add 2-3°C to the in-shade WBGT values. Daily deaths and their causes were obtained from the records of the Foreign Employment Promotion Board (FEPB) in Nepal, 2009-2017. Interviews with returning NMWs about their working conditions and the impacts of these conditions added information. The association between the heat variable and mortality was tested with standard statistical methods. RESULTS: The average annual death rate for NMWs in Qatar was 150 deaths/100,000. According to interviews, the majority of NMWs were found working in high WBGT (>31°C) each working day during hot months. The major cause of these deaths was recorded as cardiovascular problems (cardiovascular disease; CVD). Unfortunately, the causes of death were poorly described, and many deaths were listed as "cardiac arrest." We included these deaths in the broader category of "cardiovascular causes." There was a strong correlation between average monthly afternoon heat levels (WBGT) and CVD mortality. It is likely that a large proportion of these CVD deaths during hot months were due to serious heat stroke. Global studies show that approximately 15% of deaths in the age group 25-35 years are due to CVD causes. However, in this NMW population, the figures were 22% during the cool season and 58% during the hot season. CONCLUSIONS: The increased CVD mortality during hot periods is most likely due to severe heat stress. As many as 200 of the 571 CVD deaths during 2009-2017 could have been prevented if effective heat protection had been implemented as a part of local occupational health and safety programs. There is an urgent need for protection against such heat effects among NMWs, and rising temperatures from ongoing climate change are further increasing the health risks. Cause of death records for workers dying in hot conditions should be more precise than "cardiac arrest."

Workplace heat exposure, health protection, and economic impacts: A case study in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Occupational heat exposure is a serious concern for worker health, productivity, and the economy. Few studies in North America assess how on-site wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) levels and guidelines are applied in practice. METHODS: We assessed the use of a WBGT sensor for localized summertime heat exposures experienced by outdoor laborers at an industrial worksite in Ontario, Canada during the warm season (May-October) from 2012 to 2018 inclusive. We further examined informed decision making, approximated workers' predicted heat strain (sweat loss, core temperature), and estimated potential financial loss (via hourly wages) due to decreased work allowance in the heat. RESULTS: Significantly higher worksite WBGT levels occured compared with regional levels estimated at the airport, with an upward trend in heat warnings over the 7 years and expansion of warnings into the fall season. The maximum WBGT during warnings related strongly to predicted hourly sweat loss. On average, 22 hours per worker were lost each summer (~1% of annual work hours) as a result of taking breaks or stopping due to heat. This amount of time corresponded to an average individual loss of C$1100 Canadian dollars (~C$220,000 combined for ~200 workers) to workers or the company. The additional losses for an enterprise due to reduced product output were not estimated. CONCLUSIONS: Worksite observations and actions at the microscale are essential for improving the estimates of health and economic costs of extreme heat to enterprises and society. Providing worksite heat metrics to the employees aids in appropriate decision making and health protection.

Surveillance of work environment and heat stress assessment using meteorological data.

Health surveillance and workplace surveillance are two related but different aspects of occupational health services. The assessment of heat stress using heat indices and thermal models in connection with meteorological data is an important part of surveillance of workplace heat. The assessment of heat exposure provides the basis for occupational health services. Workers should have health surveillance if the high heat stress cannot be reduced.

Workers' health and productivity under occupational heat strain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Occupational heat strain (ie, the effect of environmental heat stress on the body) directly threatens workers' ability to live healthy and productive lives. We estimated the effects of occupational heat strain on workers' health and productivity outcomes. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines for this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed and Embase from database inception to Feb 5, 2018, for relevant studies in any labour environment and at any level of occupational heat strain. No restrictions on language, workers' health status, or study design were applied. Occupational heat strain was defined using international health and safety guidelines and standards. We excluded studies that calculated effects using simulations or statistical models instead of actual measurements, and any grey literature. Risk of bias, data extraction, and sensitivity analysis were performed by two independent investigators. Six random-effects meta-analyses estimated the prevalence of occupational heat strain, kidney disease or acute kidney injury, productivity loss, core temperature, change in urine specific gravity, and odds of occupational heat strain occurring during or at the end of a work shift in heat stress conditions. The review protocol is available on PROSPERO, registration number CRD42017083271. FINDINGS: Of 958 reports identified through our systematic search, 111 studies done in 30 countries, including 447 million workers from more than 40 different occupations, were eligible for analysis. Our meta-analyses showed that individuals working a single work shift under heat stress (defined as wet-bulb globe temperature beyond 22·0 or 24·8°C depending on work intensity) were 4·01 times (95% CI 2·45-6·58; nine studies with 11 582 workers) more likely to experience occupational heat strain than an individual working in thermoneutral conditions, while their core temperature was increased by 0·7°C (0·4-1·0; 17 studies with 1090 workers) and their urine specific gravity was increased by 14·5% (0·0031, 0·0014-0·0048; 14 studies with 691 workers). During or at the end of a work shift under heat stress, 35% (31-39; 33 studies with 13 088 workers) of workers experienced occupational heat strain, while 30% (21-39; 11 studies with 8076 workers) reported productivity losses. Finally, 15% (11-19; ten studies with 21 721 workers) of individuals who typically or frequently worked under heat stress (minimum of 6 h per day, 5 days per week, for 2 months of the year) experienced kidney disease or acute kidney injury. Overall, this analysis include a variety of populations, exposures, and occupations to comply with a wider adoption of evidence synthesis, but resulted in large heterogeneity in our meta-analyses. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation analysis revealed moderate confidence for most results and very low confidence in two cases (average core temperature and change in urine specific gravity) due to studies being funded by industry. INTERPRETATION: Occupational heat strain has important health and productivity outcomes and should be recognised as a public health problem. Concerted international action is needed to mitigate its effects in light of climate change and the anticipated rise in heat stress. FUNDING: EU Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme.

