scholarly journals International expert workshop on the analysis of the economic and public health impacts of air pollution: workshop summary.

2002 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 1163-1168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle L Bell ◽  
Devra Davis ◽  
Luis Cifuentes ◽  
Aaron Cohen ◽  
Nelson Gouveia ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
David Rojas-Rueda

Background: Bicycling has been associated with health benefits. Local and national authorities have been promoting bicycling as a tool to improve public health and the environment. Mexico is one of the largest Latin American countries, with high levels of sedentarism and non-communicable diseases. No previous studies have estimated the health impacts of Mexico’s national bicycling scenarios. Aim: Quantify the health impacts of Mexico urban bicycling scenarios. Methodology: Quantitative Health Impact Assessment, estimating health risks and benefits of bicycling scenarios in 51,718,756 adult urban inhabitants in Mexico (between 20 and 64 years old). Five bike scenarios were created based on current bike trends in Mexico. The number of premature deaths (increased or reduced) was estimated in relation to physical activity, road traffic fatalities, and air pollution. Input data were collected from national publicly available data sources from transport, environment, health and population reports, and surveys, in addition to scientific literature. Results: We estimated that nine premature deaths are prevented each year among urban populations in Mexico on the current car-bike substitution and trip levels (1% of bike trips), with an annual health economic benefit of US $1,897,920. If Mexico achieves similar trip levels to those reported in The Netherlands (27% of bike trips), 217 premature deaths could be saved annually, with an economic impact of US $45,760,960. In all bicycling scenarios assessed in Mexico, physical activity’s health benefits outweighed the health risks related to traffic fatalities and air pollution exposure. Conclusion: The study found that bicycling promotion in Mexico would provide important health benefits. The benefits of physical activity outweigh the risk from traffic fatalities and air pollution exposure in bicyclists. At the national level, Mexico could consider using sustainable transport policies as a tool to promote public health. Specifically, the support of active transportation through bicycling and urban design improvements could encourage physical activity and its health co-benefits.


Atmosphere ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 516 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Sacks ◽  
Neal Fann ◽  
Sophie Gumy ◽  
Ingu Kim ◽  
Giulia Ruggeri ◽  
...  

Scientific evidence spanning experimental and epidemiologic studies has shown that air pollution exposures can lead to a range of health effects. Quantitative approaches that allow for the estimation of the adverse health impacts attributed to air pollution enable researchers and policy analysts to convey the public health impact of poor air quality. Multiple tools are currently available to conduct such analyses, which includes software packages designed by the World Health Organization (WHO): AirQ+, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA): Environmental Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program—Community Edition (BenMAP—CE), to quantify the number and economic value of air pollution-attributable premature deaths and illnesses. WHO’s AirQ+ and U.S. EPA’s BenMAP—CE are among the most popular tools to quantify these effects as reflected by the hundreds of peer-reviewed publications and technical reports over the past two decades that have employed these tools spanning many countries and multiple continents. Within this paper we conduct an analysis using common input parameters to compare AirQ+ and BenMAP—CE and show that the two software packages well align in the calculation of health impacts. Additionally, we detail the research questions best addressed by each tool.


2013 ◽  
Vol 67 (6) ◽  
pp. 480-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvia Medina ◽  
Ferran Ballester ◽  
Olivier Chanel ◽  
Christophe Declercq ◽  
Mathilde Pascal

2015 ◽  
Vol 106 (6) ◽  
pp. e362-e368 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Stieb ◽  
Stan Judek ◽  
Aaron van Donkelaar ◽  
Randall V. Martin ◽  
Kevin Brand ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Marcello Iriti ◽  
Prisco Piscitelli ◽  
Eduardo Missoni ◽  
Alessandro Miani

Air pollution is a recent public health issue. In 2006, the World Health Organization (WHO) published updated air quality guidelines for a number of air pollutants (including PM10 and PM2.5), which recommended for particulate matter annual average concentration levels at half or less the limit values set by European legislation. In the European Union, around 80% of the European urban population is exposed to air pollution above the levels recommended by the WHO guidelines. Only in 2015 the WHO addressed for the first time the topic of the health impacts of air pollution in its general assembly, which adopted a resolution clearly defining air pollution as the world’s largest single environmental health risk factor. Nowadays, the WHO considers air pollution as a major public health threat, causing a 7% increase in overall mortality for each increase of 10 μg/m3 in annual average of PM2.5. This result has been achieved thanks to the outstanding efforts of the director of the WHO’s Environment and Public Health Department, Dr. Maria Neira, who has devoted her full commitment to highlighting the consequences that air pollution has on people’s health. More recently, at European level, the Air Quality Directive has been subject to a fitness check, published in 2019; the European Green Deal has since announced its aim to align EU air quality standards more closely with the WHO recommendations. Every year, the European Environment Agency (EEA) publishes its “Air Quality in Europe” Report to assess the figures on air pollution across Europe and related health impacts. However, environmental data provided by official regional or national agencies—used by decision makers to adopt preventive measures such as limitations on urban traffic or domestic heating—refer to legal thresholds established by the law (usually on the basis of values set at European level, at least for the EU). These legal thresholds, however, are not adequate to fully protect population against all impacts from air pollution as recommended by WHO and scientific evidence. Therefore, we point out the need for a medical reading of environmental monitoring data that should be performed both at national and regional or local level by health authorities, to foster population health protection against air pollution and guarantee the application of the precautionary principle. A stronger cooperation between environmental agencies and health authorities is needed to address the new challenges to human and planetary health arising from air pollution and climate change. Health authorities should integrate their medical staff with new professionals and researchers with adequate training in environmental sciences to foster population health protection against air pollution. For this purposes, multi-disciplinary research units or teams should be established by local health authorities on environmental health topics, working together with medical staff and environmental agencies for a mutual integration of competencies.


2010 ◽  
Vol 102 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 159-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Elizabeth Jackson ◽  
Michael G. Yost ◽  
Catherine Karr ◽  
Cole Fitzpatrick ◽  
Brian K. Lamb ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 449 ◽  
pp. 390-400 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Pascal ◽  
M. Corso ◽  
O. Chanel ◽  
C. Declercq ◽  
C. Badaloni ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document