New study confirms the relationship between toxic pollution, climate risk to human health-ScienceDaily

For over 30 years, scientists at the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have focused on human-induced climate change. Their fifth assessment report led to the 2015 Paris Agreement, shortly after which a special report on the dangers of global warming above 1.5 degrees Celsius, above pre-industrial levels, was produced. By mitigating global warming, the Nobel Prize-winning team “is significantly easier to achieve many aspects of sustainable development, increasing the likelihood of eradicating poverty and reducing inequality.” I emphasized.

Drew (Richard) Marcantonio, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Notre Dame, Seanfield (Anthropology), a PhD student, Debra Javelin, an associate professor of political science, and Agustin Fuentes (formerly the University of Notre Dame) in Princeton are global. We have found a strong and statistically significant relationship between the spatial distribution of climate risk and toxic pollution. In other words, the countries at the highest risk of climate change impacts are also, in most cases, the countries at the highest risk of toxic pollution.

They also measured other variables such as spatial distribution of toxic environments, total pollution mortality, and climate risk, and found strong interrelationships.They are their future PLOS Paper, “Consistent with Global Distribution of Pollution, Climate Impacts, and Health Risks in the Anthropocene”: “When the distribution of toxic pollution is maximum, and decisively, the effects of climate change bring about Even if mortality due to toxic pollution is the highest and greatest risk. “

“It’s not surprising to discover that these risks are highly correlated, but this article provides data and analysis to inform previously lacking policies, data, and analysis. We do, “says Javeline.

To complete the survey, Javline, Marchantonio, Field, and Fuentes used data from three indexes. ND-GAIN is an index of 182 countries that summarizes how vulnerabilities and climate exposures impact risks and are ready to improve climate resilience. The EPI ranks 180 countries with 24 performance indicators across 10 problem categories covering environmental health and ecosystem vitality. Finally, GAHP estimates the number of deaths from toxic pollution in the country, including deaths caused by global exposure to toxic air, water, soil and chemical pollution.

To make their results most favorable to policy makers, the authors are called “targets,” a measure that combines a country’s risk of climate impact, risk of toxic pollution, and potential preparations to mitigate these risks. I created something. Based on these criteria, the top 10 countries they recommend to concentrate on are Singapore, Rwanda, China, India, Solomon Islands, Bhutan, Botswana, Georgia, South Korea and Thailand. Some of the countries listed at the bottom of the list are Equatorial Guinea, Iraq, Jordan, the Central African Republic and Venezuela. These countries are most likely currently having open governance issues that are preventing them from effectively addressing pollution.

“In particular, our results show that the top one-third of countries at risk of toxic pollution and climate effects make up more than two-thirds of the world’s population, which is a problem. It highlights the unequal distribution of size and environmental risk. Some of the world’s population lives in countries with higher toxic pollution and climate risk, where and how to reduce pollution risk. Understanding what to do is important for maximizing the reduction of potential human casualties, “they write.

The authors also state that neighboring countries will also benefit from reducing toxic pollution in large, populous countries such as China and India. China’s 2013 Air Pollution and Prevention and Management Action Plan, especially for toxic emissions, has produced impressive results. Researchers have found that emissions of toxic substances have been reduced by 40 percent since the plan was enacted.

“The target idea is to emphasize where action can be taken to reduce the risk to human health and prosperity, but how that targeting is done (eg incentives and sanctions). Needs moral remorse to decide which action to take, who should take it, who is most responsible for creating these risks, who is most at risk This is especially true given the general opposite relationship, ”says Marcantonio.

During the 2021-22 academic year, the university will hold a series of conversations through the annual Notre Dame Forum focusing on the theme of “Care for Our Common Home: Transition to a Sustainable Future.” I will. Inspired by Laudato Si’s and Pope Francis’ continued focus on these issues, the forum will feature a wide range of discussions and events over the next year. Since its founding in 2005, the Notre Dame Forum has been a major talk by key authorities on issues and opportunities for globalization, the role of the presidential debate, immigration, locations and other issues that are important to universities, countries and the larger world. Has been featured. Of faith in a pluralistic society.

Back to top button