TY - JOUR
T1 - Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions
T2 - overview and implications for policy makers
AU - Haines, Andy
AU - McMichael, Anthony J.
AU - Smith, Kirk R.
AU - Roberts, Ian
AU - Woodcock, James
AU - Markandya, Anil
AU - Armstrong, Ben G.
AU - Campbell-Lendrum, Diarmid
AU - Dangour, Alan D.
AU - Davies, Michael
AU - Bruce, Nigel
AU - Tonne, Cathryn
AU - Barrett, Mark
AU - Wilkinson, Paul
N1 - Funding Information:
The project that led to this Series was funded by the Wellcome Trust (coordinating funder); Department of Health, National Institute for Health Research; the Royal College of Physicians; the Academy of Medical Sciences; the Economic and Social Research Council; the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; and WHO. The Royal College of Physicians was supported by an unrestricted educational grant from Pfizer. The funders had no role in the design, analysis, or interpretation of the study. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the funding bodies or the US Health Effects Institute or its sponsors.
Copyright:
Copyright 2010 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2009/12/19
Y1 - 2009/12/19
N2 - This Series has examined the health implications of policies aimed at tackling climate change. Assessments of mitigation strategies in four domains-household energy, transport, food and agriculture, and electricity generation-suggest an important message: that actions to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions often, although not always, entail net benefits for health. In some cases, the potential benefits seem to be substantial. This evidence provides an additional and immediate rationale for reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions beyond that of climate change mitigation alone. Climate change is an increasing and evolving threat to the health of populations worldwide. At the same time, major public health burdens remain in many regions. Climate change therefore adds further urgency to the task of addressing international health priorities, such as the UN Millennium Development Goals. Recognition that mitigation strategies can have substantial benefits for both health and climate protection offers the possibility of policy choices that are potentially both more cost effective and socially attractive than are those that address these priorities independently.
AB - This Series has examined the health implications of policies aimed at tackling climate change. Assessments of mitigation strategies in four domains-household energy, transport, food and agriculture, and electricity generation-suggest an important message: that actions to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions often, although not always, entail net benefits for health. In some cases, the potential benefits seem to be substantial. This evidence provides an additional and immediate rationale for reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions beyond that of climate change mitigation alone. Climate change is an increasing and evolving threat to the health of populations worldwide. At the same time, major public health burdens remain in many regions. Climate change therefore adds further urgency to the task of addressing international health priorities, such as the UN Millennium Development Goals. Recognition that mitigation strategies can have substantial benefits for both health and climate protection offers the possibility of policy choices that are potentially both more cost effective and socially attractive than are those that address these priorities independently.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=72049108387&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61759-1
DO - 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61759-1
M3 - Review article
C2 - 19942281
AN - SCOPUS:72049108387
VL - 374
SP - 2104
EP - 2114
JO - The Lancet
JF - The Lancet
SN - 0140-6736
IS - 9707
ER -
