DATA FROM a climate vulnerability monitor for 184 nations are now available via an interactive online portal, making them more accessible to researchers, academics and policymakers worldwide. The data are based on the Climate Vulnerability Monitor report, first released at the UN climate conference (COP 16) in Cancun, Mexico, in 2010, and updated in September 2012. The revised data are now available through a searchable Online Data Portal — launched last month — which aims to serve as a reference for less developed countries to help them devise strategies for climate change adaptation. The monitor is co-published by DARA, a non-profit research organisation based in Spain, and its Climate Vulnerable Forum, a network of countries that are heavily affected by climate change. The 2010 edition of the report considered four indicators: weather and environmental disasters; health impacts; habitat loss; and economic stress. The revised report takes into account 34 areas of climate-related concern, including fisheries, biodiversity, oil spills, droughts, agriculture, and vector-borne diseases. “The revised monitor has a new section of analysis labelled ‘carbon’, focusing on the socio-economic ramifications of pursuing carbon-intensive and climate unsafe activities,” Matthew McKinnon, editor of the Climate Vulnerability Monitor, says. It draws on peer-reviewed scientific literature and datasets released by the UN, World Bank and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). But it adds value to the existing reports by extracting climate change data individually for 184 countries from published reports, such as IPCC assessment reports, its designers say. “Our reports have a specific challenge and focus — to assess the impact of the climate change challenge in socio-economic terms with estimates of impact and vulnerability for 184 countries for 2010 and 2030,” says McKinnon. “The IPCC has a much broader focus that goes further into the future.” Country-wise analyses for economic costs and mortality resulting from climate change in 2010 and 2030 are available on the data portal. “The data portal will now provide the public, and all interested parties, with direct access to the full set of statistical information that was published in the Monitor last September,” McKinnon explains. “The portal allows download, sorting and interactive screen views of the entire Monitor’s data, including world maps and also two-page country profiles.” Saleemul Huq, a senior fellow in the climate change group at the International Institute for Environment and Development, and a member of the monitor’s advisory panel, says: “We hope that with the online version, more people will access and use the Monitor at a national level. So far, it’s been primarily used to inform policy and debate at the global level.” (SciDev)
Housing improvements linked to good health
HAVING ENOUGH suitable living space is a key determinant of health outcomes around the world, a review of studies on housing improvements for health has found. Initiatives targeting housing improvements at the most impoverished people and those in the poorest health were more effective than generic schemes targeting entire areas, the review found. “If you want tangible health improvements, it is better to focus on targeting individuals with existing health problems,” says Hilary Thomson, lead author of the paper and senior investigator scientist at the Medical Research Council’s Social and Public Health Sciences Unit in Glasgow, United Kingdom. The review, published online last month in the Cochrane Library, analysed 39 studies to investigate whether investment in improving the physical fabric of housing is linked with better health. Three of the studies were in developing countries: Bangladesh, Cuba and Paraguay. The Paraguayan study examined the reduction in Chagas disease caused by efforts to reduce exposure to its insect vector, such as removing cracks in walls and ceilings, and improving ventilation and light. The Bangladeshi study looked at the impact on diarrhoea levels in households that received water hand pumps and sealed double-pit water latrines. Other studies included health outcomes as diverse as flu symptoms and mental health. Few adverse impacts of these housing improvements on health were reported. Overall, good predictors of better health were found to be a sufficient amount of self-reported space for household needs and a comfortable living temperature. But Thomson says health improvements are only possible if people can afford adequate, suitable and region-specific housing. “Money is a big determinant of health,” she says. “Housing costs affect disposable incomes and impact on the ability to have enough food.” Peter Williams, founder and executive director of charity Architecture for Health in Vulnerable Environments, says that “assessing the most vulnerable [people] needs to be based on micro-level economic productivity, [local] disease burden and a visual survey of living conditions”. He adds that housing improvements “must occur within a climate where all parties — government, business and society — are working together”. Williams says that focusing on housing to improve health should not solely be the remit of health agencies and that policymakers need to acknowledge the relationship between substandard living conditions and social consequences, such as poor health. “We are failing to look at the co-dependencies and interrelationships between health and housing,” he says. “Governments need to focus on social development that tackles the interdependency between these two things.” Williams says that mobilising individuals through community-level housing planning is key to minimising risk factors associated with poor health, such as overcrowding and indoor air pollution, which exacerbate the risks of tuberculosis (TB). Thomson hopes the review will facilitate better dialogue with policymakers and communicate the value of housing improvements for public health. (SciDev)
——————————————————————–