Negrutiu Et Al Resource Planetary Health Toolbox 12 05 2021.Odt

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

The Resource - Planetary Health Toolbox – taking the long view and a science-policy agenda for the next decade

Ioan Negrutiu1*, Gérard Escher2, Jason D Whittington3, Ole P Ottersen4, Philippe Gil- let2, Nils C Stenseth3

1 Institut Michel Serres, RDP-IXXI, École Normale Supérieure de Lyon, France 2 Office of the president and Earth and Planetary Science Laboratory, EPFL - École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland 3Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Norway 4 Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

* Correspondence :

Ioan Negrutiu

[email protected]

Keywords: Adjusting needs and resources; Accounting and accountability; Convergence; Cultural shift; Demography; Ecological degrowth; Evidence-informed decision; Human rights and duties; Planetary health; Resource justice; State shift; Time boundary; Universal social protection floor.

Abstract (218)

Nature’s goods and services are the foundation of life and health. Humans are strongly health-minded, and are individually and collectively resource-driven. However, humans do not frame resources properly and the environmental crisis reflects the unsustainable management of resources, the signature landmark of the Great Acceleration in the Anthropocene. Current governance systems are not equipped to handle challenges such as the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals, as resource governance across sectors and institu-

tions does not exist. To bring our governance systems more in line with sustainable use of and fair access to resources, the main question is: How to allocate accessible resources in ways that reconcile the basic needs of populations with the maintenance of the life-support

functions of ecosystems? Here we describe a novel resource systems approach that integrates three principles (resource stewardship, human rights, and human duties) with the concept of planetary health (health for individuals, societies, and ecosystems). To facilitate their operationalization and societal acceptance, resource-centered science is integrated within the

model as a Resource Planetary Health Toolbox. The aim is to translate and incorporate this

approach with knowledge-led and scientific evidence-based decision-making, and to experimentally define new objects of law and new forms of institutions in the public interest: reach social goals within ecological limits. Ongoing programs, practices, experimentations or initiatives indicate that this resource approach is timely and feasible.

Main message

Two conditions are necessary and sufficient for a peaceful future if we act NOW: resource justice and shared health. Resources all combined and the health of the biosphere, societies, and people. Neither one in isolation. So long as these conditions have not been enacted collectively, it will be difficult to resolve other grand challenges: poverty, equity and democracy, food security and sovereignty, global pollution and biodiversity erosion, climate change. It is

very likely that the forthcoming great narrative will strongly rely on the planetary health concept and methodology, and have the resource justice and stewardship challenge at its core.

1

Table of contents

1. State-of-the-art - failing governance of resources and public health

Three interdependent problems

2. Creating convergence and synergy between social and ecological issues through the resource-health paradigm (the Resource Planetary Health Toolbox)

2.1 Building a resource-centered systems science to impulse a transformative process of Social Justice, Ecological Responsibility and Cultural Acceptance

Three inclusive principles

Integrating the principles with planetary health The emergence of a Resource-centered science Measuring what counts

2.2 The Resources Planetary Health toolbox or RPHT - Integrating principles, planetary health, resource-centered science and real life experiments

2.3 The Resource Planetary Health Toolbox: The science-informed political instrument in the adjustment of resources and needs

2.3.1 Defining a science – policy guiding frame and prioritizing research at national to local levels

2.3.2 Defining a science – policy guiding frame and prioritizing research at global to regional levels

2.3.3 Scale interdependences with RPH – the challenge ahead, a multi-scalar RPHT

3. Conclusions

2

1. State-of-the-art - Failing governance of resources and public health

The current social and environmental crisis is systemic and has multiple and intertwined causes. The underlying cause is the failure of appropriate valuation and governance of resources and public health, two driving global challenges of our time (Dobs et al, 2011; Ehrlich et al, 2012; Barnosky et al, 2012; Mottesharrei et al, 2014; Ottersen et al, 2014; De Schutter, 2014a; Whitmee et al, 2015; Acunzo et al, 2018; Laurent, 2020).

Resources have always played a central role in human history and geopolitics (Meadows et al, 1972; Klare, 2002; Medina and Petit, 2012; Sverdrup and Ragnasdottir, 2014; Daviron, 2019). Updating the definition to reflect the challenges of the Anthropocene, we take a socioecological view to broadly define resources as inclusive physical, human, economic, institutional, normative, financial, technological, digital, etc. capacities through which collective and individual agency operates within societies (other resource definitions in Panel). Resources are both the substance and driver of economic models and institutions, of investment and fiscal and monetary strategies, of political capture and privilege and power systems, and of world order strategies (Ostrom, 2002; Srinivasan et al, 2008; Gylfason, 2011; Kissinger, 2014; Bergstrom and Randall, 2016; Jarrige and Vrignon, 2020). This system leads developed States to take economic and technological advantage in terms of resource exploitation and appropriation, consigning an ecological burden on poor-income countries (Srinivasan et al, 2008). The intricate financial, human, and natural resource basis of the 2008 crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic are good examples.

