Ancillary human health benefits of improved air quality resulting from climate change mitigation

Bell, Michelle L.; Davis, Devra Lee; Cifuentes, Luis A.; Krupnick, Alan; Morgenstern, Richard D.; Thurston, George D.

doi:10.1186/1476-069x-7-41

Cited by 118 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 156 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The health co-benefits of climate change mitigation activities may be substantial, but to date, co-benefits studies have had limited usefulness in policy decision making because of variability in methods used, health outcomes assessed, the limited number of sectors evaluated, and uncertainty regarding climate change related damages (Bell et al, 2008, Nemet et al, 2010Jack andKinney, 2010, Groosman et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A wedge-based approach to estimating health co-benefits of climate change mitigation activities in the United States

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A wedge-based approach to estimating health co-benefits of climate change mitigation activities in the United States

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…WTP studies use a foundational principle of neoclassical welfare economics -the substitutability of goods -to provide estimates of preferences for improved health (Davis et al, 2000a;Li et al, 2004;Amann et al, 2011;Bell et al, 2008;Jack and Kinney, 2010). Economists generally agree that WTP is the ideal means of monetizing health improvements (U.S. EPA, 2004).…”

Section: Estimate the Monetary Value Of Health And Other Co-benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most common health impacts evaluated are the incidence of premature mortality and certain debilitating illnesses such as chronic and acute bronchitis. Premature deaths are by far the r the greatest human health impact of air pollution (Davis et al, 2000b;Bell et al, 2008).…”

Section: Figure 2: Population Distribution In Shanghai In 1995 (Uppermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Washington have developed a tool, the Fast Environmental Policy Regulatory Evaluation Tool (FERET) to evaluate how policy changes impact air-pollution related health outcomes and economic impacts. The U.S. EPA's Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program (BenMAP) estimates population-level exposures and monetizes health end-points (Bell et al, 2008;see 3.3.4. below for a more extensive description of BenMAP).…”

Section: Figure 2: Population Distribution In Shanghai In 1995 (Uppermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

International Experiences with Quantifying the Co-Benefits of Energy-Efficiency and Greenhouse-Gas Mitigation Programs and Policies

Williams¹

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Executive SummaryImproving the efficiency of energy production and consumption and switching to lower carbon energy sources can significantly decrease carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions and reduce climate change impacts. A growing body of research has found that these measures can also directly mitigate many non-climate change related human health hazards and environmental damage. Positive impacts of policies and programs that occur in addition to the intended primary policy goal are called co-benefits. Policy analysis relies on forecasting and comparing the costs of policy and program implementation and the benefits that accrue to society from implementation. GHG reduction and energy efficiency policies and programs face political resistance in part because of the difficulty of quantifying their benefits. On the one hand, climate change mitigation policy benefits are often global, long-term, and subject to large uncertainties, and subsidized energy pricing can reduce the direct monetary benefits of energy efficiency policies to below their cost. On the other hand, the co-benefits that accrue from these efforts' resultant reductions in conventional air pollution (such as improved health, agricultural productivity, reduced damage to infrastructure, and local ecosystem improvements) are generally near term, local, and more certain than climate change mitigation benefits and larger than the monetary value of energy savings. The incorporation of co-benefits into energy efficiency and climate mitigation policy and program analysis therefore might significantly increase the uptake of these policies. Faster policy uptake is especially important in developing countries because ongoing development efforts that do not consider co-benefits may lock in suboptimal technologies and infrastructure and result in high costs in future years.Over the past two decades, studies have repeatedly documented that non-climate change related benefits of energy efficiency and fuel conversion efforts, as a part of GHG mitigation strategies, can be from between 30% to over 100% of the costs of such policies and programs strategies. Policy makers around the world are increasingly interested in including both GHG and non-GHG impacts in analyses of energy efficiency and fuel switching policies and programs and a set of methodologies has matured from the efforts of early moving jurisdictions such as the European Union, the United States, and Japan.ii ES.1. General Steps for Quantifying Co-benefitsThere are four general steps for quantifying the co-benefits of energy efficiency and GHG emissions reduction policies discussed in this report:1. Calculating emissions differences between base case and alternative policy scenarios.2. Applying air dispersion modeling or simplifications to characterize and compare concentrations of pollutants.3. Estimating impacts for each scenario and comparing them against each other (using, for example, population-adjusted C-R functions to find health impacts).4. Monetizing or otherwise quantifying those impacts in rela...

show abstract

“…MAPS stands out for the applied contributions on co-benefits assessments in national policy processes in developing countries. The IPCC advances general concerns on the relationship between climate mitigation and SD, definitions and concepts, integrated assessment models, uncertainties and, very importantly, sectoral approaches including health and air pollution (Bell et al, 2008;IPCC, 2014;McCollum et al, 2013;Nemet, Holloway, & Meier, 2010;Riahi et al, 2012;Smith et al, 2009). …”

Section: Knowledge Network: Knowledge Holders and Their Ideasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Novel shapes of South–South collaboration: emerging knowledge networks on co-benefits of climate and development policies

Rennkamp

Boulle

2017

Climate and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyses knowledge networks on co-benefits of climate and development. The world's most sizeable populations live in middle-income countries with emerging economies and growing emissions. This situation requires political intervention to facilitate economic growth, job creation and poverty eradication alongside efforts to control emissions growth. This interdisciplinary study draws on concepts and methods from sociology, political science, science and technology studies and the management literature. The authors combine social network and discourse network analysis in an innovative way. The methodology analyses both the interactions between researchers as well as their actual knowledge contributions. The study argues that there is a substantial network of knowledge holders involved in knowledge creation on climate and development co-benefits. Our analysis shows the type of interactions between two knowledge networks as well as new knowledge emerging from these networks. Research groups and practitioners have produced 17 novel knowledge contributions, ranging from definitions of co-benefits, methodology and implementation. Yet the networks remain loosely connected. Practitioners who have less time to assess academic literature could benefit from closer interactions with more academically oriented experts and vice versa.

show abstract

Ancillary human health benefits of improved air quality resulting from climate change mitigation

Cited by 118 publications

References 156 publications

A wedge-based approach to estimating health co-benefits of climate change mitigation activities in the United States

A wedge-based approach to estimating health co-benefits of climate change mitigation activities in the United States

International Experiences with Quantifying the Co-Benefits of Energy-Efficiency and Greenhouse-Gas Mitigation Programs and Policies

Novel shapes of South–South collaboration: emerging knowledge networks on co-benefits of climate and development policies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About