Priorities for research to support local authority action on health and climate change: a study in England.

BACKGROUND: Evidence is needed to support local action to reduce the adverse health impacts of climate change and maximise the health co-benefits of climate action. Focused on England, the study identifies priority areas for research to inform local decision making. METHODS: Firstly, potential priority areas for research were identified from a brief review of UK policy documents, and feedback invited from public and policy stakeholders. This included a survey of Directors of Public Health (DsPH) in England, the local government officers responsible for public health. Secondly, rapid reviews of research evidence examined whether there was UK evidence relating to the priorities identified in the survey. RESULTS: The brief policy review pointed to the importance of evidence in two broad areas: (i) community engagement in local level action on the health impacts of climate change and (ii) the economic (cost) implications of such action. The DsPH survey (n = 57) confirmed these priorities. With respect to community engagement, public understanding of climate change's health impacts and the public acceptability of local climate actions were identified as key evidence gaps. With respect to economic implications, the gaps related to evidence on the health and non-health-related costs and benefits of climate action and the short, medium and longer-term budgetary implications of such action, particularly with respect to investments in the built environment. Across both areas, the need for evidence relating to impacts across income groups was highlighted, a point also emphasised by the public involvement panel. The rapid reviews confirmed these evidence gaps (relating to public understanding, public acceptability, economic evaluation and social inequalities). In addition, public and policy stakeholders pointed to other barriers to action, including financial pressures, noting that better evidence is insufficient to enable effective local action. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence to inform health-centred local action on climate change. More evidence is required on public perspectives on, and the economic dimensions of, local climate action. Investment in locally focused research is urgently needed if local governments are to develop and implement evidence-based policies to protect public health from climate change and maximise the health co-benefits of local action.

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.

Intergovernmental engagement on health impacts of climate change.

OBJECTIVE: To examine countries' engagement with the health impacts of climate change in their formal statements to intergovernmental organizations, and the factors driving engagement. METHODS: We obtained the texts of countries' annual statements in United Nations (UN) general debates from 2000 to 2019 and their nationally determined contributions at the Paris Agreement in 2016. To measure countries' engagement, we used a keyword-in-context text search with relevant search terms to count the total number of references to the relationship of health to climate change. We used a machine learning model (random forest predictions) to identify the most important country-level predictors of engagement. The predictors included political and economic factors, health outcomes, climate change-related variables and membership of political negotiating groups in the UN. FINDINGS: For both UN general debate statements and nationally determined contributions, low- and middle-income countries discussed the health impacts of climate change much more than did high-income countries. The most important predictors of engagement were health outcomes (infant mortality, maternal deaths, life expectancy), countries' income levels (gross domestic product per capita), and fossil fuel consumption. Membership of political negotiating groups (such as the Group of 77 and Small Island Developing States) was a less important predictor. CONCLUSION: Our analysis indicated a higher engagement in countries that carry the heaviest climate-related health burdens, but lack necessary resources to address the impacts of climate change. These countries are shouldering responsibility for reminding the global community of the implications of climate change for people's health.

Mixed Methods EvAluation of the high-volume low-complexity Surgical hUb pRogrammE (MEASURE): a mixed methods study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The waiting list for elective surgery in England recently reached over 7.8 million people and waiting time targets have been missed since 2010. The high-volume low complexity (HVLC) surgical hubs programme aims to tackle the backlog of patients awaiting elective surgery treatment in England. This study will evaluate the impact of HVLC surgical hubs on productivity, patient care and the workforce. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This 4-year project consists of six interlinked work packages (WPs) and is informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. WP1: Mapping current and future HVLC provision in England through document analysis, quantitative data sets (eg, Hospital Episodes Statistics) and interviews with national service leaders. WP2: Exploring the effects of HVLC hubs on key performance outcomes, primarily the volume of low-complexity patients treated, using quasi-experimental methods. WP3: Exploring the impact and implementation of HVLC hubs on patients, health professionals and the local NHS through approximately nine longitudinal, multimethod qualitative case studies. WP4: Assessing the productivity of HVLC surgical hubs using the Centre for Health Economics NHS productivity measure and Lord Carter's operational productivity measure. WP5: Conducting a mixed-methods appraisal will assess the influence of HVLC surgical hubs on the workforce using: qualitative data (WP3) and quantitative data (eg, National Health Service (NHS) England's workforce statistics and intelligence from WP2). WP6: Analysing the costs and consequences of HVLC surgical hubs will assess their achievements in relation to their resource use to establish value for money. A patient and public involvement group will contribute to the study design and materials. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the East Midlands-Nottingham Research Ethics Committee 23/EM/0231. Participants will provide informed consent for qualitative study components. Dissemination plans include multiple academic and non-academic outputs (eg, Peer-reviewed journals, conferences, social media) and a continuous, feedback-loop of findings to key stakeholders (eg, NHS England) to influence policy development. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Research registry: Researchregistry9364 (https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry%23home/registrationdetails/64cb6c795cbef8002a46f115/).