Health gains depth and momentum through the lens of the “planetary health” concept (see

Panel of definitions), i.e.,“health for individuals, societies, and ecosystems”. The strength of

this concept stems from its breadth. It encompasses the societal symbolic meaning of health together with the actionable, factual, and scientific evidence-based policy dimension of public health of individuals and societies, and the state of ecosystems. Ecosystems are in a healthy state when their capacity to provide services and other resources, the ultimate foundations of life and health (Corvalan et al, 2005), is maintained over time.

We posit that the (mis-)governance and (mis-)allocation of resources are early warning signals of socioecosystemic vulnerability or resilience, i.e., of planetary health, and best inform and connect the broad spectrum of global change research targets (Biermann, 2007; Biermann et al, 2012). Indeed, planetary health and the issue of resources converge when sustainability is considered in terms of an inclusive social and ecological system. This socioecological system analysis explains how human activities require resources and affect the ecological system over time through energy and material demand and emissions (Binder et al, 2013; Fischer-Kowalski and Steiberger, 2017).

The inclusive resource-health view is not properly addressed by current political and diplomatic agendas. Current agendas ignore the long view and underestimate slow systemic risks. Many reports have analyzed the major drivers influencing public health and/or natural resources (Costanza et al, 2007; Vitali et al, 2011; Ehrlich et al, 2012; Ottersen et al, 2013; Barnosky et al, 2013; UNEP, 2014; Bradshaw and Brook, 2014; De Schutter, 2014b; Motesharrei et al, 2014; Stockstad, 2015; Nuesiri, 2016; De Schutter, 2017; Horton, 2017; Engebretsen et al, 2017; Sterner et al, 2019).

A common feature of these studies is the deterioration of socioecological systems resulting from inadequate social norms and power asymmetries between actors with conflicting interests at all governance levels. The determinants of socioecosystemic vulnerability are mutually
3reinforcing and influence several other global challenges such as food and labor security, access to water and land, energy, and education (Raskin et al, 2002; UN human rights, 2011; De Schutter, 2017). Ultimately, resource depletion and strong economic stratification end up in societal collapse, as documented throughout history (Butzer, 2012; Motesharrei et al, 2014; Sverdrup and Ragnasdottir, 2014). Today, critical state shifts are expected around 2030 (Meadows et al, 2005; Barnosky et al, 2012).

Taken together, socioecological vulnerability reflects ill-adapted institutions and ineffective decision-making processes, which fail to solve or even aggravate issues (Figure 1A; Acemoglu and Robinson, 2012; Horton and Lo, 2014; Engebretsen et al, 2017; Pecl et al, 2017; Wyborn et al, 2020; Dasgupta, 2021). This means that business as usual is maintaining a situation at odds with the public interest (or common purpose) in fields as diverse as the environment, social cohesion and health security, trade and investment, financial and economic regulation, intellectual property, and international security (Raskin et al, 2002; Ottersen et al,

2014). This not only depletes human and planetary resources, but maintains a system that

drives the increasing concentration of power and resources in the hands of the few without meeting the vital needs of populations (Freibauer et al, 2011; Negrutiu, 2011; Motesharrei et al, 2014). Denying fair access to vital resources violates fundamental human rights and raises concerns about resource stewardship governance, with impacts on both public health and ecosystem health. This situation hinders the articulation of major global challenges with the coherent implementation of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs; Engebretsen et al, 2017;

Herrero et al, 2020).

In summary, we are facing a quadruple problem.

(1) A lack of convergence between social and ecological (health) issues (see also Supple- mental File 1). We argue that such convergence is handicapped by the fact that resource governance across sectors and inclusive resource-centered science and education programs do not exist. The result is a dysfunctional use of resources in the context of an increasingly fragmented research landscape and policy agendas (Schoon and Van der Leeuw, 2015; Bornemann et al, 2017; Sidgel et al, 2018; Wyborn et al, 2020; Negrutiu et al, 2020). This calls for a systemic approach across the entire resource field.

(2) A lack of adjustment of resources and needs in public policies. The acceleration of world

demand for limited resources is incompatible with the SDG’s imperatives (UNEP International Resource Panel, 2015; Eisenmerger et al, 2020). Supplemental File 1 discusses the im-

pact of this lack of convergence on the SDGs and their reliance on resource governance.

There is compelling evidence that making green growth the building block of SDGs is misleading: a range of scenarios, including carbon budgeting, resource efficiency, incentives, and technological innovations, indicates that decoupling GDP from resource use under current growth expectations (2-3 per cent year increase) is not possible (Dittrich et al, 2012; UNEP, 2016).

