Communicating climate change findings from IPCC reports: insights from outreach events in India.

In recent years, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been collaborating with Indian institutions to organise outreach events. This essay draws on the perspective of participants, speakers and organisers of 17 in-person outreach events conducted across India in 2018 and 2020, to share insights and recommendations for future IPCC events in India and other developing country contexts. The formats analysed in this essay range from panel events with very large public audiences to more focused workshops, meetings and seminars. Target audiences covered both academic and non-academic audiences and included researchers, teachers, students, industry and NGOs. The events, while achieving their main objective of communicating the findings of IPCC reports, also provided a platform for open discussion of localised climate impacts and good practices in adaptation and mitigation. There are, however, notable challenges to public outreach in India, specifically in terms of attracting an adequate number of participants, experts' availability, communicating to a diverse audience and translation into local languages. The biggest challenge faced by speakers was a lack of knowledge about the number of attendees and the composition of the audience prior to an event. It is our recommendation that future outreach events in India are designed to be interactive, tailored to the regional context and complemented by simplified communication materials. Speakers should be provided with audience information and background prior to the event, and greater reach into rural areas, including school children, could be achieved with material in local languages. Additionally, event organisers often require logistical and operational support to host outreach events.

Determinants of the use of alternatives to arsenic-contaminated shallow groundwater: an exploratory study in rural West Bengal, India.

Shallow groundwater containing toxic concentrations of arsenic is the primary source of drinking water for millions of households in rural West Bengal, India. Often, this water also contains unpleasant levels of iron and non-negligible fecal contamination. Alternatives to shallow groundwater are increasingly available, including government-built deep tubewells, water purchased from independent providers, municipal piped water, and household filters. We conducted a survey of 501 households in Murshidabad district in 2014 to explore what influenced the use of available alternatives. Socioeconomic status and the perceived likelihood of gastrointestinal (GI) illness (which was associated with dissatisfaction with iron in groundwater) were the primary determinants of the use of alternatives. Arsenic knowledge was limited. The choice amongst alternatives was influenced by economic, social, and aesthetic factors, but not by health risk perceptions. The use of purchased water was rarely exclusive and was strongly associated with socioeconomic status, suggesting that this form of market-based water provision does not ensure universal access. Demand for purchased water appeared to decrease significantly shortly after free piped water became available at public taps. Our results suggest that arsenic mitigation interventions that also address co-occurring water problems (iron, GI illness) could be more effective than a focus on arsenic alone.

Unpacking sustainabilities in diverse transition contexts: solar photovoltaic and urban mobility experiments in India and Thailand.

It is generally accepted that the concept of sustainability is not straightforward, but is subject to ongoing ambiguities, uncertainties and contestations. Yet literature on sustainability transitions has so far only engaged in limited ways with the resulting tough questions around what sustainability means, to whom and in which contexts. This paper makes a contribution to this debate by unpacking sustainability in India and Thailand in the context of solar photovoltaic and urban mobility experimentation. Building on a database of sustainability experiments and multicriteria mapping techniques applied in two workshops, the paper concludes that sustainability transition scholarship and associated governance strategies must engage with such questions in at least three important ways. First, there is a need for extreme caution in assuming any objective status for the sustainability of innovations, and for greater reflection on the normative implications of case study choices. Second, sustainability transition scholarship and governance must engage more with the unpacking of uncertainties and diverse possible socio-technical configurations even within (apparently) singular technological fields. Third, sustainability transition scholarship must be more explicit and reflective about the specific geographical contexts within which the sustainability of experimentation is addressed.

Electro-chemical arsenic remediation: field trials in West Bengal.

Millions of people in rural South Asia are exposed to high levels of arsenic through groundwater used for drinking. Many deployed arsenic remediation technologies quickly fail because they are not maintained, repaired, accepted, or affordable. It is therefore imperative that arsenic remediation technologies be evaluated for their ability to perform within a sustainable and scalable business model that addresses these challenges. We present field trial results of a 600 L Electro-Chemical Arsenic Remediation (ECAR) reactor operating over 3.5 months in West Bengal. These results are evaluated through the lens of a community scale micro-utility business model as a potential sustainable and scalable safe water solution for rural communities in South Asia. We demonstrate ECAR's ability to consistently reduce arsenic concentrations of ~266 µg/L to <5 µg/L in real groundwater, simultaneously meeting the international standards for iron and aluminum in drinking water. ECAR operating costs (amortized capital plus consumables) are estimated as $0.83-$1.04/m(3) under realistic conditions. We discuss the implications of these results against the constraints of a sustainable and scalable business model to argue that ECAR is a promising technology to help provide a clean water solution in arsenic-affected areas of South Asia.

Urban health inequities and the added pressure of climate change: an action-oriented research agenda.

Climate change will likely exacerbate already existing urban social inequities and health risks, thereby exacerbating existing urban health inequities. Cities in low- and middle-income countries are particularly vulnerable. Urbanization is both a cause of and potential solution to global climate change. Most population growth in the foreseeable future will occur in urban areas primarily in developing countries. How this growth is managed has enormous implications for climate change given the increasing concentration and magnitude of economic production in urban localities, as well as the higher consumption practices of urbanites, especially the middle classes, compared to rural populations. There is still much to learn about the extent to which climate change affects urban health equity and what can be done effectively in different socio-political and socio-economic contexts to improve the health of urban dwelling humans and the environment. But it is clear that equity-oriented climate change adaptation means attention to the social conditions in which urban populations live-this is not just a climate change policy issue, it requires inter-sectoral action. Policies and programs in urban planning and design, workplace health and safety, and urban agriculture can help mitigate further climate change and adapt to existing climate change. If done well, these will also be good for urban health equity.

Economic benefits of arsenic removal from ground water--a case study from West Bengal, India.

People living in almost 50% of the districts in West Bengal are exposed to arsenic contaminated water. This paper seeks to estimate the economic costs imposed by arsenic-related health problems. We use data from a primary survey of 473 households carried out in the districts of North 24 Parganas and Midnapore. We take into account household actions to either decrease the exposure of family members to unsafe water or to alleviate the health effects of consuming arsenic-contaminated water. This allows us to assess the benefits of arsenic-safe water by estimating a three equation system that includes averting actions, medical expenditures and a sickness function. We find that by reducing arsenic concentration to the safe limit of 50 microg/l, a representative household will benefit by Rs 297 ($7) per month. The current cost of supplying filtered piped water by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation to households is Rs 127 ($3) per month per household. Thus, investing in safe drinking water is economically feasible and households are willing to pay for such investments if made aware of the effective gain in welfare. Poor households, who make up the highest proportion of arsenic-affected households and incur the largest number of sick days, will be major beneficiaries of such investments.