Implications for workability and survivability in populations exposed to extreme heat under climate change: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Changes in temperature and humidity due to climate change affect living and working conditions. An understanding of the effects of different global temperature changes on population health is needed to inform the continued implementation of the Paris Climate Agreement and to increase global ambitions for greater cuts in emissions. By use of historical and projected climate conditions, we aimed to investigate the effects of climate change on workability (ie, the ability to work) and survivability (the ability to survive). METHODS: In this modelling study, we estimated the changes in populations exposed to excessive heat stress between the recent past (ie, 1986-2005) and 2100. We used climate data from four models to calculate the wet-bulb globe temperature, an established heat exposure index that can be used to assess the effects of temperature, humidity, and other environmental factors on humans. We defined and applied thresholds for risks to workability (where the monthly mean of daily maximum wet-bulb globe temperature exceeds 34°C) and survivability (where the maximum daily wet-bulb globe temperature exceeds 40°C for 3 consecutive days), and we used population projections to quantify changes in risk associated with different changes to the global temperature. FINDINGS: The risks to workability increase substantially with global mean surface temperature in all four climate models, with approximately 1 billion people affected globally after an increase in the global temperature of about 2·5°C above pre-industrial levels. There is greater variability between climate models for exposures above the threshold for risks to survivability than for risks to workability. The number of people who are likely to be exposed to heat stress exceeding the survivability threshold increases with global temperature change, to reach around 20 million people globally after an increase of about 2·5°C, estimated from the median of the models, but with a large model uncertainty. More people are likely to be exposed to heat stress in urban than in rural areas. Population exposure can fluctuate over time and change substantially within one decade. INTERPRETATION: Exposure to excessive heat stress is projected to be widespread in tropical or subtropical low-income and middle-income countries, highlighting the need to build on the Paris Agreement regarding global temperature targets, to protect populations who have contributed little to greenhouse gas emissions. The non-linear dependency of heat exposure risk on temperature highlights the importance of understanding thresholds in coupled human-climate systems. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust.

Impact of climate change on occupational health and productivity: a systematic literature review focusing on workplace heat.

BACKGROUND: With climate change, mean annual air temperatures are getting hotter and extreme weather events will become more and more common in most parts of the world. OBJECTIVES: As part of the EU funded project HEAT-SHIELD we conducted a systematic review to summarize the epidemiological evidence of the effects of global warming-related heat exposure on workers' health and productivity. METHODS: Three separate searches, focused, respectively, on: i) heat-related illness (HRI), cardiovascular, respiratory and kidney diseases; ii) traumatic injuries; and iii) vector-borne diseases or vectors distribution, were conducted in PubMed. EMBASE was also consulted to retrieve relevant studies focused on the health effects of climate change. A fourth search strategy to assess the effects on work productivity was conducted both in PubMed and in the SCOPUS database. RESULTS: A significant proportion of studies reported findings regarding the Mesoamerican nephropathy issue. This is a disease occurring especially among young and middle-aged male sugarcane workers, without conventional risk factors for chronic kidney disease. For injuries, there is a reversed U-shaped exposure-response relationship between Tmax and overall daily injury claims. Outdoor workers are at increased risk of vector-borne infectious diseases, as a positive correlation between higher air temperatures and current or future expansion of the habitat of vectors is being observed. As for productivity, agriculture and construction are the most studied sectors; a day with temperatures exceeding 32°C can reduce daily labour supply in exposed sectors by up to 14%. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings should inform development of further research and related health policies in the EU and beyond with regard to protecting working people from the effects of workplace heat during climate change.

Occupational heat stress assessment and protective strategies in the context of climate change.

