DOCSLIB.ORG

Addressing Human Health in Environmental Impact Assessment As Per EU Directive 2011/92/EU Amended by 2014/52/EU CONSULTATION DRAFT November 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Addressing Human Health in Environmental Impact Assessment As Per EU Directive 2011/92/EU Amended by 2014/52/EU CONSULTATION DRAFT November 2019 Addressing Human Health in Environmental Impact Assessment As per EU Directive 2011/92/EU amended by 2014/52/EU CONSULTATION DRAFT November 2019 DRAFT Contributors (in alphabetical order) Name Organisation Cave, Ben IAIA/EUPHA Claßen, Thomas EUPHA Fischer-Bonde, Brigitte IAIA Humboldt-Dachroeden, Sarah IAIA Martín-Olmedo, Piedad EUPHA Martuzzi, Marco WHO Regional Office for Europe Mekel, Odile EUPHA Nowacki, Julia WHO Regional Office for Europe Pyper, Ryngan IAIA Silva, Filipe IAIA Viliani, Francesca IAIA Xiao, Yina IAIA DRAFT Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Key concepts ............................................................................................................................... 4 3 Environmental impact assessment ............................................................................................. 7 4 Principles for human health in environmental impact assessment .........................................14 5 Screening ..................................................................................................................................16 6 Scoping .....................................................................................................................................21 7 EIA report – assessment ...........................................................................................................28 8 Consultation – stakeholder engagement .................................................................................37 9 Monitoring ................................................................................................................................40 10 Expertise for conducting a health assessment within EIA ........................................................42 11 References ................................................................................................................................44 12 Appendices ...............................................................................................................................48 Appendix A: Scoping health as an EIA topic ........................................................................49 Appendix B: Multi-criteria analysis example of considerations for health sensitivity, magnitude and significance in EIA ..................................................................52 Appendix C: Screening checklist ..........................................................................................58 Appendix D: Scoping checklist .............................................................................................64 Appendix E: Assessment checklist .......................................................................................86 Appendix F: Consultation checklist .....................................................................................91 Appendix G: Monitoring checklist ........................................................................................92 DRAFT iii | Page List of figures Figure 1: Strategies to combat environment related disease ........................................................... 2 Figure 2: Environmental assessment of policies, plans, programmes and projects .......................... 7 Figure 3: The Environmental Impact Assessment process as set out in the EIA Directive ................ 8 Figure 4: The EIA process and entry points for health professionals ................................................ 9 Figure 5: Text of Article 3 in the amended EIA Directive 2014/52 EU .............................................10 Figure 6: The determinants of health and wellbeing in our neighbourhoods .................................11 Figure 7: Participatory rights ...........................................................................................................19 Figure 8: Scoping health as an EIA topic chapter .............................................................................26 Figure 8 Example of considerations during the scoping of health effects in EIA ...........................49 Figure 10: Multi-criteria analysis example of considerations for health sensitivity, magnitude and significance in EIA .............................................................................................................53 List of tables Table 1: Key concepts for health in EIA ............................................................................................ 4 Table 2: Categories and examples of the broader environmental and social determinants of health and wellbeing ........................................................................................................22 Table 3: Scrutinising the judgement on health significance in EIA .................................................33 Table C-1: Screening checklist ............................................................................................................58 Table C-2: Screening questions ..........................................................................................................62 Table D-1: Scoping checklist ...............................................................................................................64 Table D-2: Scoping questions .............................................................................................................84 Table E-1: Assessment checklist: description of the likely significant effects of the project ............86 Table F-1: Assessment checklist: refernces to consultation ..............................................................91 Table G-1: Assessment checklist:DRAFT description of monitoring measures ............................................92 iv | Page IAIA is the International Association for Impact Assessment, the leading global network on best practice in the use of impact assessment for informed decision making regarding policies, programs, plans and projects. For more information see www.iaia.org/index.php The European Public Health Association, or EUPHA in short, is an umbrella organisation for public health associations and institutes in Europe. For more information see https://eupha.org/index.php DRAFT v | Page DRAFT vi | Page 1 Introduction 1.1 Background 1.1.1 The response to social, environmental and economic determinants of health requires multisectoral approaches. The range of determinants that act on people’s health, such as socioeconomic status, gender and other environmental and social determinants, means that multisectoral action is central to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), set by the United Nations General Assembly in 2015 (1), and in achieving the triple billion goal of the World Health Organization (WHO) aiming to ensure that by 2023 one billion more people benefit from universal health coverage (UHC), one billion more people have better protection from health emergencies; and one billion more people enjoy better health and well-being. 1.1.2 One of the disciplines supporting multisectoral action is the enhanced assessment of health impacts in environmental assessments such as environmental impact assessments (EIA) and strategic environmental assessment (SEA). A task WHO supports since the first Ministerial Conference on Environment and Health, Frankfurt 1989 (2) and through diverse Resolutions of the World Health Assembly. 1.1.3 EIA is governed in the European Union by EIA Directive 2011/92/EU (3), as amended by 2014/52/EU (4) (hereafter the ‘EIA Directive’). Article 3 of the amended EIA Directive names human health among the topics to be addressed when conducting an EIA. The amended EIA Directive also includes issues that are relevant to human health, for example, climate change and vulnerability (exposure and resilience) to major accidents and/or disasters. 1.1.4 These amendments are relevant not only for European Members States but beyond EU borders through, for example, the policies of the European Investment Bank (5) and the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development (6). 1.1.5 The EIA Directive identifies various actors, including the Developer bringing forward the project application and the Competent Authority responsible for performing the duties arising from the EIA Directive. The societal response to protecting and improving health and moving towards sustainability requires partnerships between multiple sectors and collaborative and integrated approaches for action. 1.2 Aim of this paper 1.2.1 This paper aims to provideDRAFT principles and good practice for appropriately addressing health in EIA for the health sector and all sectors and actors involved in the EIA process. 1.2.2 This paper seeks to contribute towards consistent coverage of human health within an EIA. This is of interest to practitioners conducting EIA, Developers and to the authorities requested to express their opinion on the information supplied in an EIA report. 1.2.3 It seeks to complement guidance, for example the guides for Andalucía and for Wales (7,8) and it builds on previous joint action between the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA), the European Public Health Association (EUPHA), and the WHO Regional Office for Europe (9). 1.2.4 This paper contributes to the strategies to combat environment related disease and to WHO actions as set out by WHO (see Figure 1). 1 | Page Figure 1: Strategies to combat environment related disease DRAFT From the World Health Organization (10) Preparing this paper 1.2.5 In
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Safety Data Sheets (Sdss) Information and Glossary
    Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) Information and Glossary 2408 Wanda Daley Drive Ames, Iowa 50011 (515) 294-5359 | www.ehs.iastate.edu Copyright© Reviewed 2018 Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) Information Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) are informational sheets required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for hazardous substances (chemicals). The OSHA Hazard Communication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200) and the Iowa Hazardous Chemical Risks Right to Know Standard (Iowa Administrative Code Section 875, Chapters 110-140) requires SDSs be “readily accessible” for any hazardous chemical in the workplace. Employees must be made aware of the SDS content and chemical storage location. SDSs can be obtained from manufacturers and distributors at the time of initial shipment. Each university workplace must maintain an SDS for each hazardous chemical in its inventory. SDSs that are available electronically meet the “readily accessible” criteria, as long as computer access is available to all employees whenever work is being conducted. EH&S suggests that each workspace also maintain paper copies of commonly used hazardous chemicals for ease of access. OSHA requires specific information be included on an SDS, in a 16-section format as described in the UN Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). The SDS must be in English and must include at least the following information: Section 1: Identification includes product identifier; manufacturer or distributor name, address, phone number; emergency phone number; recommended use; restrictions on use. Section 2: Hazard(s) Identification includes all hazards regarding the chemical; required label elements. Section 3: Composition/Information on Ingredients includes information on chemical ingredients; trade secret claims.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality, Health, and Place
