• Energy Research

Despite considerable global attention to the issues of climate change, relatively little priority has been given to the likely effects on human health of current and future changes in the global climate. We identify three major societal determinants that influence the impact of climate change on human health, namely the application of scholarship and knowledge; economic and commercial considerations; and actions of governments and global agencies.The three major areas are each discussed in terms of the ways in which they facilitate and frustrate attempts to protect human health from the effects of climate change. Academia still pays very little attention to the effects of climate on health in poorer countries. Enterprise is starting to recognise that healthy commerce depends on healthy people, and so climate change presents long-term threats if it compromises health. Governments and international agencies are very active, but often face immovable vested interests in other sectors. Overall, there tends to be too little interaction between the three areas, and this means that potential synergies and co-benefits are not always realised.More attention from academia, enterprise, and international agencies needs to be given to the potential threats the climate change presents to human health. However, there needs to also be much closer collaboration between all three areas in order to capitalise on possible synergies that can be achieved between them.

The Lancet Countdown is an international, multidisciplinary collaboration, dedicated to monitoring the evolving health profile of climate change, and providing an independent assessment of the delivery of commitments made by governments worldwide under the Paris Agreement.\ud The 2019 report presents an annual update of 41 indicators across five key domains: climate change impacts, exposures, and vulnerability; adaptation, planning, and resilience for health; mitigation actions and health co-benefits; economics and finance; and public and political engagement. The report represents the findings and consensus of 35 leading academic institutions and UN agencies from every continent. Each year, the methods and data that underpin the Lancet Countdown's indicators are further developed and improved, with updates described at each stage of this report. The collaboration draws on the world-class expertise of climate scientists; ecologists; mathematicians; engineers; energy, food, and transport experts; economists; social and political scientists; public health professionals; and doctors, to generate the quality and diversity of data required.\ud The science of climate change describes a range of possible futures, which are largely dependent on the degree of action or inaction in the face of a warming world. The policies implemented will have far-reaching effects in determining these eventualities, with the indicators tracked here monitoring both the present-day effects of climate change, as well as the worldwide response. Understanding these decisions as a choice between one of two pathways—one that continues with the business as usual response and one that redirects to a future that remains “well below 2°C”—helps to bring the importance of recognising the effects of climate change and the necessary response to the forefront.\ud Evidence provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the International Energy Agency, and the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration clarifies the degree and magnitude of climate change experienced today and contextualises these two pathways.

Despite intensive research activity within the area of climate change, substantial knowledge gaps still remain regarding the potential future impacts of climate change on human health. A key shortcoming in the scientific understanding of these impacts is the lack of studies that are conducted in a coordinated and consistent fashion, producing directly comparable outputs. This Viewpoint discusses and exemplifies a bottom-up initiative generating new research evidence in a more coordinated and consistent way compared with previous efforts. It describes one of the largest model comparisons of projected health impacts due to climate change, so far. Yet, the included studies constitute only a selection of health impacts in a variety of geographical locations, and are therefore not a comprehensive assessment of all possible impact pathways and potential consequences. The new findings of these studies shed light on the complex and multidirectional impacts of climate change on health, where impacts can be both adverse or beneficial. However, the adverse impacts dominate overall, especially in the scenarios with more greenhouse gas forcing. Overall, the future population at risk of disease and incidence rates are predicted to increase substantially, but in a highly location-specific and disease-specific fashion. Greenhouse gas emission mitigation can substantially reduce risk and resultant morbidity and mortality. The potential positive impact of adaptation has not been included in the models applied, and thus remains a major source of uncertainty. This bottom-up initiative lays out a research strategy that brings more meaningful research outputs and calls for greater coordination of research initiatives across the health community.