* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Adaptation Baseline - Center for Integrated Study of the Human
Public health genomics wikipedia , lookup
Maternal health wikipedia , lookup
Race and health wikipedia , lookup
Health system wikipedia , lookup
Fetal origins hypothesis wikipedia , lookup
Health equity wikipedia , lookup
Preventive healthcare wikipedia , lookup
CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Approaching Adaptation: Parallels and Contrasts between the Climate and Health Communities Center for Integrated Study of the Human Dimensions of Global Change, Carnegie Mellon University National Science Foundation, ExxonMobil, API and CMU Context and Introduction • Public health prevention and climate change adaptation share the goal of increasing the ability of nations, communities and individuals to cope effectively and efficiently with challenges and changes. • Public health researcher approach from the perspective of protecting and enhancing the health and well-being of individuals and communities • Climate researchers approach adaptation from a perspective that can trace its roots to the natural hazards community. 2 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Public Health • Public health is “the combination of sciences, skills, and beliefs that is directed to the maintenance and improvement of the health of all people through collective or social actions. The programs, services, and institutions involved emphasize the prevention of disease and the health needs of the population as a whole. Public health activities change with changing technology and social values, but the goals remain the same: to reduce the amount of disease, premature deaths, and disease-produced discomfort and disability in the population (Last 2001).” 3 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Three Stages of Prevention • Public health aims to achieve its goals through prevention (adaptation). • Measures to reduce disease and save lives are categorized into primary, secondary and tertiary prevention (Last 2001). 4 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Three Stages of Prevention • Primary prevention is the “protection of health by personal and community wide efforts.” • Secondary prevention includes “measures available to individuals and populations for the early detection and prompt and effective intervention to correct departures from good health.” • Tertiary prevention “consists of the measures available to reduce or eliminate long-term impairments and disabilities, minimize suffering caused by existing departures from good health, and to promote the patient’s adjustment to irremediable conditions.” 5 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Climate Community and Adaptation • Human and natural systems adapt autonomously to » gradual change, if it can be detected, and » variability (or change in variability). • Human systems can plan to adapt and implement their plans 6 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Public Health and Vulnerability • Public health uses the concept of vulnerability in two different senses. • One acknowledges that advances in public health are not permanent and that deterioration of the public health infrastructure could permit the return of adverse health outcomes that are currently controlled. As a result, vulnerability depends on maintaining and improving health systems. 7 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Public Health and Vulnerability • The second sense relates to specific health outcomes. • The classic approach to evaluating environmental health risks is a four-step assessment paradigm: hazard identification, dose (exposure) cum response assessment, exposure assessment, and risk characterization. • The evaluation of information on the hazards of environmental agents and exposure of sensitive receptors (e.g., humans, animals, and ecosystems) produces quantitative or qualitative statements about the probability and degree of harm. 8 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Comparison • To a climate researcher, vulnerability is a function of exposure and sensitivity; and exposure and sensitivity are themselves functions of adaptive capacity. In general, it is a statement about future conditions after adaptations have been implemented. • In the health community, vulnerability is a function of exposure to an agent and the exposure-response relationship between that exposure and a particular health outcome. In general, it is a statement about current conditions. It is preferable to have the exposure-response relationship determined before preventative measures (i.e. adaptations), are implemented. 