(3) A lack of valuation of the benefits that ecosystem capital delivers to human well-being and society at large (Dasgupta, 2010 and 2021; see also Lindner, 2011; Guerry et al., 2015; Schultz et al., 2015). Instead, economic growth is being built on the depreciation of the planetary ecosystem capital, i.e., on unhealthy ecosystems. That neglected process of “ecosystem

degrowth” (see Panel of Defini)ons) is building on slow drivers and cumula;ve ;pping

points, i.e., compound risks. Over time, this depreciation has become societally harmful. (4) The social foundations of equity, equality, and justice have not been built on normative questions of of resource and opportunity distribution (Downing et al, 2020).

4
Altogether, our analysis indicates that acting on existing obstacles radical changes in resource governance and allocation must be considered. Most of the resource science and governance elements are available but insufficiently or improperly employed. Supplemental File 2

sketches the landscape of current resource expertise and corresponding regulatory instru-

ments. They have not been integrated into an inclusive and coherent frame to ensure effective human rights, fair resource allocation, and the preservation of life-supporting capacities of natural systems.

2. Creating convergence and synergy between social and ecological issues through the resource-health paradigm (the Resource Planetary Health Toolbox)

The convergence design we develop below consists of assembling a set of inclusive principles for resource justice (Panel) and planetary health instruments with the goal to translate and incorporate them into a resource-centered systems science, and to experimentally define new objects of law and new forms of institutions for resource governance. The model in Fig- ure 1B shows how these components are articulated.

2.1 Building a resource-centered systems science to impulse a transformative process of Social Justice, Ecological Responsibility, and Cultural Acceptance

To enable such developments, the natural sciences and legal and political studies must

build a permanent alliance (see also Serres, 1992) with the aim of designing instruments for a commons and resource-centered social management. Importantly, law conveys the values that a society sets for itself to act according to policy options that borrow the language of law (Collart Dutilleul, 2021). The question of what forms of legal powers should be held over natural resources becomes crucial in a context of conflicting legal regimes and national capacities in a resource-constrained world (Ostrom, 2002; Medina and Petit, 2012; Malwe and Fernandez, 2013; Bergstrom and Randall, 2016; Gylfason, 2018; Supplemental File 2).

With these issues in mind, the alliance is focusing on the following aspects: Define an ethical frame based on a set of structuring principles; Integrate the principles with planetary health; and Work out the emergence of a resource-centered science.

Three inclusive principles that enjoy global institutional recognition and bear significant lo-

cal meaning have been assembled (Figure 1B, Table 1):

1) Integrate responsible resource stewardship and fair allocation; 2) Ensure fundamental human rights and basic needs; and 3) Preserve the life-supporting capacity of ecosystems. The principles underpin the socioecological frame on universal and indivisible human rights and duties, with emphasis on resource stewardship and resource justice. Social justice starts with resource justice on which ecological responsibility can now be connected through knowledge and values.

The three principles ensure both the full realization of human rights and the balance and articulation between instruments and devices in local-global, north-south, and cultural contexts.

Integrating the principles with planetary health. The planetary health approach is creating

synergy between the principles, both from a policy and science perspective (Table 1). Thus, in a society that emphasizes social justice and environmental responsibility, health becomes “a precondition, outcome, and indicator of a sustainable society, and should be

5

adopted as a universal value and shared social and political objective for all” (Ottersen et al, 2014). The concept of health allows reframing the long debated instrumentalization of nature (Ordway, 1956; Folke et al, 2016) into a system of “technological and environmental sobriety and literacy” (Martin et al, 2016; i.e., a narrative, as defined in Panel). Through the narrative, the inclusive health approach is likely to be understood, accepted, and shared locally and globally, and thus fill a gap in current practice of socioecological convergence.

As methodology, the planetary health makes the three categories of health indivisible, interdependent, and reciprocal by providing science-informed and technology-enhanced actionable capacity (e.g., diagnostic protocols, standards, and norms, and monitoring, traceability, and reporting tools) in local-to-global contexts. For example, building the knowledge infrastructure for natural capital and economic data with increased geographic resolution and robust resource footprints (Moran et al, 2020) requires satellite, sensor, tracker, and hyper- and multi-spectral imaging technologies, combined with AI and machine learning. This can Inform spatially explicit scenarios of disruption (environmental impacts of economic activities) needed in economic models and investment strategies.

Planetary Health calls for the emergence of a Resource-centered science (RCS) across disci-

plines and user groups building on the data sphere in general, and the networking of individuals, communities, and organizations in particular. It is imperative to mobilize the best available science supported by rigorous statistics and modeling, and facilitate the adoption of results among decision-makers and society (Lomborg, 2001; Rosling et al, 2001; Cash et al, 2006). This is expected to

(1) facilitate synergy between science and policy-making (DeFries et al, 2012; Barnosky et al, 2014; Rockstrom, 2016; Folke et al, 2016) while opening strategic policy to the scrutiny of science (Boyd, 2016; Negrutiu et al, 2020) and

(2) improve the management of resource use (technological innovations) and maximize the resilience levels of given socioecological systems (social innovations) embracing cultural and geographic histories and specifics.

