10 research outputs found
Impact of COVID-19 on food insecurity using multiple waves of high frequency household surveys
In response to the rapid spread of COVID-19, governments across the globe have implemented local lockdowns that have led to increased unemployment and have disrupted local and international transport routes and supply chains. Whilst such efforts aim to slow or stop the spread of the SARSCoV-2 virus, they have also resulted in increased food insecurity, whether due to reduced incomes or increased food prices. This is the first paper to track food insecurity and its determinants during the pandemic using multi-country and multi-wave evidence. Using data from 11 countries and up to 6 waves of High-Frequency Phone Survey data (household-level surveys) on COVID-19 and its impacts, we use a fixed-effects linear probability model to investigate the socioeconomic determinants of food insecurity during the pandemic for each country using household-level data over multiple waves. We control for socioeconomic characteristics including gender and education of the household head; income and poverty status of the households during the pandemic; safety nets in the form of cash and food assistance; coping strategies adopted by households; and price effects of major food items. Our findings suggest that cash safety nets appear to have been more effective than food in terms of reducing food insecurity during the pandemic; and that those particularly hard hit are female headed households (highest in Malawi: 0.541, 95% CI 0.516, 0.569; lowest in Cambodia: 0.023, 95% CI 0.022, 0.024), the less educated (highest in Djibouti: − 0.232, 95% CI − 0.221, − 0.244; lowest in Nigeria: 0.006, 95% CI − 0.005, − 0.007), and poorer households (highest in Mali: 0.382, 95% CI 0.364, 0.402; lowest in Chad: 0.135, 95% CI 0.129, 0.142). In line with the existing literature, our results show that, even controlling for income loss and poverty status, those households who had to borrow rather than rely on savings had a higher probability of suffering from food insecurity. Distinct differences in the efficacy of safety nets across the 11 countries, and the differential impact of the pandemic on different groups within societies, suggest in-depth country-specific studies are needed to understand why some countries have coped better than others. Our paper highlights the importance of improving household resilience to future systemic crises, and using evidence-based best practice in the design of relevant policy instruments
Rapid draft sequencing and real-time nanopore sequencing in a hospital outbreak of Salmonella
Background: Foodborne outbreaks of Salmonella remain a pressing public health concern. We recently detected a large outbreak of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis phage type 14b affecting more than 30 patients in our hospital. This outbreak was linked to community, national and European-wide cases. Hospital patients with Salmonella are at high risk, and require a rapid response. We initially investigated this outbreak by whole-genome sequencing using a novel rapid protocol on the Illumina MiSeq; we then integrated these data with whole-genome data from surveillance sequencing, thereby placing the outbreak in a national context. Additionally, we investigated the potential of a newly released sequencing technology, the MinION from Oxford Nanopore Technologies, in the management of a hospital outbreak of Salmonella. Results: We demonstrate that rapid MiSeq sequencing can reduce the time to answer compared to the standard sequencing protocol with no impact on the results. We show, for the first time, that the MinION can acquire clinically relevant information in real time and within minutes of a DNA library being loaded. MinION sequencing permits confident assignment to species level within 20 min. Using a novel streaming phylogenetic placement method samples can be assigned to a serotype in 40 min and determined to be part of the outbreak in less than 2 h. Conclusions: Both approaches yielded reliable and actionable clinical information on the Salmonella outbreak in less than half a day. The rapid availability of such information may facilitate more informed epidemiological investigations and influence infection control practices
Landscape and management influences on smallholder agroforestry yields show shifts during a climate shock
Sustaining yields for smallholder perennial agriculture under a rapidly changing climate regime may require consideration of landscape features and on-farm management decisions in tandem. Optimising landscape and management may not be possible for maximising yields in any one year but maintaining heterogeneous landscapes could be an important climate adaptation strategy. In this study, we observed elevation, forest patch and shade management gradients affecting smallholder coffee (Coffea arabica) yields in a ‘normal’ year versus the 2015/16 El Niño. We generally found a benefit to yields from having leguminous shade trees and low canopy openness, while maintaining diverse shade or varying canopy openness had more complex influences during a climate shock. The two years of observed climate shock were dominated by either drought or high temperatures, with yield responses generally negative. Climate projections for East Africa predict more erratic rainfall and higher temperatures, which will disproportionately impact smallholder farmers
The 2023 Latin America report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: the imperative for health-centred climate-resilient development
In 2023, a series of climatological and political events unfolded, partly driving forward the global climate and health
agenda while simultaneously exposing important disparities and vulnerabilities to climate-related events. On the
policy front, a significant step forward was marked by the inaugural Health Day at COP28, acknowledging the
profound impacts of climate change on health. However, the first-ever Global Stocktake showed an important gap
between the current progress and the targets outlined in the Paris Agreement, underscoring the urgent need for
further and decisive action. From a Latin American
perspective, some questions arise: How do we achieve
the change that is needed? How to address the vulnerabilities to climate change in a region with longstanding social inequities? How do we promote intersectoral collaboration to face a complex problem such as climate
change? The debate is still ongoing, and in many instances, it is just starting.