9 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Determinants of Adaptive Capacity ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ 10 The range of available technological options for adaptation; The availability of resources and their distribution; The structure of critical institutions and the derivative allocation of decision-making authority; The stock of human capital (e.g. education and personal security; The stock of social capital; The system’s access to risk spreading processes; The ability of decision-makers to manage information; and The public’s perceived attribution of the source of stress and the significance of exposure to its local manifestations. CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Prerequisites for Prevention An awareness that a problem exists; ∞ A sense that the problem matters; ∞ Understanding of what causes the problem; ∞ Capability to deal with the problem; and ∞ Political will to control the problem. ∞ 11 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Table 1: Determinants of Adaptive Capacity and the Prerequisites for Prevention 12 Determinants of Adaptive Cap Prerequisites for Prevention Availability of Options Capability to control Resources Capability to control Governance Political will Human and social capital Understanding of causes; political will Access to risk spreading mechanism Capability to control Managing information Understanding of causes; problem matters Public perception Awareness; problem matters CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Table 2: Trends in Selected Health Indicators and Their Determinants in Costa Rica and the former USSR, 19601990 Costa Rica Health Indicator Former USSR 1960 1990 % to Tech Under 5 Mortality 124 14 55 Female Adult Mortality 203 73 48 246 122 59 Female Life Expectancy 65 79 Male Life Expectancy 62 7 Male Adult Mortality Total Fertility Rate 1960 1990 % to Tech 39 27 40 59 72 74 43 74 60 65 63 46 3.3 38 2.7 2.2 25 Determinants Income Per Capita 13 2001 3381 2397 7453 Female Education (yrs) 4.0 5.6 7.6 10.3 Male Education 4.1 5.5 8.5 10.8 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Table 3: Socioeconomic and Health Services and Finance Indicators for Costa Rica and the Russian Federation, 1960-1990 Socioeconomic Indicator Costa Rica Russian Federation Males 6 12 Females 7 13 Malnutrition (children under 5) Health Services/Finance Indicator Children Immunized for Measles 99% 92% Health Expenditure 14 Total (% of GDP) 8.5 4.8 Public Sector (% of GDP) 6.3 4.1 Public Sector (% of total) 74 87 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Figure 1a Historical Context – Adaptation Baseline Annual River Flow (milliards) 100 90 80 70 60 Flow 50 Upper 40 Low er 30 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 Year 15 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Figure 1b Amplifying the Historical Trend - Baseline Revisited Annual River Flow (milliards) 100 90 80 70 Flow 60 Upper 50 Low er 40 30 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 Year 16 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Figure 1c Annual River Flow (milliards) 100 90 80 70 Flow 60 Upper 50 Low er 40 30 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 Year 17 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Annual River Flow (milliards) Figure 2 Building a Levy in the Fifth Period 100 90 80 70 Flow Upper Low er 60 50 40 30 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 Year 18 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Annual River Flow (milliards) Figure 3 Smoothing Variation with an Upstream Dam 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 Flow Upper Low er 0 10 20 30 40 50 Time Period 19 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Figure 4 Reducing Flood Threat by Dredging Annual River Flow (milliards) 100 90 80 70 Flow 60 Upper 50 Lower 40 30 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 Time Period 20 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Figure 5a: Initial Conditions Variable 2 »A0 »B0 Variable 1 21 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Figure 5b: Conditions in 50 Years Variable 2 »A50 »B 50 Variable 1 22 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Figure 5c: Trajectories of Sustainability Indices 1 Sustainability Index 0.8 0.6 Locus I Locus II Locus III 0.4 0.2 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Year 23 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Figure 6 Sustainability Indices for the Hypothetical River Example 1.2 Sustainability Index 1 0.8 Baseline Levy 0.6 Dam Dredging 0.4 0.2 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Years 24 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Public Health Perspective • Public health seeks to identify and reduce both the background level of disease and any epidemics or outbreaks. • Public health does not use the terminology or the concept of a “coping range.” Use of the term suggests a range within which significant consequences are not observed. • Adaptation policies and measures are needed now to address current conditions. • Public health has recognized thresholds for centuries. 25 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Public Health and Thresholds • It is difficult to generalize approaches to thresholds because each is specific to a particular exposure-response relationship. • Exposures that exhibit J- or U-shaped relationships with health outcomes, where either too little or too much is detrimental to health (i.e., ambient temperature and oxygen). • Exposures that have threshold relationships with health outcomes, where low doses are not associated with increased morbidity and mortality (i.e., arsenic and dose required to develop a case of cholera). • Exposures that have linear relationships with health outcomes (e.g., tobacco smoking and asbestos). 