Public Perceptions of Climate Change and Its Health Impacts: Taking Account of People's Exposure to Floods and Air Pollution.

Climate change-related exposures such as flooding and ambient air pollution place people's health at risk. A representative UK survey of adults investigated associations between reported flooding and air pollution (in the participants' local area, by the participant personally, and/or by family and close friends) and climate change concerns (CCC) and perceptions of its health impacts (PIH). In regression analyses controlling for socio-demographic factors and health status, exposure was associated with greater CCC and more negative PIH. Compared to those with low CCC, participants who reported local-area exposure were significantly more likely to be fairly (OR 2.07, 95%CI 1.26, 3.40) or very concerned (OR 3.40, 95%CI 2.02, 5.71). Odds of greater CCC were higher for those reporting personal and/or family exposure ('fairly concerned': OR 2.83, 95%CI 1.20, 6.66; 'very concerned': OR 4.11, 95%CI 1.69, 10.05) and for those reporting both local and personal/family exposure ('fairly concerned': OR 3.35, 95%CI 1.99, 5.63; 'very concerned': OR 6.17, 95%CI 3.61, 10.55). For PIH, local exposure significantly increased the odds of perceiving impacts as 'more bad than good' (1.86, 95%CI 1.22, 2.82) or 'entirely bad' (OR 1.88; 95%CI 1.13, 3.13). Our study suggests that public awareness of climate-related exposures in their local area, together with personal exposures and those of significant others, are associated with heightened concern about climate change and its health impacts.

Engagement with health in national climate change commitments under the Paris Agreement: a global mixed-methods analysis of the nationally determined contributions.

BACKGROUND: Instituted under the Paris Agreement, nationally determined contributions (NDCs) outline countries' plans for mitigating and adapting to climate change. They are the primary policy instrument for protecting people's health in the face of rising global temperatures. However, evidence on engagement with health in the NDCs is scarce. In this study, we aimed to examine how public health is incorporated in the NDCs, and how different patterns of engagement might be related to broader inequalities and tensions in global climate politics. METHODS: We analysed the NDCs in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change registry submitted by 185 countries. Using content analysis and natural language processing (NLP) methods, we developed measures of health engagement. Multivariate regression analyses examined whether country-level factors (eg, population size, gross domestic product [GDP], and climate-related exposures) were associated with greater health engagement. Using NLP methods, we compared health engagement with other climate-related challenges (ie, economy, energy, and agriculture) and examined broader differences in the keyword terms used in countries with high and low health engagement in their NDCs. FINDINGS: Countries that did not mention health in their NDCs were clustered in high-income countries, whereas greater health engagement was concentrated in low-income and middle-income countries. Having a low GDP per capita and being a small island developing state were associated with higher levels of health engagement. In addition, higher levels of population exposure to temperature change and ambient air pollution were associated with more health coverage included in a country's NDC. Variation in health engagement was greater than for other climate-related issues and reflected wider differences in countries' approaches to the NDCs. INTERPRETATION: A focus on health in the NDCs follows broader patterns of global inequalities. Poorer and climate-vulnerable countries that contribute least to climate change are more likely to engage with health in their NDCs, while richer countries focus on non-health sectors in their NDCs, such as energy and the economy. FUNDING: This work was in part funded through an unrestricted grant from the Wellcome Trust and supported by The Economic and Social Research Council.