The renamed regional centre Lancet Countdown Latin America (previously named Lancet Countdown South America)
expanded its geographical scope adding Mexico and five Central American countries: Costa Rica, El Salvador,
Guatemala, Honduras, and Panama, as a response to the need for stronger collaboration in a region with significant
social disparities, including research capacities and funding. The centre is an independent and multidisciplinary
collaboration that tracks the links between health and climate change in Latin America, following the global Lancet
Countdown’s methodologies and five domains. The Lancet Countdown Latin America work hinges on the
commitment of 23 regional academic institutions, United Nations agencies, and 34 researchers who generously
contribute their time and expertise.
Building from the first report, the 2023 report of the Lancet Countdown Latin America, presents 34 indicators that
track the relationship between health and climate change up to 2022, aiming at providing evidence to public decisionmaking with the purpose of improving the health and wellbeing of Latin American populations and reducing social
inequities through climate actions focusing on health.
This report shows that Latin American populations continue to observe a growing exposure to changing climatic
conditions. A warming trend has been observed across all countries in Latin America, with severe direct impacts. In
2022, people were exposed to ambient temperatures, on average, 0.38 ◦C higher than in 1986–2005, with Paraguay
experiencing the highest anomaly (+1.9 ◦C), followed by Argentina (+1.2 ◦C) and Uruguay (+0.9 ◦C) (indicator 1.1.1).
In 2013–2022, infants were exposed to 248% more heatwave days and people over 65 years old were exposed to 271%
more heatwave days than in 1986–2005 (indicator 1.1.2). Also, compared to 1991–2000, in 2013–2022, there were 256
and 189 additional annual hours per person, during which ambient heat posed at least moderate and high risk of heat
stress during light outdoor physical activity in Latin America, respectively (indicator 1.1.3). Finally, the region had a
140% increase in heat-related mortality from 2000–2009 to 2013–2022 (indicator 1.1.4).
Changes in ecosystems have led to an increased risk of wildfires, exposing individuals to very or extremely high fire
danger for more extended periods (indicator 1.2.1). Additionally, the transmission potential for dengue by Aedes
aegypti mosquitoes has risen by 54% from 1951–1960 to 2013–2022 (indicator 1.3), which aligns with the recent
outbreaks and increasing dengue cases observed across Latin America in recent months.
Based on the 2023 report of the Lancet Countdown Latin America, there are three key messages that Latin America
needs to further explore and advance for a health-centred climate-resilient development.
Latin American countries require intersectoral public policies that simultaneously increase climate resilience, reduce social
inequities, improve population health, and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
The findings show that adaptation policies in Latin America remain weak, with a pressing need for robust vulnerability and adaptation (V&A) assessments to address climate risks effectively. Unfortunately, such assessments are
scarce. Up to 2021, Brazil is the only country that has completed and officially reported a V&A to the 2021 Global
Survey conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO). Argentina, Guatemala, and Panama have also conducted them, but they have not been reported (indicator 2.1.1). Similarly, efforts in developing and implementing
Health National Adaptation Plans (HNAPs) are varied and limited in scope. Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay are the only
countries that have an HNAP (indicator 2.1.2). Moreover, self-reported city-level climate change risk assessments are
very limited in the region (indicator 2.1.3).
