From Manaus to Maputo: Toward a Public Health and Biodiversity Framework

The linkages between human health, biodiversity, ecosystems, and the life-supporting services that they provide are varied and complex. The traditional neglect of this nexus by policy-makers perpetuates threats posed to ecosystems with potentially critical impacts on global health. The Convention on Biological Diversity and the World Health Organization recently co-convened two regional workshops on these intricate but vital linkages. From discussions held with policy-makers and experts in the biodiversity and health sectors, spanning some 50 countries in Africa and the Americas, we derive a broad framework for the development of national and regional public health and biodiversity strategies relevant to strategic planning processes in the emerging post-2015 development context

Connecting global priorities: biodiversity and human health: a state of knowledge review.

Healthy communities rely on well-functioning ecosystems. They provide clean air, fresh water, medicines and food security. They also limit disease and stabilize the climate. But biodiversity loss is happening at unprecedented rates, impacting human health worldwide.The report, Connecting Global Priorities: Biodiversity and Human Health, focuses on the complex and multi-faceted connections between biodiversity and human health, and how the loss of biodiversity and corresponding ecosystem services may negatively influence health. One of the first integrative reviews of its kind, the report brings together knowledge from several scientific disciplines, including public health, conservation, agriculture, epidemiology and development. The book is a joint publication of the Convention on Biological Diversity and World Health Organization. Danny Hunter, Senior Scientist, Bioversity International is one of the Lead Coordinating Authors of the book and co-lead author on two chapters:Chapter 5: Agricultural biodiversity and food security Chapter 6: Biodiversity and nutritio

Climate change and human health: impacts, vulnerability and public health.

It is now widely accepted that climate change is occurring as a result of the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere arising from the combustion of fossil fuels. Climate change may affect health through a range of pathways, for example as a result of increased frequency and intensity of heat waves, reduction in cold related deaths, increased floods and droughts, changes in the distribution of vector-borne diseases and effects on the risk of disasters and malnutrition. The overall balance of effects on health is likely to be negative and populations in low-income countries are likely to be particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects. The experience of the 2003 heat wave in Europe shows that high-income countries may also be adversely affected. Adaptation to climate change requires public health strategies and improved surveillance. Mitigation of climate change by reducing the use of fossil fuels and increasing a number of uses of the renewable energy technologies should improve health in the near-term by reducing exposure to air pollution

Climate change and human health: impacts, vulnerability, and mitigation.

It is now widely accepted that climate change is occurring as a result of the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere arising from the combustion of fossil fuels. Climate change may affect health through a range of pathways--eg, as a result of increased frequency and intensity of heat waves, reduction in cold-related deaths, increased floods and droughts, changes in the distribution of vector-borne diseases, and effects on the risk of disasters and malnutrition. The overall balance of effects on health is likely to be negative and populations in low-income countries are likely to be particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects. The experience of the 2003 heat wave in Europe shows that high-income countries might also be adversely affected. Adaptation to climate change requires public-health strategies and improved surveillance. Mitigation of climate change by reducing the use of fossil fuels and increasing the use of a number of renewable energy technologies should improve health in the near term by reducing exposure to air pollution

Our planet, our health, our future. Human health and the Rio conventions: biological diversity, climate change and desertification

Health is our most basic human right and one of the most important indicators of sustainable development. We rely on healthy ecosystems to support healthy communities and societies. Wellfunctioning ecosystems provide goods and services essential for human health. These include nutrition and food security, clean air and fresh water, medicines, cultural and spiritual values, and contributions to local livelihoods and economic development. They can also help to limit disease and stabilize the climate. Health policies need to recognize these essential contributions. The three so-called Rio Conventions arising from the 1992 Earth Summit – the Convention on Biological Diversity, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification – together aim to maintain well-functioning ecosystems for the benefit of humanity. There is growing evidence of the impacts of global environmental changes on ecosystems and people, and a renewed consciousness among peoples and nations of the need to act quickly to protect the planet’s ecological and climatic systems. In the last two decades, the Rio Conventions have brought global attention to the impacts of anthropogenic change on the ecosystems of the planet. Increasingly unsustainable practices are placing pressure on natural resources to meet the demands of our economies and the needs of a rapidly growing global population, resulting in soil, water and air pollution, increased emissions of greenhouse gases, deforestation and land use change, expanded urban areas, introduction of non-native species, and inadequately planned development of water and land resources to meet food and energy needs. These changes are having both direct and indirect impacts on our climate, ecosystems and biological diversity. More than ever, the pursuit of public health, at all levels from local to global, now depends on careful attention to the processes of global environmental change. Traditional knowledge and scientific evidence both point to the inexorable role of global environmental changes in terms of their impact on human health and well-being. In many countries, anthropogenic changes to agriculture-related ecosystems have resulted in great benefits for human health and well-being, in particular through increased global food production and improved food security. These positive impacts, however, have not benefited everyone, and unsustainable levels of use of ecosystems have resulted in irreparable loss and degradation, with negative consequences for health and well-being. These range from emerging infectious diseases to malnutrition, and contribute to the rapid rise in noncommunicable diseases. Large-scale human transformation of the environment has contributed to increased disease burdens associated with the expansion of ecological and climatic conditions favourable for disease vectors. For all humans, the provision of adequate nutrition, clean water, and long-term food security depend directly on functioning agro-ecosystems and indirectly on the regulating ecosystem services of the biosphere; these ecosystem services can be eroded if overexploited and poorly managed

Misalignment between perceptions and actual global burden of disease: evidence from the US population

Significant funding of health programs in low-income countries comes from external sources, mainly private donors and national development agencies of high-income countries. How these external funds are allocated remains a subject of ongoing debate, as studies have revealed that external funding may misalign with the underlying disease burden. One determinant of the priorities set by both private donors and development agencies is the perceptions of populations living in high-income countries about which diseases are legitimate for global health intervention. While research has been conducted on the priorities expressed by recipient communities, relatively less has been done to assess those of the donating country. To investigate people's beliefs about the disease burden in high-income countries, we compared publicly available data from U.S. surveys of people's perceptions of the leading causes of death in developing countries against measures of the actual disease burden from the World Health Organization. We found little correlation between the U.S. public's perception and the actual disease burden, measured as either mortality or disability-adjusted life years. While there is potential for reverse causality, so that donor programs drive public perceptions, these findings suggest that increasing the general population's awareness of the true global disease burden could help better align global health funding with population health needs

Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: overview and implications for policy makers

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

Invited Editorial: Health as a crucial driver for climate policy

Health impacts of climate change and the need to prevent them should be at centre stage of the ongoing debate on climate policies (1). We have specifically prepared this series of papers to be available for the COP151 conference in Copenhagen, to which the world looks to agree on targets and procedures to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on the basis of fair burden-sharing between high and low-income countries