A man stands in the center of the town of Khairpur Nathan Shah, Sindh, Pakistan, which had been … [+]
The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) just published a report on climate change’s impact on health, warning of dire consequences should the world not act to curb global warming.
What KNAW calls a “climate crisis” is leading to an increase in frequency of wildfires, heat waves, floods, and extreme drought.
If climate change continues to warm the earth unabated, billions of people could experience “heat stress, infectious diseases, malnutrition, flooding, and mental health problems,” according to the report. The survival of many communities is at stake, as excessive heat, drought, or flooding could make them become unlivable. Last year, in Pakistan, we witnessed how floods displaced 30 million people while killing nearly 2,000. Air pollution may cause certain large metropolises to become “uninhabitable” by 2050.
Biodiversity is rapidly declining. According to multiple studies, including the KNAW report, about a third of plants and up to 40% of animals are at risk of extinction, while around the same percentage of ecosystems is in jeopardy of collapse.
Causes of decline in biodiversity include deforestation, unsustainable land use, and habitat destruction. The steep drop in biodiversity can have major repercussions for public health, whether by way of the impact on food supply or a disruption of ecosystem equilibrium. Also, climate change is facilitating the expansion of the range of some of the world’s worst infectious diseases, such as malaria. Many diseases are migrating to places where they weren’t prevalent before.
If these environmental changes continue unchecked, billions of people worldwide may face serious health risks by the end of this century. What’s worse, the report concludes, climate change may ultimately be responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people by the end of this century.
The Dutch KNAW isn’t alone in its rather grim assessment. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), climate change is “the single biggest health threat facing humanity in the 21st century.” As the WHO notes, climate change impacts the air we breathe, the food we eat, the water we drink, and the environment we live in.
Planetary Health
Planetary Health was launched as a new scientific field in 2015. It focuses on the consequences of global environmental change for the “health and survival of all species living on earth.”
The Dutch report presents the views of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences on the emerging field of Planetary Health. It identifies the main knowledge gaps and proposes a robust research agenda.
As a scientific program, Planetary Health is premised on the understanding that all life on earth is interconnected, as is the case with any ecosystem, large or small, and that safeguarding the health and survival of all species is a moral imperative.
A better scientific understanding of the interconnectedness cited in the KNAW report may yield a greater awareness of the health risks associated with global environmental change. Importantly, this may also enable more effective policies aimed at altering energy consumption by key stakeholders and the carbon footprint they leave behind.
Planetary Health asks how nations can adapt to more frequent extreme weather events, the rise in sea levels, and and other climate change-related risks in order to avoid the concomitant negative health consequences. Here, Planetary Health recognizes that not all countries will be affected equally by climate change. High-income countries will likely be able to cope better than poor nations in managing the health effects of global environmental change in both the short and medium term.
Complexity of Planetary Health
There is pushback from climate change skeptics, especially regarding the degree to which humans are held culpable for global warming, but also just how much damage to the environment has been done. This isn’t simply a reflection of societal polarization with respect to science and public health, or fringe climate change deniers claiming that the recent observed coherent global warming is merely part of a natural climate cycle.
Rather, there is a more sophisticated argument at hand, in which the causes of the problems we observe in the world’s ecosystems are multifactorial. Take food supply, for example. The KNAW report and others like it point to increased frequency of temperature and precipitation extremes, as well as crop pest and disease risks as long-term threats to food security. Furthermore, as climate change accelerates this could intensify the dangers to crop yields to levels that can’t be managed.
But, climate change doesn’t have to be a “harbinger of global famine.” In fact, food supply has apparently been increasing despite a changing climate. And, prior to 2018, there had been a decades-long marked decrease in the number of people dying globally in famines.
This decline in famine-related deaths, however, may be in danger of reversing soon as more than 345 million people are currently on the precipice of going hungry as they face very high levels of food insecurity. This constitutes a sharp increase of 200 million vulnerable people compared to pre-Covid-19 pandemic levels.
Climate change is one of many factors that are giving rise to this increase. War, supply-chain issues, and the corresponding increase in food prices are contributing as well.
Do enough people care?
Having lived and worked in Europe for many years, I was invariably struck by the fact that climate change was a major headline in the news on an almost daily basis. And the environmental threat isn’t merely seen in local terms. It’s viewed as a global peril.
Indeed, a survey showed that 93% of European Union citizens view climate change as a serious problem, and 78% see it as a very serious problem. In addition, 29% chose either climate change (18%), deterioration of nature (7%), or health problems due to pollution (4%) as the single most serious problem facing mankind.
On the other hand, in the U.S., global warming ranked 24th on a list of 29 issues that voters said they’d think about when deciding whom to vote for last November. Only 30% of voters said they are “very worried” about climate change and more than two-thirds said they “rarely” or “never” discuss the issue with family or friends. For these folks, ignorance is bliss, perhaps.
This may be due to America’s insular character in some respects, as what happens globally matters less to many U.S. citizens. Moreover, it seems that many politicians in the U.S. aren’t as prone to taking a long-term perspective when it comes to issues such as the climate.
Nevertheless, environmental activism appears to be winning the long game, if you will. Author, educator, and environmentalist Bill McKibben, for example, has been at the vanguard of the environmental movement since the 1980s. And for decades, the views of activists and scientists have influenced prominent lawmakers, but also policymakers in the executive branch of government, under multiple Administrations.
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which President Biden signed into law in August 2022, contains plenty of climate provisions, all of which are informed by the consensus view among scientists that climate disruption is reaching crisis levels. Specifically, the law creates numerous financial incentives to encourage the growth of green industries and subsidize eco-friendly consumer purchases such as heat pumps and electric vehicles. The U.S. federal government will spend approximately $370 billion of IRA-sponsored funds to address climate change.
But whether this is a sufficient investment remains to be seen. Moreover, there is a large and vocal faction of legislators and presidential candidates who say they want to reverse course and repeal the climate legislation that’s on the books. How much of this is political bluster is anyone’s guess.
Can something be done?
The KNAW report isn’t entirely pessimistic about the future. It says that fortunately many negative consequences of climate change can still be avoided if more measures are adopted in the short term.
Throughout Europe a plethora of policy measures have already been implemented over the past few decades, which has led to decarbonization, a reduction in emissions and air pollution, and a series of pledges to invest heavily in clean energy and wean nations off of the need for fossil fuels. And now, with enactment of the IRA, the U.S. is making up for lost time.
The jury is out on whether technological adaptations, such as the transition to renewable energy, can turn the tide or whether a more drastic overhaul is necessary, such as a contraction of production and consumption (sometimes called “de-growth”). In any case, the KNAW report says that transformative changes will be necessary to the energy, transportation, manufacturing, agricultural and other core sectors of the economy.
Overcoming food security issues, for instance, will require substantial public support for agricultural research and development to increase crop yields globally, adapt to ever-changing weather conditions, and reduce the land use and greenhouse gas emissions that derive from food production.
All stakeholders, from governments to the private sector to individual citizens, will have to fundamentally change their policies and behaviors to achieve sustainability. All things considered, society must overcome ingrained habits, and transcend vested, special interests with a view towards achieving a common purpose. A lofty and tall order, to be sure. but one that the KNAW report asserts is necessary.