Measuring what counts. Experimental sciences contribute already socioecosystemic tools to monitor, value, manage, and report on the state and dynamics of socioecological systems (Binder et al, 2013). For example, the state of physical resources at national scale, e.g., ecosystem health, has been reported (AEEA 2013 and 2019). Also, modeling and monitoring

carrying capacity (Panel) has recently been revisited in defining the interface between social and ecological health (Mote et al, 2020), and Downing et al (2020) proposed new consumerresource models that integrate environmental limits, minimum requirements for populations, and relationships between resource-versus waste-limited environments. Such instruments en-

able the translation of environmental limits into targets and deadlines, thus guiding decisionmaking to avoid, or at least to compensate for, social and ecological deficits. Ecosystem capital accounting tools are currently drawing a lot of interest because they exploit (near) realtime environmental and socio-economic data streams and serve as metrics, monitoring, and accounting instruments for policy (Ehrlich et al, 2012; Barnosky et al, 2012; Weber et al, 2014; Guerry et al, 2015; Steffen et al, 2015; Sterner et al, 2019; Ellis, 2019). These accounting tools could already have been implemented to help target no net ecosystem degradation; however, their incorporation into GDP-centered national accounting systems remains challenging (Vanoli, 2005; Hanley, 2015; Weber, 2018; Acunzo et al, 2018).

In summary, the proposed model (Figure 1B; Table 1) is a transformative process that enables adjusting the balance between management through numbers (a dominant trend today) and governance through law. The current imbalance has resulted from institutional degener-

6acy facilitated by an inflation of technical rules and norms inspired by statistics, benchmarking, big data, etc. (that collide with the unpredictability of reality), and the retrogression of the republican ideal of a society governed by general principles and rules (Supiot, 2015; see also Folke et al, 2005). That adjustment at all government / governance levels implies the enactment of binding legal instruments that (1) provide fair access to resources for all (resource justice), (2) impose accountability for resource over-use and degradation, and (3) help to achieve sustainable levels of resource use.

The first application of the Resource-centered science is the Resource Planetary Health Toolbox (RPHT). This is presented in the following sections.

2.2 The Resources Planetary Health Toolbox or RPHT - Integrating principles, planetary health, resource-centered science, and real life experiments

The preceding has allowed us to design a resource stewardship approach based on the twocomponent resource-planetary health model. The resulting RPHT, consisting of resource and governance systems, is illustrated in Figure 1B and detailed in Table 2. Ostrom’s structuring work on the sustainable management of resources as a socioecological process, the Common Pool Resources framework (CPR; Ostrom, 2009) has been instrumental in developing the toolbox.

We consider that CPR and RPHT approaches are complementary, while both target long-term sustainability supported by rules matching the attributes of the resource-to-governance systems.

The role of the Resource centered science is to develop and deploy the toolbox. For example,

SUSTAIN, a national initiative in Norway (Figure 2), is a precursor of the RPH approach for integrated harvested animal resource management through biomass stewardship. SUSTAIN was founded to address the general question of how exploitation and climate changes affect different harvested ecosystems in marine, freshwater, and terrestrial settings. The program explores multilevel feedback loop, learning, and negotiation processes in the social system in response to changes in the ecological system. This includes information sharing, deliberation and self-organization activities and rules, monitoring, and sanction mechanisms in policy development. The framework was structured following a Strategic Foresight Protocol based on inter- and transdisciplinary knowledge and good practice. The scientific work is performed in collaboration with a panel of end users, made up of managers, decision-makers, and institutions involved in the management of harvested ecosystems in an iterative process. This structure was designed to generate changes in the chains of responsibility for product-processpractice quality and monitoring for the benefit of improved auditing and transparency. Preliminary results show that incorporating stakeholders’ engagement not only widened scientists’ research perspectives and allowed their research to provide outcomes more timely and relevant to society, it also provided an opening to further build social capital. Based on successes and setbacks within SUSTAIN, the success was highly dependent on building social capital among all participants to have the trust needed to ensure an effective functioning among social groups with different interests and values. This was easiest to implement by involving all relevant groups from the start.