    November 2015 Water Quality, Health, and Place A RESEARCH BRIEF VERSION 1.1 Photo by Ann Forsyth Photo by The HEALTH AND PLACE INITIATIVE (HAPI) investigates how to create healthier cities in the future, with a specific emphasis on China. Bringing together experts from the Harvard Graduate School of Design (HGSD) and the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH), it creates a forum for understanding the multiple issues that face cities in light of rapid urbanization and an aging population worldwide. Health and Places Initiative http://research.gsd.harvard.edu/hapi/ Harvard Graduate School of Design The Research Briefs series summarizes recent research on links between human health and places at the neighborhood or district scale and provides background for a number of other forthcoming products—a set of health assessment tools, planning and urban design guidelines, urban design prototypes, and neighborhood cases. While the Research Briefs draw out implications for practice, it is these other tools that really provide specific, real-world guidance for how to create healthy places. © 2015 President and Fellows of Harvard College As is typical practice feel free to use and cite small parts of this work, with attribution. If you want to use substantial parts, or even this entire document, the following applies. Permission is granted for use for nonprofit education purposes for all of the work except third party materials incorporated in the work, which may require permission from the authors of such material. For permission to use this work in other circumstances, contact the Harvard Graduate School of Design: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 the Public Health Benefits of Sanitation Interventions
    The Public Health Benefits of Sanitation Interventions EPAR Brief No. 104 Jacob Lipson, Professor Leigh Anderson & Professor Susan Bolton Prepared for the Water & Sanitation Team of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Evans School Policy Analysis and Research (EPAR) Professor Leigh Anderson, PI and Lead Faculty Associate Professor Mary Kay Gugerty, Lead Faculty December 10, 2010 Introduction Limited sanitation infrastructure, poor hygienic practices, and unsafe drinking water negatively affect the health of millions of people in the developing world. Using sanitation interventions to interrupt disease pathways can significantly improve public health.1 Sanitation interventions primarily benefit public health by reducing the prevalence of enteric pathogenic illnesses, which cause diarrhea. Health benefits are realized and accrue to the direct recipients of sanitation interventions and also to their neighbors and others in their communities. In a report to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Hutton et al. (2006) estimate that the cost- benefit ratio of sanitation interventions in all developing countries worldwide is 11.2.2 This literature review summarizes the risks of inadequate sanitation to public health and presents the empirical evidence on the public health benefits of complete, intermediate and multiple factor sanitation interventions. The sanitation literature frequently uses inconsistent terminology to describe sanitation infrastructure, technologies and intervention types. Where feasible, we report study results using the original terminology of the authors, while also using consistent terminology to facilitate comparisons across studies. In this review and in much of the literature, sanitation interventions are defined as improvements which provide public or household fecal disposal facilities, and/or improve community fecal disposal and treatment methods.3,4 Sanitation interventions are distinct from water interventions, which focus on increasing access to clean water or improving water quality at drinking water sources or points of use.
    [Show full text]
  • Mortality–Air Pollution Associations in Low-Exposure Environments (MAPLE): Phase 1
    RESEARCH REPORT HEA L TH HEA L TH Mortality–Air Pollution Associations EFFE CTS EFFE CTS in Low-Exposure Environments INSTITUTE INSTITUTE (MAPLE): Phase 1 75 Federal Street, Suite 1400 Number 203 Michael Brauer, Jeffrey R. Brook, Tanya Christidis, Boston, MA 02110, USA November 2019 Yen Chu, Dan L. Crouse, Anders Erickson, Perry Hystad, +1-617-488-2300 www.healtheffects.org Chi Li, Randall V. Martin, Jun Meng, Amanda J. Pappin, Lauren L. Pinault, Michael Tjepkema, Aaron van Donkelaar, Scott Weichenthal, and Richard T. Burnett RESEARCH REPORT Number 203 November 2019 Includes a Commentary by HEI’s Low-Exposure Epidemiology Studies Review Panel ISSN 1041-5505 (print) ISSN 2688-6855 (online) Mortality–Air Pollution Associations in Low-Exposure Environments (MAPLE): Phase 1 Michael Brauer, Jeffrey R. Brook, Tanya Christidis, Yen Chu, Dan L. Crouse, Anders Erickson, Perry Hystad, Chi Li, Randall V. Martin, Jun Meng, Amanda J. Pappin, Lauren L. Pinault, Michael Tjepkema, Aaron van Donkelaar, Scott Weichenthal, and Richard T. Burnett with a Commentary by HEI’s Low-Exposure Epidemiology Studies Review Panel Research Report 203 Health Effects Institute Boston, Massachusetts Trusted Science · Cleaner Air · Better Health Publishing history: This document was posted at www.healtheffects.org in November 2019. Citation for document: Brauer M, Brook JR, Christidis T, Chu Y, Crouse DL, Erickson A, et al. 2019. Mortality–Air Pollution Associations in Low-Exposure Environments (MAPLE): Phase 1. Research Report 203. Boston, MA:Health Effects Institute. © 2019 Health Effects Institute, Boston, Mass., U.S.A. Cameographics, Belfast, Me., Compositor. Printed by Recycled Paper Printing, Boston, Mass. Library of Congress Catalog Number for the HEI Report Series: WA 754 R432.
