Environmental, Health, and Equity Co-benefits in Urban Climate Action Plans: A Descriptive Analysis for 27 C40 Member Cities
Many actions to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs) in cities have benefits for environmental quality, public health, and equity. These local and immediate “co-benefits” can include cleaner air, expanded green space, improved physical activity, and reduced noise. However, progress incorporating co-benefi...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022-05-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Sustainable Cities |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frsc.2022.869203/full |
| _version_ | 1818006615592271872 |
|---|---|
| author | Lauren Johnson Perrin Krisko Maha Malik Catherine O'Donnell Nick Pendleton Doyeon Ahn Andrea Bizberg Zoe A. Chafe Daniel Kim Sabrina McCormick Seneca Naidoo Susan C. Anenberg |
| author_facet | Lauren Johnson Perrin Krisko Maha Malik Catherine O'Donnell Nick Pendleton Doyeon Ahn Andrea Bizberg Zoe A. Chafe Daniel Kim Sabrina McCormick Seneca Naidoo Susan C. Anenberg |
| author_sort | Lauren Johnson |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Many actions to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs) in cities have benefits for environmental quality, public health, and equity. These local and immediate “co-benefits” can include cleaner air, expanded green space, improved physical activity, and reduced noise. However, progress incorporating co-benefits assessments into climate mitigation planning has been limited. Here, we capitalized on the new availability of climate action plans (CAPs) from dozens of C40 cities to explore the stated role of environmental quality, health, and equity in urban GHG mitigation planning. Specifically, we qualitatively reviewed how four topics—equity, exposure to environmental risk factors, health effects of climate change, and health co-benefits of GHG mitigation—were addressed in CAPs from 27 C40 member cities. The cities span Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, and South America. We found that more references pertained to exposures (57% of all identified references across the four topics) than to equity (21%), health co-benefits of GHG mitigation (15%), or health effects of climate change (7%). On average across all cities, five exposure categories represented the majority of exposure references: green space (23% of total coded exposure references), disasters (20%), physical activity (24%), heat (16%), and air quality (12%). Approximately two-thirds of health effects and health co-benefits references noted a link with health generally, without specificity to disease or other health outcome. Our results indicate that while environmental quality is commonly considered in CAPs, health effects of climate change and health co-benefits of GHG mitigation are mentioned less frequently. Future work should further develop methods to qualitatively and quantitatively assess health consequences of action and inaction to reduce GHG emissions, using approaches that are appropriate for and accessible to multiple levels of governments. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-14T05:03:37Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5b01b6889d8f4608aa143bb6c2406741 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2624-9634 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-14T05:03:37Z |
| publishDate | 2022-05-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Sustainable Cities |
| spelling | doaj.art-5b01b6889d8f4608aa143bb6c24067412022-12-22T02:10:49ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Sustainable Cities2624-96342022-05-01410.3389/frsc.2022.869203869203Environmental, Health, and Equity Co-benefits in Urban Climate Action Plans: A Descriptive Analysis for 27 C40 Member CitiesLauren Johnson0Perrin Krisko1Maha Malik2Catherine O'Donnell3Nick Pendleton4Doyeon Ahn5Andrea Bizberg6Zoe A. Chafe7Daniel Kim8Sabrina McCormick9Seneca Naidoo10Susan C. Anenberg11Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United StatesMilken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United StatesMilken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United StatesMilken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United StatesMilken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United StatesMilken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United StatesC40 Cities Leadership Group, New York, NY, United StatesC40 Cities Leadership Group, New York, NY, United StatesTrachtenberg School of Public Policy and Public Administration, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United StatesMilken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United StatesC40 Cities Leadership Group, New York, NY, United StatesMilken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, United StatesMany actions to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs) in cities have benefits for environmental quality, public health, and equity. These local and immediate “co-benefits” can include cleaner air, expanded green space, improved physical activity, and reduced noise. However, progress incorporating co-benefits assessments into climate mitigation planning has been limited. Here, we capitalized on the new availability of climate action plans (CAPs) from dozens of C40 cities to explore the stated role of environmental quality, health, and equity in urban GHG mitigation planning. Specifically, we qualitatively reviewed how four topics—equity, exposure to environmental risk factors, health effects of climate change, and health co-benefits of GHG mitigation—were addressed in CAPs from 27 C40 member cities. The cities span Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, and South America. We found that more references pertained to exposures (57% of all identified references across the four topics) than to equity (21%), health co-benefits of GHG mitigation (15%), or health effects of climate change (7%). On average across all cities, five exposure categories represented the majority of exposure references: green space (23% of total coded exposure references), disasters (20%), physical activity (24%), heat (16%), and air quality (12%). Approximately two-thirds of health effects and health co-benefits references noted a link with health generally, without specificity to disease or other health outcome. Our results indicate that while environmental quality is commonly considered in CAPs, health effects of climate change and health co-benefits of GHG mitigation are mentioned less frequently. Future work should further develop methods to qualitatively and quantitatively assess health consequences of action and inaction to reduce GHG emissions, using approaches that are appropriate for and accessible to multiple levels of governments.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frsc.2022.869203/fullclimate changehealthenvironmental healthenvironmental policyair quality |
| spellingShingle | Lauren Johnson Perrin Krisko Maha Malik Catherine O'Donnell Nick Pendleton Doyeon Ahn Andrea Bizberg Zoe A. Chafe Daniel Kim Sabrina McCormick Seneca Naidoo Susan C. Anenberg Environmental, Health, and Equity Co-benefits in Urban Climate Action Plans: A Descriptive Analysis for 27 C40 Member Cities Frontiers in Sustainable Cities climate change health environmental health environmental policy air quality |
| title | Environmental, Health, and Equity Co-benefits in Urban Climate Action Plans: A Descriptive Analysis for 27 C40 Member Cities |
| title_full | Environmental, Health, and Equity Co-benefits in Urban Climate Action Plans: A Descriptive Analysis for 27 C40 Member Cities |
| title_fullStr | Environmental, Health, and Equity Co-benefits in Urban Climate Action Plans: A Descriptive Analysis for 27 C40 Member Cities |
| title_full_unstemmed | Environmental, Health, and Equity Co-benefits in Urban Climate Action Plans: A Descriptive Analysis for 27 C40 Member Cities |
| title_short | Environmental, Health, and Equity Co-benefits in Urban Climate Action Plans: A Descriptive Analysis for 27 C40 Member Cities |
| title_sort | environmental health and equity co benefits in urban climate action plans a descriptive analysis for 27 c40 member cities |
| topic | climate change health environmental health environmental policy air quality |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frsc.2022.869203/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT laurenjohnson environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities AT perrinkrisko environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities AT mahamalik environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities AT catherineodonnell environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities AT nickpendleton environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities AT doyeonahn environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities AT andreabizberg environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities AT zoeachafe environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities AT danielkim environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities AT sabrinamccormick environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities AT senecanaidoo environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities AT susancanenberg environmentalhealthandequitycobenefitsinurbanclimateactionplansadescriptiveanalysisfor27c40membercities |