The collaboration between meteorological and health sectors remains insufficient, with only Argentina, Brazil,
Colombia, and Guatemala self-reporting some level of integration (indicator 2.2.1), hindering comprehensive responses to climate-related health risks in the region. Additionally, despite the urgent need for action, there has been
minimal progress in increasing urban greenspaces across the region since 2015, with only Colombia, Nicaragua, and
Venezuela showing slight improvements (indicator 2.2.2). Compounding these challenges is the decrease in funding
for climate change adaptation projects in Latin America, as evidenced by the 16% drop in funds allocated by the
Green Climate Fund (GCF) in 2022 compared to 2021. Alarmingly, none of the funds approved in 2022 were directed
toward climate change and health projects, highlighting a critical gap in addressing health-related climate risks
(indicator 2.2.3).
From a vulnerability perspective, the Mosquito Risk Index (MoRI) indicates an overall decrease in severe mosquitoborne disease risk in the region due to improvements in water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) (indicator 2.3.1).
Brazil and Paraguay were the only countries that showed an increase in this indicator. It is worth noting that significant temporal variation within and between countries still persists, suggesting inadequate preparedness for
climate-related changes.
Overall, population health is not solely determined by the health sector, nor are climate policies a sole responsibility of
the environmental sector. More and stronger intersectoral collaboration is needed to pave development pathways that
consider solid adaptation to climate change, greater reductions of GHG emissions, and that increase social equity and
population health. These policies involve sectors such as finance, transport, energy, housing, health, and agriculture,
requiring institutional structures and policy instruments that allow long-term intersectoral collaboration.
Latin American countries need to accelerate an energy transition that prioritises people’s health and wellbeing, reduces energy
poverty and air pollution, and maximises health and economic gains.
In Latin America, there is a notable disparity in energy transition, with electricity generation from coal increasing by
an average of 2.6% from 1991–2000 to 2011–2020, posing a challenge to efforts aimed at phasing out coal (indicator
3.1.1). However, this percentage increase is conservative as it may not include all the fossil fuels for thermoelectric
electricity generation, especially during climate-related events and when hydropower is affected (Panel 4). Yet,
renewable energy sources have been growing, increasing by an average of 5.7% during the same period. Access to
clean fuels for cooking remains a concern, with 46.3% of the rural population in Central America and 23.3% in South
America lacking access to clean fuels in 2022 (indicator 3.1.2). It is crucial to highlight the concerning overreliance on
fossil fuels, particularly liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), as a primary cooking fuel. A significant majority of Latin
American populations, approximately 74.6%, rely on LPG for cooking. Transitioning to cleaner heating and cooking
alternatives could also have a health benefit by reducing household air pollution-related mortality. Fossil fuels
continue to dominate road transport energy in Latin America, accounting for 96%, although some South American
countries are increasing the use of biofuels (indicator 3.1.3). Premature mortality attributable to fossil-fuel-derived
PM2.5 has shown varied trends across countries, increasing by 3.9% from 2005 to 2020 across Latin America,
which corresponds to 123.5 premature deaths per million people (indicator 3.2.1). The Latin American countries with
the highest premature mortality rate attributable to PM2.5 in 2020 were Chile, Peru, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, and
Paraguay. Of the total premature deaths attributable to PM2.5 in 2020, 19.1% was from transport, 12.3% from
households, 11.6% from industry, and 11% from agriculture.
From emission and capture of GHG perspective, commodity-driven deforestation and expansion of agricultural land
remain major contributors to tree cover loss in the region, accounting for around 80% of the total loss (indicator 3.3).
Additionally, animal-based food production in Latin America contributes 85% to agricultural CO2 equivalent emissions, with Argentina, Brazil, Panama, Paraguay, and Uruguay ranking highest in per capita emissions (indicator
3.4.1). From a health perspective, in 2020, approximately 870,000 deaths were associated with imbalanced diets, of
which 155,000 (18%) were linked to high intake of red and processed meat and dairy products (indicator 3.4.2).