    [Show full text]
  • 4. What Are the Effects of Education on Health? – 171
    4. WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF EDUCATION ON HEALTH? – 171 4. What are the effects of education on health? By Leon Feinstein, Ricardo Sabates, Tashweka M. Anderson, ∗ Annik Sorhaindo and Cathie Hammond ∗ Leon Feinstein, Ricardo Sabates, Tashweka Anderson, Annik Sorhaindo and Cathie Hammond, Institute of Education, University of London, 20 Bedford Way, London WC1H 0AL, United Kingdom. We would like to thank David Hay, Wim Groot, Henriette Massen van den Brink and Laura Salganik for the useful comments on the paper and to all participants at the Social Outcome of Learning Project Symposium organised by the OECD’s Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI), in Copenhagen on 23rd and 24th March 2006. We would like to thank the OECD/CERI, for their financial support of this project. A great many judicious and helpful suggestions to improve this report have been put forward by Tom Schuller and Richard Desjardins. We are particularly grateful for the general funding of the WBL Centre through the Department for Education and Skills whose support has been a vital component of this research endeavour. We would also like to thank research staff at the Centre for Research on the Wider Benefits of Learning for their useful comments on this report. Other useful suggestions were received from participants at the roundtable event organised by the Wider Benefits of Learning and the MRC National Survey of Health and Development, University College London, on 6th December 2005. All remaining errors are our own. MEASURING THE EFFECTS OF EDUCATION ON HEALTH AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT: PROCEEDINGS OF THE COPENHAGEN SYMPOSIUM – © OECD 2006 172 – 4.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Every Breath We Take: the Lifelong Impact of Air Pollution
    Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air pollution Report of a working party February 2016 The Royal College of Physicians The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) plays a leading role in the delivery of high-quality patient care by setting standards of medical practice and promoting clinical excellence. The RCP provides physicians in over 30 medical specialties with education, training and support throughout their careers. As an independent charity representing 32,000 fellows and members worldwide, the RCP advises and works with government, patients, allied healthcare professionals and the public to improve health and healthcare. Citation for this document : Royal College of Physicians. Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air pollution . Report of a working party. London: RCP, 2016. Copyright All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means and whether or not transiently or incidentally to some other use of this publication) without the written permission of the copyright owner. Applications for the copyright owner’s written permission to reproduce any part of this publication should be addressed to the publisher. Copyright © Royal College of Physicians 2016 ISBN 978-1-86016-567-2 eISBN 978-1-86016-568-9 Royal College of Physicians 11 St Andrews Place Regent’s Park London NW1 4LE www.rcplondon.ac.uk Registered charity no 210508 Typeset by Cambrian Typesetters, Camberley, Surrey Printed and bound in Great Britain by The Lavenham
    [Show full text]
  • Inadequate Housing and Health: an Overview. Int. J. of Environment and Pollution 30
    Int. J. Environment and Pollution, Vol. 30, Nos. 3/4, 2007 411 Inadequate housing and health: an overview Xavier Bonnefoy Environment and Health Consultant, Paris, France E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: For many years, the housing environment has been acknowledged as one of the main settings that affect human health. Living and housing conditions are the basis of many factors influencing residential health. Still, to date there is no commonly agreed upon definition of ‘healthy housing’, and there are still major gaps in the knowledge on how housing conditions may affect health. Epidemiological findings suggest strong associations between housing conditions and health effects. This paper explores the relevance of housing conditions as a key factor influencing mental health, sleep quality, indoor air, home safety, accessibility, obesity, mould growth, hygrothermal conditions and energy consumption, perception of crime, and residential quality. Keywords: housing conditions; inadequate housing; health; evidence. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Bonnefoy, X. (2007) ‘Inadequate housing and health: an overview’, Int. J. Environment and Pollution, Vol. 30, Nos. 3/4, pp.411–429. Biographical notes: Xavier Bonnefoy is a Civil Engineer, Sanitary Engineer and has Post Graduate Degree from the Faculty of Medicine of Nancy in Public Health (CES de santé publique). Currently, he is working as an Environment and Health Consultant. Until July 2006, he served as Regional Adviser and head of the noise and health and housing and health programmes at the European Center for Environment and Health, Bonn office, of the WHO Regional Office for Europe. As WHO staff, he was coordinating the team in charge of the implementation of the Budapest conference declaration aspects related to housing and health in the European Region of WHO.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Health Impact Assessments in the U.S.: Current State-Of-Science, Best Practices, and Areas for Improvement
    EPA/600/R-13/354 December 2013 www.epa.gov/ord A Review of Health Impact Assessments in the U.S.: Current State-of-Science, Best Practices, and Areas for Improvement Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory EPA/600/R-13/354 December 2013 www.epa.gov/ord A Review of Health Impact Assessments in the U.S.: Current State-of-Science, Best Practices, and Areas for Improvement Justicia Rhodus1, Florence Fulk2, Bradley Autrey2, Shannon O’Shea3, Annette Roth2 1 CSS-Dynamac c/o U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Cincinnati, OH 45268 2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Exposure Research Laboratory Cincinnati, OH 45268 3 Contractor, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Exposure Research Laboratory Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 National Exposure Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Cincinnati, OH 45268 Notice The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development funded and managed the research described here under contract EP-D-11-073 to Dynamac Corporation. It has been subjected to the Agency’s external and administrative reviews and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Author Contributions and Acknowledgements J. Rhodus (HIA Review Lead) – developed and managed the HIA Review process (including review framework and database), reviewed HIAs, implemented the QA Review and corrective actions, compiled and managed the final review database, performed final quality check on review database, synthesized the results of the HIA Review, and authored this synthesis report. F. Fulk (Principal Investigator) – managed implementation of the HIA Review in the context of other related Agency research, provided input during conceptualization of the HIA Review process, reviewed HIAs, and reviewed this synthesis report.
    [Show full text]
  • Airborne Dust WHO/SDE/OEH/99.14 Chapter 1 - Dust: Definitions and Concepts
    Hazard Prevention and Control in the Work Environment: Airborne Dust WHO/SDE/OEH/99.14 Chapter 1 - Dust: Definitions and Concepts Airborne contaminants occur in the gaseous form (gases and vapours) or as aerosols. In scientific terminology, an aerosol is defined as a system of particles suspended in a gaseous medium, usually air in the context of occupational hygiene, is usually air. Aerosols may exist in the form of airborne dusts, sprays, mists, smokes and fumes. In the occupational setting, all these forms may be important because they relate to a wide range of occupational diseases. Airborne dusts are of particular concern because they are well known to be associated with classical widespread occupational lung diseases such as the pneumoconioses, as well as with systemic intoxications such as lead poisoning, especially at higher levels of exposure. But, in the modern era, there is also increasing interest in other dust-related diseases, such as cancer, asthma, allergic alveolitis, and irritation, as well as a whole range of non-respiratory illnesses, which may occur at much lower exposure levels. This document aims to help reduce the risk of these diseases by aiding better control of dust in the work environment. The first and fundamental step in the control of hazards is their recognition. The systematic approach to recognition is described in Chapter 4. But recognition requires a clear understanding of the nature, origin, mechanisms of generation and release and sources of the particles, as well as knowledge on the conditions of exposure and possible associated ill effects. This is essential to establish priorities for action and to select appropriate control strategies.
