Jeremy J Hess, Nikhil Ranadive, Chris Boyer, Lukasz Aleksandrowicz, Susan C Anenberg, Kristin Aunan, Kristine Belesova, Michelle L Bell, Sam Bickersteth, Kathryn Bowen, Marci Burden, Diarmid Campbell-Lendrum, Elizabeth Carlton, Guéladio Cissé, Francois Cohen, Hancheng Dai, Alan David Dangour, Purnamita Dasgupta, Howard Frumkin, Peng Gong, Robert J Gould, Andy Haines, Simon Hales, Ian Hamilton, Tomoko Hasegawa, Masahiro Hashizume, Yasushi Honda, Daniel E Horton, Alexandra Karambelas, Ho Kim, Satbyul Estella Kim, Patrick L Kinney, Inza Kone, Kim Knowlton, Jos Lelieveld, Vijay S Limaye, Qiyong Liu, Lina Madaniyazi, Micaela Elvira Martinez, Denise L Mauzerall, James Milner, Tara Neville, Mark Nieuwenhuijsen, Shonali Pachauri, Frederica Perera, Helen Pineo, Justin V Remais, Rebecca K Saari, Jon Sampedro, Pauline Scheelbeek, Joel Schwartz, Drew Shindell, Priya Shyamsundar, Timothy J Taylor, Cathryn Tonne, Detlef Van Vuuren, Can Wang, Nicholas Watts, J Jason West, Paul Wilkinson, Stephen A Wood, James Woodcock, Alistair Woodward, Yang Xie, Ying Zhang, Kristie L Ebi
BACKGROUND: Modeling suggests that climate change mitigation actions can have substantial human health benefits that accrue quickly and locally. Documenting the benefits can help drive more ambitious and health-protective climate change mitigation actions; however, documenting the adverse health effects can help to avoid them. Estimating the health effects of mitigation (HEM) actions can help policy makers prioritize investments based not only on mitigation potential but also on expected health benefits...
November 2020: Environmental Health Perspectives