Energy transition in Latin America is still in its infancy, and as a result, millions of people are currently exposed to
dangerous levels of air pollution and energy poverty (i.e., lack of access to essential energy sources or services). As
shown in this report, the levels of air pollution, outdoors and indoors, are a significant problem in the whole region,
with marked disparities between urban and rural areas. In 2022, Peru, Chile, Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, El
Salvador, Brazil, Uruguay, Honduras, Panama, and Nicaragua were in the top 100 most polluted countries globally.
Transitioning to cleaner sources of energy, phasing out fossil fuels, and promoting better energy efficiency in the
industrial and housing sectors are not only climate mitigation measures but also huge health and economic opportunities for more prosperous and healthy societies.
Latin American countries need to increase climate finance through permanent fiscal commitments and multilateral development banks to pave climate-resilient development pathways.
Climate change poses significant economic costs, with investments in mitigation and adaptation measures
progressing slowly. In 2022, economic losses due to weather-related extreme events in Latin America were
US23 billion. Venezuela had the highest net subsidies relative to current health expenditure (123%), followed by Argentina (10.5%), Bolivia (10.3%), Ecuador (8.3%), and Chile (5.6%) (indicator 4.2.1).
Fossil fuel-based energy is today more expensive than renewable energy. Fossil fuel burning drives climate change
and damages the environment on which people depend, and air pollution derived from the burning of fossil fuels
causes seven million premature deaths each year worldwide, along with a substantial burden of disease. Transitioning to sustainable, zero-emission energy sources, fostering healthier food systems, and expediting adaptation
efforts promise not only environmental benefits but also significant economic gains. However, to implement mitigation and adaptation policies that also improve social wellbeing and prosperity, stronger and solid financial systems
are needed. Climate finance in Latin American countries is scarce and strongly depends on political cycles, which
threatens adequate responses to the current and future challenges.
Progress on the climate agenda is lagging behind the urgent pace required. While engagement with the intersection
of health and climate change is increasing, government involvement remains inadequate. Newspaper coverage of
health and climate change has been on the rise, peaking in 2022, yet the proportion of climate change articles discussing health has declined over time (indicator 5.1). Although there has been significant growth in the number of
scientific papers focusing on Latin America, it still represents less than 4% of global publications on the subject
(indicator 5.3). And, while health was mentioned by most Latin American countries at the UN General Debate in
2022, only a few addressed the intersection of health and climate change, indicating a lack of awareness at the
governmental level (indicator 5.4).
The 2023 Lancet Countdown Latin America report underscores the cascading and compounding health impacts of
anthropogenic climate change, marked by increased exposure to heatwaves, wildfires, and vector-borne diseases.
Specifically, for Latin America, the report emphasises three critical messages: the urgent action to implement
intersectoral public policies that enhance climate resilience across the region; the pressing need to prioritise an
energy transition that focuses on health co-benefits and wellbeing, and lastly, that need for increasing climate finance
by committing to sustained fiscal efforts and engaging with multilateral development banks. By understanding the
problems, addressing the gaps, and taking decisive action, Latin America can navigate the challenges of climate
change, fostering a more sustainable and resilient future for its population.
Spanish and Portuguese translated versions of this Summary can be found in Appendix B and C, respectively.
The full translated report in Spanish is available in Appendix D
One Hundred Priority Questions for the Development of Sustainable Food Systems in Sub-Saharan Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa is facing an expected doubling of human population and tripling of food demand over the next quarter century, posing a range of severe environmental, political, and socio-economic challenges. In some cases, key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are in direct conflict, raising difficult policy and funding decisions, particularly in relation to trade-offs between food production, social inequality, and ecosystem health. In this study, we used a horizon-scanning approach to identify 100 practical or research-focused questions that, if answered, would have the greatest positive impact on addressing these trade-offs and ensuring future productivity and resilience of food-production systems across sub-Saharan Africa. Through direct canvassing of opinions, we obtained 1339 questions from 331 experts based in 55 countries. We then used online voting and participatory workshops to produce a final list of 100 questions divided into 12 thematic sections spanning topics from gender inequality to technological adoption and climate change. Using data on the background of respondents, we show that perspectives and priorities can vary, but they are largely consistent across different professional and geographical contexts. We hope these questions provide a template for establishing new research directions and prioritising funding decisions in sub-Saharan Africa