Recommended publications
  • Development and Validation of an Index Based on EAT-Lancet Recommendations: the Planetary Health Diet Index

    Development and Validation of an Index Based on EAT-Lancet Recommendations: the Planetary Health Diet Index

    nutrients Article Development and Validation of an Index Based on EAT-Lancet Recommendations: The Planetary Health Diet Index Leandro Teixeira Cacau 1 , Eduardo De Carli 1 , Aline Martins de Carvalho 1 , Paulo Andrade Lotufo 2, Luis A. Moreno 3,4,5 , Isabela Martins Bensenor 2 and Dirce Maria Marchioni 1,* 1 Department of Nutrition, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 01246-904, Brazil; [email protected] (L.T.C.); [email protected] (E.D.C.); [email protected] (A.M.d.C.) 2 Clinical and Epidemiological Research Center, University Hospital, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 05508-000, Brazil; [email protected] (P.A.L.); [email protected] (I.M.B.) 3 Growth, Exercise, Nutrition and Development (GENUD) Research Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain; [email protected] 4 Instituto Agroalimentario de Aragón (IA2), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Aragón, 50013 Zaragoza, Spain 5 Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Fisiopatología de la Obesidad y Nutrición (CIBEROBN), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, 28040 Madrid, Spain * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The EAT-Lancet Commission has proposed a planetary health diet. We propose the development of the Planetary Health Diet Index (PHDI) based on this proposed reference diet. We used baseline dietary data obtained through a 114-item FFQ from 14,779 participants of the Longitudinal Study on Adult Health, a multicenter cohort study conducted in Brazil. The PHDI has 16 components and a score from 0 to 150 points. Validation and reliability analyses were performed, Citation: Cacau, L.T.; De Carli, E.; de including principal component analyses, association with selected nutrients, differences in means Carvalho, A.M.; Lotufo, P.A.; Moreno, between groups (for example, smokers vs.
  • Down to Earth: the Emerging Field of Planetary Health Nate Seltenrich

    Down to Earth: the Emerging Field of Planetary Health Nate Seltenrich

    A Section 508–conformant HTML version of this article Focus is available at https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP2374. Down to Earth: The Emerging Field of Planetary Health Nate Seltenrich https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP2374 Human impacts on our planet have become so profound that From this realization has come another new term: planetary many researchers now favor a new name for the current epoch: health.2 There is significant overlap between planetary health and the Anthropocene.1 The underlying premise of this term is that traditional environmental health; both examine the relationship essentially every Earth system, from the deep oceans to the upper between human health and conditions and exposures originating atmosphere, has been significantly modified by human activity. outside the body, be they extreme temperatures, chemicals and This idea, and related concepts like the great acceleration, biological agents, vector-borne diseases, or any number of other planetary boundaries, and tipping points may be of interest, even potential factors. However, planetary health, by definition, ex- grave concern, to ecologists, biologists, and climatologists. Yet plicitly accounts for the importance of natural systems in terms viewed through an environmental health lens—which recognizes of averted cases of disease and the potential harm that comes the critical links between human health and the food we eat, the from human-caused perturbations of these systems—a considera- water we drink, and the air we breathe—humans’ growing influ- tion that has not necessarily factored into environmental health ence on the planet threatens the very long-term survival of our research to date.
  • Nutrition Education in the Anthropocene: Toward Public and Planetary Health

    Nutrition Education in the Anthropocene: Toward Public and Planetary Health

    Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development ISSN: 2152-0801 online https://www.foodsystemsjournal.org VIEWPOINT Nutrition education in the Anthropocene: Toward public and planetary health Jennifer Lynn Wilkins * Syracuse University and Cornell University Submitted February 20, 2020 / Published online May 4, 2020 Citation: Wilkins, J. L. (2020). Nutrition education in the Anthropocene: Toward public and planetary health. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 9(3), 59–69. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2020.093.026 Copyright © 2020 by the Author. Published by the Lyson Center for Civic Agriculture and Food Systems. Open access under CC-BY license. Abstract need to ensure that such competencies are ad- Nutrition education has traditionally focused pri- dressed in course content. Advocates need to be marily on food and nutrition knowledge, motiva- vigilant to ensure that sustainability, food systems, tions, and skills that facilitate behavior change. This and community aspects related to nutrition and essay argues that while this content remains an es- diet are incorporated into policy. The relevance of sential foundation for nutrition education, is it no nutrition education will depend upon the degree to longer sufficient. In the Anthropocene—the cur- which this shift is successful. rent distinct geological period during which human activity is the dominant influence on climate and Keywords the environment—the goal of nutrition framework Anthropocene, Diet, Food Skills, Health is twofold: public health and planetary health. This Outcomes, Nutrition Education approach requires that competencies in food sys- tems, agriculture, and policy be included in the ed- Disclosure ucation and training of food and nutrition The views expressed in this reflective essay are those of the education practitioners and researchers.
  • Health-Emergency-Of-Climate-Change-Episode-9-Reading-List.Pdf