26 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Example with A Zero Threshold: Eradication of Smallpox • Smallpox is a highly infectious viral disease • Repeated epidemics have decimated populations • Spread is person-to-person • Case fatality rate up to 25% • No effective treatment • No carrier state and no animal reservoir • Potent and stable vaccine available • 1967 eradication campaign launched • 1980 smallpox eradicated » Budget: $81 million (WHO) + ~ $232 million (country-level and bilateral assistance) 27 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Example with a Positive Threshold: Arsenic • Arsenic is a metalloid that is abundant in the earth’s crust • Environmental exposures are primarily through food & water » Average daily intake 20-300 ug • Adverse health effects begin once an individual’s threshold body burden is exceeded • Groundwater standards: » WHO 10 ug/L » Bangladesh 50 ug/L • In Bangladesh, 28-57 million people consuming water above the standard • 1/100-300 people who consume water containing >50 ug/L may suffer an arsenic-related cancer (lung, bladder, liver) 28 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Issues of Scale • Determinants of Adaptive Capacity operate on different scales from site to site. » Some are truly macro in scale - provide handles for national and even international intervention » This can be true even if their relevant manifestations are micro in scale • Prerequisites for Prevention do the same 29 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Relationship Between Vulnerability to Natural Disasters and Income Vulnerability to Natural Disasters and Per Capita Income 8 y = -0.3858x + 4.7271 R2 = 0.0771 Ln(Fraction of population killed per decade) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 -1 -2 Ln(Income per capita in US dollar) 30 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Relationship Between Vulnerability to Natural Disasters and Income Vulnerability to Natural Disasters and Per Capita Income Ln(Annual damage in percentage of GDP) 4 2 0 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 -2 -4 -6 -8 y = 0.1443x - 3.4473 R2 = 0.005 -10 Ln(Income per capita in US dollar) 31 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Relationship Between Vulnerability to Natural Disasters and Income Vulnerability to Natural Disasters and Per Capita Income Ln(Fraction of population affected per decade) 2 0 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 y = -1.0196x + 4.7624 R2 = 0.2105 -12 Ln(Income per capita in US dollar) 32 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon A Caveat - Incorporating the “Second Best” into the Adaptation Baselines • Local scale implications are most critical. • Determinants and prerequisites can work to support or impede specific adaptations. • Relating adaptations to their efficacy in reducing exposure or sensitivity can be accomplished. • Looking for patterns here can uncover the macro scale implications. • BUT adaptation baselines must reflect existing distortions; analysis can investigate the implications of reducing their power. • Public Health can be a natural laboratory for examining how to do this. 33 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon A Template for Adaptation Analysis in Either Context • Proper vulnerability cum adaptation analyses must confront these issues directly by comparing results from a series of runs into the future. • One might, for example, look at the future with a given adaptation baseline (with existing distortions and impediments) and no extra stress. • A second set of runs into the future might then persist with the no extra stress assumption but include adjustments in adaptation that could be anticipated to reduce exposure or sensitivity to present vulnerability. 34 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon A Template for Adaptation Analysis in Either Context • A third set of runs could then impose the extra stress on the adaptation baseline (the first set) to see how they might work. • A fourth collection could repeat the analysis with anticipated adjustments (the adjusted baseline for the second set of runs). 35 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon A Template for Adaptation Analysis in Either Context • In every case, however, it is critical that the analysis presumes neither dumb actors who will not respond to any changes in environment nor clairvoyant actors who know everything from the very beginning. • The future will be fraught with uncertainty, just like the present; and any considerations of adaptation must recognize this fact. • A complete vulnerability cum adaptation analysis of a particular region or sector would contemplate a range of “not-implausible”. 36 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Applying the Template - Coastal Storms and Sea Level Rise • S1 - Storm scenarios with current practices • S2 - Storm scenarios with enlarged set-backs • S3 - Rerun S1 with climate induced sea level rise and changes in storm patterns - frequency and/or intensity • S4 - Rerun S2 with climate change • S3 vs S1 - Cost of climate change along current baseline • S2 vs S4 - Cost of climate change with modified baseline • S1 vs S2 - Value of modification absent climate change • S3 vs S4 - Value of modification with climate change 37 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon Synthesis and Conclusions • Vulnerability means different things in the two communities. • Approaches can still be comparable. • Determinants hypotheses supported by health understanding of the prerequisites for prevention. • Any thoughts? 38 CIS oƒ HDGC Carnegie Mellon