A Human Development Framework for CO2 Reductions

Although developing countries are called to participate in CO2 emission reduction efforts to avoid dangerous climate change, the implications of proposed reduction schemes in human development standards of developing countries remain a matter of debate. We show the existence of a positive and time-dependent correlation between the Human Development Index (HDI) and per capita CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. Employing this empirical relation, extrapolating the HDI, and using three population scenarios, the cumulative CO2 emissions necessary for developing countries to achieve particular HDI thresholds are assessed following a Development As Usual approach (DAU). If current demographic and development trends are maintained, we estimate that by 2050 around 85% of the world's population will live in countries with high HDI (above 0.8). In particular, 300Gt of cumulative CO2 emissions between 2000 and 2050 are estimated to be necessary for the development of 104 developing countries in the year 2000. This value represents between 20% to 30% of previously calculated CO2 budgets limiting global warming to 2{\deg}C. These constraints and results are incorporated into a CO2 reduction framework involving four domains of climate action for individual countries. The framework reserves a fair emission path for developing countries to proceed with their development by indexing country-dependent reduction rates proportional to the HDI in order to preserve the 2{\deg}C target after a particular development threshold is reached. Under this approach, global cumulative emissions by 2050 are estimated to range from 850 up to 1100Gt of CO2. These values are within the uncertainty range of emissions to limit global temperatures to 2{\deg}C.Comment: 14 pages, 7 figures, 1 tabl

Epidemic Leptospirosis Associated with Pulmonary Hemorrhage—Nicaragua, 1995

In October 1995, epidemic “hemorrhagic fever,” without jaundice or renal manifestations, was reported in rural Nicaragua following heavy flooding; 2259 residents were evaluated for nonmalarial febrile illnesses (cumulative incidence, 6.1%) and 15 (0.7%) died with pulmonary hemorrhage. A case-control study found that case-patients were more likely than controls to have ever walked in creeks (matched odds ratio [MOR], 15.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7–132.3), have household rodents (MOR, 10.4; 95% CI, 1.1–97.1), or own dogs with titers ≥ 400 to Leptospira species (MOR, 23.4; 95% CI, 3.6–`). Twenty-six of 51 case-patients had serologic or postmortem evidence of acute leptospirosis. Leptospira species were isolated from case-patients and potential animal reservoirs. This leptospirosis epidemic likely resulted from exposure to flood waters contaminated by urine from infected animals, particularly dogs. Leptospirosis should be included in the differential diagnosis for nonmalarial febrile illness, particularly during periods of flooding or when pulmonary hemorrhage occurs

Social capital and health: Does egalitarianism matter? A literature review

The aim of the paper is to critically review the notion of social capital and review empirical literature on the association between social capital and health across countries. The methodology used for the review includes a systematic search on electronic databases for peer-reviewed published literature. We categorize studies according to level of analysis (single and multilevel) and examine whether studies reveal a significant health impact of individual and area level social capital. We compare the study conclusions according to the country's degrees of economic egalitarianism. Regardless of study design, our findings indicate that a positive association (fixed effect) exists between social capital and better health irrespective of countries degree of egalitarianism. However, we find that the between-area variance (random effect) in health tends to be lower in more egalitarian countries than in less egalitarian countries. Our tentative conclusion is that an association between social capital and health at the individual level is robust with respect to the degree of egalitarianism within a country. Area level or contextual social capital may be less salient in egalitarian countries in explaining health differences across places