    Health-Emergency-Of-Climate-Change-Episode-9-Reading-List.Pdf

    Planetary health through the lens of the pandemic - Episode 9 Reading List Find out more about the work of our illustrator for the session here: www.jamesnicholls.net Download a high quality version of the illustration here. RSM Library Resources List Amuasi, J. et al. Reconnecting for our future: The Lancet One Health Commission Lancet 2020 395(10235) 1469-1471. Available through PubMed Central. Boriani, E. et al. Pragmatic Use of Planetary Health and Nature-Based Solutions for Future Pandemics Using COVID-19 Case Scenario Frontiers in Public Health 2021 9 620120. Available through PubMed. Budd, J. et al. Digital technologies in the public-health response to COVID-19 Nature Medicine 2020 26(8) 1183-1192. Available to RSM members via RSM online. Fisher, MC, et al. Emerging infections and the integrative environment-health sciences: the road ahead Nature Reviews. Microbiology 2021 19(3) 133-135. Available through PubMed Central. Gruetzmacher, K. et al. The Berlin principles on one health – Bridging global health and conservation The Science of the Total Environment 2021 764 142919. Available through Elsevier. He, B. et al. Effectiveness and resource requirements of test, trace and isolate strategies for COVID in the UK Royal Society Open Science 2021 8(3) 201491. Available through PubMed Central. © Library & Knowledge Services, The Royal Society of Medicine 1 Planetary health through the lens of the pandemic - Episode 9 Reading List Jowell, A. et al. COVID-19: A Matter of Planetary, not Only National Health American Journal of Trop- ical Medicine & Hygiene 2020 103(1) 31-32. Available through PubMed Central. Lewis, B.
  • Intertwined Strands for Ecology in Planetary Health

    Intertwined Strands for Ecology in Planetary Health

    challenges Perspective Intertwined Strands for Ecology in Planetary Health Pierre Horwitz 1,* and Margot W. Parkes 2 1 Centre for Ecosystem Management, School of Science, Edith Cowan University, 270 Joondalup Drive, Joondalup, WA 6027, Australia 2 School of Health Sciences, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, BC V2N 4Z9, Canada; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 31 January 2019; Accepted: 8 March 2019; Published: 14 March 2019 Abstract: Ecology is both blessed and burdened by romanticism, with a legacy that is multi-edged for health. The prefix ‘eco-’ can carry a cultural and political (subversive) baggage, associated with motivating environmental activism. Ecology is also practiced as a technical ‘science’, with quantitative and deterministic leanings and a biophysical emphasis. A challenge for planetary health is to avoid lapsing into, or rejecting, either position. A related opportunity is to adopt ecological thought that offers a rich entrance to understanding living systems: a relationality of connectedness, interdependence, and reciprocity to understand health in a complex and uncertain world. Planetary health offers a global scale framing; we regard its potential as equivalent to the degree to which it can embrace, at its core, ecological thought, and develop its own political narrative. Keywords: romanticism; ecosystems; rationality; relationality; living systems; interdependence 1. Introduction Viewing health in the context of the living systems on which humans and other species depend, is not a new idea. Ecological thought offers a rich entrance to understanding these living systems, with its emphasis on connectedness and interdependence. This understanding is coherent and foundational within many human knowledge systems (consider Indigenous cultures, through to Hippocrates: Airs, Waters, Places) but has been overlooked and poorly addressed in our current framing of how we consider health and well-being in society, including in public health policy and health-related scholarship.
  • A Case for Planetary Health/Geohealth 10.1002/2017GH000084 Amalia A

    A Case for Planetary Health/Geohealth 10.1002/2017GH000084 Amalia A

    PUBLICATIONS GeoHealth COMMENTARY A case for Planetary Health/GeoHealth 10.1002/2017GH000084 Amalia A. Almada1 , Christopher D. Golden1,2 , Steven A. Osofsky3,4, and Samuel S. Myers1,2 Special Section: 1Planetary Health Alliance, Harvard University Center for the Environment, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, 2Department of Earth and Space Science is Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachussetts, USA, 3Planetary Health Alliance, Essential for Society Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA, 4Department of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ithaca, New York, USA Key Points: • Global environmental change is an urgent threat to human health Abstract Concern has been spreading across scientific disciplines that the pervasive human • Action-focused, transdisciplinary transformation of Earth’s natural systems is an urgent threat to human health. The simultaneous research to optimize the health of people and ecosystems is needed emergence of “GeoHealth” and “Planetary Health” signals recognition that developing a new relationship • The emerging field of Planetary between humanity and our natural systems is becoming an urgent global health priority—if we are to Health/GeoHealth aims to build a prevent a backsliding from the past century’s great public health gains. Achieving meaningful progress scientific evidence base to support more robust policy decisions will require collaboration across a broad swath of scientific disciplines as well as with policy makers, natural resource managers, members of faith communities, and movement builders around the world in order to build a rigorous evidence base of scientific understanding as the foundation for more robust Correspondence to: policy and resource management decisions that incorporate both environmental and human A.
  • COVID-19 and Planetary Health: How a Pandemic Could Pave the Way for a Green Recovery