    [Show full text]
  • Life and Breath: How Air Pollution Affects Public Health in the Twin Cities
    Acknowledgements Primary Authors Minnesota Pollution Control Agency David Bael Minnesota Department of Health Jeannette Sample Contributors Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Dorian Kvale Greg Pratt Mary Williams Minnesota Department of Health Jean Johnson Paula Lindgren Naomi Shinoda Acknowledgements We are grateful to the following people who served as technical consultants, reviewers and advisors to the authors as well as technical review by external representatives of other organizations. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota Department of Health New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Ned Brooks Wendy Brunner Iyad Kheirbek Mary Dymond Jim Kelly Kristie Ellickson Kathy Norlien U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5 MaryJean Fenske Kristin Raab George Bollweg Lisa Herschberger Chuck Stroebel Frank Kohlasch Dan Symonik U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Margaret McCourtney Linden Weiswerda Air Quality Planning and Standards Cassie McMahon Neal Fann Kari Palmer Editing and graphic design Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Risikat Adesaogun Ralph Pribble Minnesota Department of Health Kitty Hurley Sara Maaske Doug Schultz 1 aq1-61 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 4 What’s the issue? .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Twin Cities-area annual* health impacts
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Pollution
    www.abiosci.com Editorial Annals of Biological Sciences 2021, 9(2): 3-3 ISSN: 2348-1927 Soil Pollution Tanupriya Kumari* iMedPub, Green Lane, London, UK *Corresponding author: Tanupriya Kumari, iMedPub, Green Lane, London, UK, E-mail: [email protected] Received Date: March 06, 2021, Accepted Date: March 07, 2021, Published Date: March 14, 2021 EDITORIAL Nowadays, Pollution is a normal phenomenon. Human activities are the main source of soil contamination. Industrial processing, agrochemicals, and waste management are the main factors. Soil contamination is also caused by waste disposal, chemicals, waste clothing, and glasses. The pollution of soil reduced agricultural land production. The use of various pesticides can reduce the soil's fertility and quality. Toxic chemicals reduce crop productivity over time, which can affect plant growth. People who live, work, or play near polluted lands are more likely to develop skin and respiratory diseases. Causes and types of Soil Pollution The main causes of current soil depletion are erosion, lack of organic carbon, increased salt content, compacting, acidification, and chemical contamination. The FAO also differentiates between two forms of soil contamination. Relevant Pollution: Caused by specific causes, occurring in small areas, and with easily recognizable causes. Land pollution is typically found in towns, abandoned factory sites, along highways, illegal dumps, and sewage treatment plants. Broad Pollution: Affects a vast area and have a number of causes that are difficult to trace. These types of cases include the spread of toxins by air-ground-water a system, which has an effect on human health and the environment. Industry, mining, military activities, waste including technological waste and waste water management, farming, stock breeding, and the construction of urban and transportation infrastructures are among the most common causes of soil contamination caused by human activity, according to the FAO.
    [Show full text]
  • Hygiene and Environmental Health, Part 1 Blended Learning Module for the Health Extension Programme
    Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Ministry of Health Hygiene and Environmental Health, Part 1 Blended Learning Module for the Health Extension Programme HEAT Health Education and Training HEAT in Africa Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Ministry of Health The Ethiopian Federal Ministry of Health (FMOH) and the Regional Health Bureaus (RHBs) have developed this innovative Blended Learning Programme in partnership with the HEAT Team from The Open University UK and a range of medical experts and health science specialists within Ethiopia. Together, we are producing 13 Modules to upgrade the theoretical knowledge of the country’s 33,000 rural Health Extension Workers to that of Health Extension Practitioners and to train new entrants to the service. Every student learning from these Modules is supported by a Tutor and a series of Practical Training Mentors who deliver the parallel Practical Skills Training Programme. This blended approach to work-place learning ensures that students achieve all the required theoretical and practical competencies while they continue to provide health services for their communities. These Blended Learning Modules cover the full range of health promotion, disease prevention, basic management and essential treatment protocols to improve and protect the health of rural communities in Ethiopia. A strong focus is on enabling Ethiopia to meet the Millennium Development Goals to reduce maternal mortality by three-quarters and under-5 child mortality by two-thirds by the year 2015. The Modules cover antenatal care, labour and delivery, postnatal care, the integrated management of newborn and childhood illness, communicable diseases (including HIV/AIDS, malaria, TB, leprosy and other common infectious diseases), family planning, adolescent and youth reproductive health, nutrition and food safety, hygiene and environmental health, non-communicable diseases, health education and community mobilisation, and health planning and professional ethics.
    [Show full text]