A complex, whole-of-economy issue such as climate change demands an interdisciplinary, multi-sectoral response. However, evidence suggests that human health has remained elusive in its influence on the development of ambitious climate change mitigation policies for many national governments, despite a recognition that the combustion of fossil fuels results in pervasive short- and long-term health consequences. We use insights from literature on the political economy of health and climate change, the science–policy interface and power in policy-making, to identify additional barriers to the meaningful incorporation of health co-benefits into climate change mitigation policy development. Specifically, we identify four key interrelated areas where barriers may exist in relation to health co-benefits: discourse, efficiency, vested interests and structural challenges. With these insights in mind, we argue that the current politico-economic paradigm in which climate change is situated and the processes used to develop climate change mitigation policies do not adequately support accounting for health co-benefits. We present approaches for enhancing the role of health co-benefits in the development of climate change mitigation policies to ensure that health is embedded in the broader climate change agenda.

No abstract

Background: The long-term health effects of bushfires include the potential to trigger new and exacerbate existing mental health problems. Objective: This review aimed to determine the prevalence of long-term mental health issues in Australian populations exposed to bushfires. Method: A systematic search was conducted in five databases (Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science) to identify studies focusing on Australian populations impacted by bushfires with the prevalence of mental health issues reported at 2+ years after bushfire. The Joanna Briggs Institute prevalence critical appraisal tool was utilised. We conducted meta-analyses to determine the prevalence of general psychological distress in the general population, and a narrative synthesis. Results: We included 21 articles based on 5 studies and conducted on 3 bushfire events. Meta-analyses showed a pooled prevalence of 14% (95% CI 12%-16%) for psychological distress in the general population at 2–4 years post bushfire. The overall prevalence of long-term psychological problems in firefighters at 2–7 years ranged from 28% to 47.6%. The prevalence of some psychological issues decreased with time and was directly proportional to the level of bushfire impact. Conclusions: As the magnitude of long-term bushfire-related mental health impacts in Australia is severe, it is important to monitor psychological problems and assist communities in future. Future research needs include: (a) more studies on the full range of long-term psychological impacts of bushfires, and (b) consensus on instruments and diagnostic criteria to define mental health issues. HIGHLIGHTS First systematic review of long-term bushfire mental health issues in Australia. Indicating substantial mental health problems among affected populations. Long-term issues were linked to bushfire impact and elevated among firefighters. Highlighting need for further rigorous research on long-term disaster sequalae.

AirRater is a free smartphone app developed in 2015, supporting individuals to protect their health from environmental hazards. It does this by providing (i) location-specific and near real-time air quality, pollen and temperature information and (ii) personal symptom tracking functionality. This research sought to evaluate user perceptions of AirRater’s usability and effectiveness. We collected demographic data and completed semi-structured interviews with 42 AirRater users, identified emergent themes, and used two frameworks designed to understand and support behavior change—the Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) and the Protective Action Decision Model (PADM)—to interpret results. Of the 42 participants, almost half indicated that experiencing symptoms acted as a prompt for app use. Information provided by the app supported a majority of the 42 participants to make decisions and implement behaviors to protect their health irrespective of their location or context. The majority of participants also indicated that they shared information provided by the app with family, friends and/or colleagues. The evaluation also identified opportunities to improve the app. Several study limitations were identified, which impacts the generalizability of results beyond the populations studied. Despite these limitations, findings facilitated new insights into motivations for behavior change, and contribute to the existing literature investigating the potential for smartphone apps to support health protection from environmental hazards in a changing climate.

Reducing domestic carbon dioxide and other associated emissions can lead to short-term, localized health benefits. Quantifying and incorporating these health co-benefits into the development of national climate change mitigation policies may facilitate the adoption of stronger policies. There is, however, a dearth of research exploring the role of health co-benefits on the development of such policies. To address this knowledge gap, research was conducted in Australia involving the analysis of several data sources, including interviews carried out with Australian federal government employees directly involved in the development of mitigation policies. The resulting case study determined that, in Australia, health co-benefits play a minimal role in the development of climate change mitigation policies. Several factors influence the extent to which health co-benefits inform the development of mitigation policies. Understanding these factors may help to increase the political utility of future health co-benefits studies.