Assessing the Health Benefits of Improved Air Quality in Central and Eastern Europe

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Ambient Air Pollution Reduction

Introduction

The Czech Republic has been frequently associated with poor air quality in northern Bohemia. However, recent data on particulate reduction in the country seems to indicate relatively low pollution levels in the sampled areas.

Estimating Health-Related Effects Reduction

To assess the potential reductions in adverse health-related effects, we used a dose-response model that considers various health effects associated with ambient pollutant concentrations. These effects include asthma attacks, restricted activity days, heart disease, and premature mortality. The model, developed by researchers at Resources for the Future and other institutions, incorporates expert opinions from clinical and epidemiological literature on air pollution’s health impacts. Two notable assumptions of the model are the linear relationship between exposures and health effects and the benefits of improving air quality even when pollution concentrations are already low.

Regional Disparities and Underestimation

It is important to note that the dose-response relationships in the model are based on data from the United States and Western Europe, which may not fully capture the differences in the health status of residents in Central and Eastern Europe. We suspect that our model underestimates the reduction in adverse health effects that would occur if pollution declined in the countries included in our analysis. This suspicion arises from the assumption that individuals in Central and Eastern Europe may be less healthy and more sensitive to pollution exposures. Due to uncertainties and controversies surrounding dose-response relationships, our model provides a range of responses for each health effect, including low, middle, and high responses.

Economic Valuation of Health Improvements

Once the reductions in adverse health effects were calculated, we proceeded to determine the economic value of these health improvements. Assigning monetary values to human health and risks of premature mortality is a subject of philosophical and practical debate. However, we believe that it is possible to obtain useful information about the trade-offs individuals are willing to make between health and other social goods.

Addressing Willingness-to-Pay for Health Threat Reduction

In assessing the willingness-to-pay (WTP) for reductions in exposure to health threats, our valuation model considers both direct health damage costs (such as medical expenses and wage rates reflecting the value of restricted activity days) and estimates of WTP for reduced exposure. These estimates are derived from contingent valuation studies where individuals reveal their WTP for reduced exposure to health threats. Similar to our dose-response model, our valuation model incorporates expert opinions from the literature on monetary valuations of health effects. To account for uncertainties in existing WTP estimates, the model provides low, middle, and high valuations.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
• SDG 13: Climate Action

The article discusses the reduction in adverse health effects due to improvements in air quality, which is directly related to SDG 3 – Good Health and Well-being. It also mentions the poor air quality in northern Bohemia, which is a city in the Czech Republic, connecting it to SDG 11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities. Additionally, the article acknowledges the need for improving air quality to reduce pollution, which aligns with SDG 13 – Climate Action.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water, and soil pollution and contamination.
• SDG 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management.
• SDG 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies, and planning.

Based on the article’s content, the targets mentioned above are relevant. The reduction in adverse health effects due to improved air quality aligns with SDG 3.9. The focus on air quality in cities, specifically in northern Bohemia, connects to SDG 11.6. Lastly, the need to improve air quality to reduce pollution is in line with SDG 13.2.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Reductions in ambient pollutant concentrations
• Reductions in adverse health-related effects
• Per-unit economic value for health improvements

The article mentions the calculation of reductions in adverse health-related effects resulting from improved air quality. This can be used as an indicator to measure progress towards SDG 3.9. The estimation of the per-unit economic value for health improvements can also serve as an indicator for this target. Additionally, the reduction in ambient pollutant concentrations can be used as an indicator to measure progress towards SDG 11.6 and SDG 13.2.

4. Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: resources.org

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.