Search

This paper proposes a conceptual framework to systematize the use of Nature-based solutions (NBS) by integrating their resilience potential into Natural Assurance Scheme (NAS), focusing on insurance value as corner stone for both awareness-raising and valuation. As such one of its core goal is to align research and pilot projects with infrastructure development constraints and priorities. Under NAS, the integrated contribution of natural infrastructure to Disaster Risk Reduction is valued in the context of an identified growing need for climate robust infrastructure. The potential of NAS benefits and trade-off are explored by through the alternative lens of Disaster Resilience Enhancement (DRE). Such a system requires a joint effort of specific knowledge transfer from research groups and stakeholders to potential future NAS developers and investors. We therefore match the knowledge gaps with operational stages of the development of NAS from a project designer perspective. We start by highlighting the key role of the insurance industry in incentivizing and assessing disaster and slow onset resilience enhancement strategies. In parallel we place the public sector as potential kick-starters in DRE initiatives through the existing initiatives and constraints of infrastructure procurement. Under this perspective the paper explores the required alignment of Integrated Water resources planning and Public investment systems. Ultimately this will provide the possibility for both planners and investors to design no regret NBS and mixed Grey-Green infrastructures systems. As resources and constraints are widely different between infrastructure development contexts, the framework does not provide explicit methodological choices but presents current limits of knowledge and know-how. In conclusion the paper underlines the potential of NAS to ease the infrastructure gap in water globally by stressing the advantages of investment in the protection, enhancement and restoration of natural capital as an effective climate change adaptation investment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global environmental changes, driven by the consequences of human activities and population growth, are altering our planet in ways that pose current threats to human health, with the magnitude of these threats projected to increase over coming decades if additional, proactive actions are not taken. Global changes, unprecedented in their geospatial and temporal scales, include climate change, marine pollution, ozone layer depletion, soil degradation, and urbanization. Climate change is the best studied. The health risks of a changing climate will become increasingly urgent as climate change affects the quantity and quality of food and water, increases air pollution, alters the distribution of vectors/pathogens and disease transmission dynamics, and reduces eco-physical buffering against extreme weather and climate events. Health systems urgently need to be improved to effectively address these emerging challenges. This paper provides an overview of the health consequences of climate change, and discusses how health risks can be minimized and avoided via mitigation and adaptation pathways. • The global mean surface temperature is now approximately1.0°C above preindustrial levels, with detrimental consequences for human and natural systems. • Each additional unit of warming is projected to increase climate-related health risks. • The increasing risks of a changing climate are regarded as a health emergency. • Emerging health risks can be minimized and avoided via effective mitigation and adaptation pathways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adverse health effects from extreme heat remain a major risk, especially in a changing climate. Several European countries have implemented heat health action plans (HHAPs) to prevent ill health and excess mortality from heat. This paper assesses the state of implementation of HHAPs in the WHO European Region and discusses barriers and successes since the early 2000s. The results are based on a web-based survey among 53 member states on the current national and federal HHAPs in place. Guided by the eight core elements of HHAPs as outlined by the WHO Regional Office for Europe guidance from 2008, we analyzed which elements were fully or partially implemented and which areas of improvement countries identified. HHAP adaptations to account for COVID-19 were sought via literature search and expert consultations. 27 member states provided information, of which 17 countries reported having a HHAP. Five out of eight core elements, namely agreement on a lead body, accurate and timely alert systems, heat-related health information plans, strategies to reduce health exposure, and care for vulnerable groups, were at least partially implemented in all 17 plans. Alert systems were implemented most often at 94%. The least often implemented items were real-time surveillance, long-term urban planning, and preparedness of health and social systems. Five countries had published COVID-19 guidance online. Our findings suggest a progressive improvement in the development and rollout of HHAPs overall and awareness of vulnerable population groups in WHO/Europe, while integration of HHAPs into long-term climate change and health planning remains a challenge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]