RESUMO
Air pollution poses major disease burdens globally and accounts for approximately 10% of deaths annually through its contribution to a variety of respiratory, cardiovascular, and other diseases. The burden of disease is particularly acute in Saudi Arabia, where a mix of anthropogenic and natural sources of air pollution threatens public health. Addressing these burdens requires careful study of the costs and effectiveness of available technologies and policies for reducing emissions (mitigation) and avoiding exposure (adaptation). To help evaluate these options, we conduct a semi-systematic literature review of over 3,000 articles published since 2010 that were identified by searches of literature focused on pollution mitigation and pollution adaptation. We identify a wide variety of effective mitigation and adaptation technologies and find that cost-effectiveness information for policy design is highly variable in the case of mitigation, both within and across pollution source categories; or scarce, in the case of adaptation. While pollution control costs are well studied, policy costs differ; these may vary more by location because of factors such as technology operating conditions and behavioral responses to adaptation initiatives, limiting the generalizability of cost-effectiveness information. Moreover, potential cost advantages of multipollutant control policies are likely to depend on the existing mix of pollution sources and controls. While the policy literature generally favors more flexible compliance mechanisms that increase the cost of polluting to reflect its costs to society, important policy design factors include policy co-benefits, distributional concerns, and inter-regional harmonization. In addition to these key themes, we find that further study is needed both to improve the availability of cost information for adaptation interventions and to localize technology and policy cost estimates to the Saudi context.
RESUMO
Background: Environmental health is a growing area of knowledge, continually increasing and updating the body of evidence linking the environment to human health. Aim: This study summarizes the epidemiological evidence on environmental risk factors from meta-analyses through an umbrella review. Methods: An umbrella review was conducted on meta-analyses of cohort, case-control, case-crossover, and time-series studies that evaluated the associations between environmental risk factors and health outcomes defined as incidence, prevalence, and mortality. The specific search strategy was designed in PubMed using free text and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms related to risk factors, environment, health outcomes, observational studies, and meta-analysis. The search was limited to English, Spanish, and French published articles and studies on humans. The search was conducted on September 20, 2020. Risk factors were defined as any attribute, characteristic, or exposure of an individual that increases the likelihood of developing a disease or death. The environment was defined as the external elements and conditions that surround, influence, and affect a human organism or population's life and development. The environment definition included the physical environment such as nature, built environment, or pollution, but not the social environment. We excluded occupational exposures, microorganisms, water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), behavioral risk factors, and no-natural disasters. Results: This umbrella review found 197 associations among 69 environmental exposures and 83 diseases and death causes reported in 103 publications. The environmental factors found in this review were air pollution, environmental tobacco smoke, heavy metals, chemicals, ambient temperature, noise, radiation, and urban residential surroundings. Among these, we identified 65 environmental exposures defined as risk factors and 4 environmental protective factors. In terms of study design, 57 included cohort and/or case-control studies, and 46 included time-series and/or case-crossover studies. In terms of the study population, 21 included children, and the rest included adult population and both sexes. In this review, the largest body of evidence was found in air pollution (91 associations among 14 air pollution definitions and 34 diseases and mortality diagnoses), followed by environmental tobacco smoke with 24 associations. Chemicals (including pesticides) were the third larger group of environmental exposures found among the meta-analyses included, with 19 associations. Conclusion: Environmental exposures are an important health determinant. This review provides an overview of an evolving research area and should be used as a complementary tool to understand the connections between the environment and human health. The evidence presented by this review should help to design public health interventions and the implementation of health in all policies approach aiming to improve populational health.