    COVID-19 and Planetary Health: How a Pandemic Could Pave the Way for a Green Recovery

    STILL ONLY ONE EARTH: Lessons from 50 years of UN sustainable development policy BRIEF #13 COVID-19 and Planetary Health: How a Pandemic Could Pave the Way for a Green Recovery Nicole de Paula, Ph.D. Elizabeth Willetts March 2021 Key Messages and Recommendations • The COVID-19 pandemic magnifies underlying systemic problems, including ineffective environmental policies, social and economic inequalities, and weak healthcare systems. • Policymakers need to strengthen climate resilience in our societies, economies, and ecosystems, and promote greater synergies and convergence between climate, biodiversity, and health finance. • Collaboration between environment and health ministries to form joint agendas and link policy and programming is essential to facilitate a green recovery. • International organizations and agencies need to break down silos, take joint action, and integrate policy and programming to promote planetary health. Before the COVID-19 pandemic began in exposure can cost nearly USD 1 trillion in 2020, policymakers already faced sobering neurodevelopmental effects in middle and health statistics. As noted by the World Health low-income countries. Microplastics, nutrient Organization (WHO) and the United Nations excess from farm run-off, and zoonotic diseases Environment Programme (UNEP), nearly 25% impact health, well-being, and economic of all global deaths are related to economic development in overlapping and complicated decisions affecting the environment. Annually, 7 ways (Myers, 2017). million people die from poor air quality and 3.5 Existing environmental policies do not million die from poor water quality. Chemical effectively support global health and © 2021 International Institute for Sustainable Development Photo: NASA (CC0 1.0) COVID-19 and Planetary Health: How a Pandemic Could Pave the Way for a Green Recovery sustainable development objectives.
  • The Role of Digital Media in Shaping Youth Planetary Health Interests in the Global Economy

    The Role of Digital Media in Shaping Youth Planetary Health Interests in the Global Economy

    Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity Article The Role of Digital Media in Shaping Youth Planetary Health Interests in the Global Economy Ibrahim Niankara 1,* , Muhammad Noor Al adwan 2 and Aminata Niankara 3 1 College of Business, Al Ain University, Abu Dhabi P.O. Box 112612, UAE 2 College of Communication & Media, Al Ain University, Abu Dhabi P.O. Box 112612, UAE; [email protected] 3 Department of Cardiology, The National Office of Workers’ Health (Office de Santé des Travailleurs-OST), Ouagadougou P.O. Box 7036, Burkina Faso; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +971-2444-4696 (ext. 539) Received: 28 May 2020; Accepted: 15 July 2020; Published: 17 July 2020 Abstract: Despite revolutionizing the work of practicing economists by providing a direct link between neo-classical economic theory and revealed market preference data, Random Utility Theory has yet to guide research applications in global market sustainability. With the worldwide adverse socio-economic effects of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19), such application now becomes timely. Therefore, relying on a Random Utility theoretic formulation of youths’ preferences for the biosphere (ecosystem services, sustainability) and science-based disease prevention to characterize their planetary health interests, this paper adopts a micro-based planetary view of markets to retrospectively analyze the health and ecological implications of digital media consumption among youths in the global economy. Empirically, we rely on a mixed bivariate ordered probit specification, which is estimated using Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods. Our findings reveal a strong, positive correlation coefficient (0.835) between youths’ interests in the biosphere and science-based disease prevention.
  • Can a Planetary Health Lens Inform Pandemic Response?

    Can a Planetary Health Lens Inform Pandemic Response?

    Can a Planetary Health Lens Inform Pandemic Response? Renzo Guinto, MD DrPH Chief Planetary Doctor Glo-cal PH Think-and-Do Tank L A B for People and Planet PHILIPPINES Silicon Islands of Planetary Health Whoever wishes to pursue properly the science of medicine must proceed thus. First, he ought to consider what effects each season of the year can produce; for the seasons are not at all alike but differ widely both in themselves and at their changes. The next point is the hot winds and the cold, especially those that are universal, but also those that are peculiar to each particular region. He must also consider the properties of the waters; for as these differ in taste and in weight, so the property of each is far different from that of any other. Hippocrates, Airs, Waters, and Places (400 B.C.) Father of Western Medicine How is health produced? Genetics 5% Medical Care 20% Social & Environmental Factors 55% Behavioral Factors 20% (Sowada, 2003) Anthropogenic Change and Human Health (Myers, 2017) “The pandemic is a portal, a gateway between one world and the next.” Arundhati Roy and we need a new compass! From public health to planetary health Our patients? PEOPLE and PLANET Planetary Health “the health of human civilization and the state of the natural systems on which it depends” (Lancet-Rockefeller Commission, 2015) “the international and interdisciplinary field focused on characterizing and addressing the human health impacts of global environmental change” (Planetary Health Alliance, 2019) “The health sector must lift its gaze to bigger, ecological horizons. This will require a radical extension of the public health agenda, new forms of professional training in environmental health, a preparedness to base policy advice upon predictions and best guesses (as opposed to empirical data), and an ability to collaborate with unfamiliar disciplines (e.g.
  • Planetary Health & Primary Health Care