Global warming will unquestionably increase the impact of heat on individuals who work in already hot workplaces in hot climate areas. The increasing prevalence of this environmental health risk requires the improvement of assessment methods linked to meteorological data. Such new methods will help to reveal the size of the problem and design appropriate interventions at individual, workplace and societal level. The evaluation of occupational heat stress requires measurement of four thermal climate factors (air temperature, humidity, air velocity and heat radiation); available weather station data may serve this purpose. However, the use of meteorological data for occupational heat stress assessment is limited because weather stations do not traditionally and directly measure some important climate factors, e.g. solar radiation. In addition, local workplace environmental conditions such as local heat sources, metabolic heat production within the human body, and clothing properties, all affect the exchange of heat between the body and the environment. A robust occupational heat stress index should properly address all these factors. This article reviews and highlights a number of selected heat stress indices, indicating their advantages and disadvantages in relation to meteorological data, local workplace environments, body heat production and the use of protective clothing. These heat stress and heat strain indices include Wet Bulb Globe Temperature, Discomfort Index, Predicted Heat Strain index, and Universal Thermal Climate Index. In some cases, individuals may be monitored for heat strain through physiological measurements and medical supervision prior to and during exposure. Relevant protective and preventive strategies for alleviating heat strain are also reviewed and proposed.

Estimated work ability in warm outdoor environments depends on the chosen heat stress assessment metric.

With a view to occupational effects of climate change, we performed a simulation study on the influence of different heat stress assessment metrics on estimated workability (WA) of labour in warm outdoor environments. Whole-day shifts with varying workloads were simulated using as input meteorological records for the hottest month from four cities with prevailing hot (Dallas, New Delhi) or warm-humid conditions (Managua, Osaka), respectively. In addition, we considered the effects of adaptive strategies like shielding against solar radiation and different work-rest schedules assuming an acclimated person wearing light work clothes (0.6 clo). We assessed WA according to Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT) by means of an empirical relation of worker performance from field studies (Hothaps), and as allowed work hours using safety threshold limits proposed by the corresponding standards. Using the physiological models Predicted Heat Strain (PHS) and Universal Thermal Climate Index (UTCI)-Fiala, we calculated WA as the percentage of working hours with body core temperature and cumulated sweat loss below standard limits (38 °C and 7.5% of body weight, respectively) recommended by ISO 7933 and below conservative (38 °C; 3%) and liberal (38.2 °C; 7.5%) limits in comparison. ANOVA results showed that the different metrics, workload, time of day and climate type determined the largest part of WA variance. WBGT-based metrics were highly correlated and indicated slightly more constrained WA for moderate workload, but were less restrictive with high workload and for afternoon work hours compared to PHS and UTCI-Fiala. Though PHS showed unrealistic dynamic responses to rest from work compared to UTCI-Fiala, differences in WA assessed by the physiological models largely depended on the applied limit criteria. In conclusion, our study showed that the choice of the heat stress assessment metric impacts notably on the estimated WA. Whereas PHS and UTCI-Fiala can account for cumulative physiological strain imposed by extended work hours when working heavily under high heat stress, the current WBGT standards do not include this. Advanced thermophysiological models might help developing alternatives, where not only modelling details but also the choice of physiological limit criteria will require attention. There is also an urgent need for suitable empirical data relating workplace heat exposure to workability.

Estimating population heat exposure and impacts on working people in conjunction with climate change.

Increased environmental heat levels as a result of climate change present a major challenge to the health, wellbeing and sustainability of human communities in already hot parts of this planet. This challenge has many facets from direct clinical health effects of daily heat exposure to indirect effects related to poor air quality, poor access to safe drinking water, poor access to nutritious and safe food and inadequate protection from disease vectors and environmental toxic chemicals. The increasing environmental heat is a threat to environmental sustainability. In addition, social conditions can be undermined by the negative effects of increased heat on daily work and life activities and on local cultural practices. The methodology we describe can be used to produce quantitative estimates of the impacts of climate change on work activities in countries and local communities. We show in maps the increasing heat exposures in the shade expressed as the occupational heat stress index Wet Bulb Globe Temperature. Some tropical and sub-tropical areas already experience serious heat stress, and the continuing heating will substantially reduce work capacity and labour productivity in widening parts of the world. Southern parts of Europe and the USA will also be affected. Even the lowest target for climate change (average global temperature change = 1.5 °C at representative concentration pathway (RCP2.6) will increase the loss of daylight work hour output due to heat in many tropical areas from less than 2% now up to more than 6% at the end of the century. A global temperature change of 2.7 °C (at RCP6.0) will double this annual heat impact on work in such areas. Calculations of this type of heat impact at country level show that in the USA, the loss of work capacity in moderate level work in the shade will increase from 0.17% now to more than 1.3% at the end of the century based on the 2.7 °C temperature change. The impact is naturally mainly occurring in the southern hotter areas. In China, the heat impact will increase from 0.3 to 2%, and in India, from 2 to 8%. Especially affected countries, such as Cambodia, may have losses going beyond 10%, while countries with most of the population at high cooler altitude, such as Ethiopia, may experience much lower losses.