Climate change poses a threat to health equality in the UK: The Longevity Science Panel report

The report titled, The Effects of Climate Change on Health in the UK, shows that the most economically deprived and those who are already frail through age or having long-term health conditions will be the most vulnerable to high temperatures and shocks induced by adverse weather events.

Many of the health inequalities driven by climate change are yet to be fully understood. Current literature focuses on mortality statistics, but the report from the Longevity Science Panel identifies the broader health inequality impacts from climate change, including mental health.

The research also differentiates the direct impacts of climate change, often arising from physical hazards such as higher temperatures and increased flooding, as well as the indirect consequences that will potentially arise due to the global negative economic consequences of climate change and in particular a disorderly transition to Net Zero.

Direct health impacts of climate change

Compared to many other countries, the Longevity Science Panel research found that the direct impacts of climate change such as heat waves, flooding and the increased spread of vector borne diseases, are likely to be relatively modest. This can be attributed to two factors: firstly, the UK’s geographic location in the Northern hemisphere and temperate climate, and secondly, the country’s economic resources to adapt houses, workplaces and infrastructure to reduce the adverse impacts of climate change. 

Indirect health impacts on physical and mental health inequalities in the UK 

However, the research found that greater emphasis needs to be given in climate policy development to ensure that the large existing inequalities in health are not further exacerbated by indirect implications from climate change – such as mental health challenges arising from displacement after a flood. Indirect implications that risk being overlooked include:

• Socio-economic: When economies are stressed the health of the most disadvantaged is disproportionately affected:
  • Climate change-related disruptions to global food production and supply chains will reduce food security, particularly for low-income families
  • Lower socio-economic households are more likely to be exposed to the damage caused by extreme weather events as poverty tends to force people to live in higher risk areas, but often lacking the disposable income to adequately prepare for the hazards associated with climate change
  • The build quality of certain lower income and private rental homes can make them more vulnerable to severe damage during adverse weather events
• Gender inequalities: Women are likely to be impacted more by climate effects than men. They are more often the primary caregivers, and these responsibilities can be considered an additional source of stress in times of adversity, particularly when infants and children in their care are threatened directly by displacement or food insecurity.
• Age inequalities: The young and the old are disproportionately affected by climate change compared to working age adults. This is due to differences in physiology, impacts on education, development, exposure, vulnerability to illness, lack of social support, declining health, and disruption to daily activities.
• Mental health: Climate change can negatively impact mental health in two main ways: by causing actual harm to people, family members, homes, livelihoods or culture, or by acting as a threat of harm and source of uncertainty.

Understanding the economic implications of climate change

The Longevity Science Panel report also reveals that disruptions to the UK economy, in part caused by climate-induced global economic stresses, are a key but under-appreciated indirect pathway through which climate change may adversely impact on population health in the UK.

Efforts to mitigate climate change by reducing fossil fuel use are taken on the basis that costly action today reduces substantive longer-term risk. Economic modelling strongly supports the cost-effectiveness of early mitigation, even when comparing scenarios that achieve Net Zero by 2050. However, mitigation polices are dependent on international co-operation. They are subject to the ‘commons dilemma’, where short term and local economic or adaptation interests are at odds with the long-term and global mitigation interests.

Looking ahead, future progress on climate change will also depend on more systemic changes and technologies that have yet to be developed, as well as continued public support for measures that threaten jobs, economic growth, and established ways of living.