    Planetary Health & Primary Health Care

    PLANETARY HEALTH & PRIMARY HEALTH CARE STATEMENT ON SESSION 5 (B): IMPROVING ENVIRONMENT AND HEALTH IN THE CONTEXT OF HEALTH 2020 AND THE 2030 AGENDA FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT HumAn heAlth is fully dependent on nAturAl systems, which underpin the most essentiAl services, such As the provision of cleAn Air And wAter, nutritious food, stAble climAtes, And energy. Underlying determinAnts of heAlth inequity And environmentAl chAnge overlap substantially. Climate change and the significant issues chAllenging the preservAtion of the EArth's environment must be Addressed with high priority, in humAnity's most vitAl interest And for the sAke of the present And future generAtions. Planetary health addresses the individuAl And public heAlth, while pAying judicious Attention to the nAtural systems thAt define the sAfe environmentAl limits within which humAnity cAn flourish. We recognize, therefore, planetAry health as fundamental for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The 2017 OstrAvA DeclArAtion cAlled for: “Building environmental sustainability of health systems, and reducing their environmental impacts.” HeAlth systems cAn Achieve a triple win in this regArd by: protecting the heAlth of stAff And pAtients; protecting the environment, And; saving finAncial resources at the same time. Primary health care is A pillAr for sustAinable heAlth systems, building upon interprofessionAl collAborAtion to deliver a wide range of equitable, affordable and high-quality services. The workforce of the primAry heAlth cAre teAm considers it one of their core tasks to mAintain And improve their pAtients' heAlth, in A comprehensive sense. We understAnd thAt systemAtic work with heAlth promotion hAs the potential to become A strAtegy for sustainable development –environmentally, socially and economically, and thus to play an important pArt in fulfilling the SDGs.
  • Planetary Health Ethics: Beyond First Principles

    Planetary Health Ethics: Beyond First Principles

    challenges Communication Planetary Health Ethics: Beyond First Principles Alexander Foster 1,* , Jennifer Cole 2,* , Andrew Farlow 3 and Ivica Petrikova 4 1 School of Anthropology and Museum Ethnography, Oxford University, Oxford OX2 6PE, UK 2 Department of Geography, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham TW20 0EX, UK 3 Oxford Martin School, Oxford University, Oxford OX1 3BD, UK; [email protected] 4 Department of Politics and International Relations, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham TW20 0EX, UK; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] (A.F.); [email protected] (J.C.); Tel.: +44-7815-530-951 (A.F.); +44-7847-756-474 (J.C.) Received: 6 December 2018; Accepted: 12 February 2019; Published: 15 February 2019 Abstract: Planetary health is a transdisciplinary approach that aims to advance the understanding of the links between human-driven changes to the planet and their consequences, and to develop appropriate solutions to the challenges identified. This emerging movement has not yet agreed upon a code of ethics to underpin the rapidly expanding body of research being carried out in its name. However, a code of ethics might support the principles for planetary health set out in the Canmore Declaration of 2018. Phrases such as “Public Health 2.0”, “Human Health in an Era of Global Environmental Change”, or “A safe and just operating space for humanity” are often used in planetary health discussions, but are not always clearly defined and so far, the field lacks a strong guiding ethical framework. In this paper, we propose a starting point towards a code of ethics for planetary health that builds on the Canmore Declaration.
  • COVID-19: a Dashboard to Rebuild with Nature Table of Contents Executive Summary

    COVID-19: a Dashboard to Rebuild with Nature Table of Contents Executive Summary

    COVID-19: a dashboard to rebuild with nature Table of Contents Executive summary ................................................................................................................................. 3 The role of nature in Earth systems ........................................................................................................ 4 The emergence of zoonoses driven by nature loss and climate change ................................................ 5 The global food system: a main driver of nature loss, climate change and emerging infectious diseases ................................................................................................................................................... 9 The planetary boundary framework as the dashboard for solution areas ........................................... 11 Long-term recovery from the pandemic – build forward better with nature ...................................... 14 Policy makers .................................................................................................................................... 14 Consumers ........................................................................................................................................ 15 Business ............................................................................................................................................. 16 Conclusion - Using the dashboard to achieve the safe operating space .............................................. 19 COVID-19: A dashboard to rebuild