6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Strategies for Delivering Mental Health Services in Response to Global Climate Change: A Narrative Review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This narrative review examined strategies for preparedness and response to mental health impacts of three forms of climate change from a services perspective: (1) acute and extreme weather events such as hurricanes, floods, and wildfires, (2) sub-acute or long-term events such as droughts and heatwaves; and (3) the prospect of long-term and permanent changes, including higher temperatures, rising sea levels, and an uninhabitable physical environment. Strategies for acute events included development and implementation of programs and practices for monitoring and treating mental health problems and strengthening individual and community resilience, training of community health workers to deliver services, and conducting inventories of available resources and assessments of at-risk populations. Additional strategies for sub-acute changes included advocacy for mitigation policies and programs and adaptation of guidelines and interventions to address the secondary impacts of sub-acute events, such as threats to livelihood, health and well-being, population displacement, environmental degradation, and civil conflict. Strategies for long-lasting changes included the implementation of evidence-based risk communication interventions that address the existing and potential threat of climate change, promoting the mental health benefits of environmental conservation, and promoting psychological growth and resilience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references106

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Green space, urbanity, and health: how strong is the relation?

          To investigate the strength of the relation between the amount of green space in people's living environment and their perceived general health. This relation is analysed for different age and socioeconomic groups. Furthermore, it is analysed separately for urban and more rural areas, because the strength of the relation was expected to vary with urbanity. The study includes 250 782 people registered with 104 general practices who filled in a self administered form on sociodemographic background and perceived general health. The percentage of green space (urban green space, agricultural space, natural green space) within a one kilometre and three kilometre radius around the postal code coordinates was calculated for each household. Multilevel logistic regression analyses were performed at three levels-that is, individual level, family level, and practice level-controlled for sociodemographic characteristics. The percentage of green space inside a one kilometre and a three kilometre radius had a significant relation to perceived general health. The relation was generally present at all degrees of urbanity. The overall relation is somewhat stronger for lower socioeconomic groups. Elderly, youth, and secondary educated people in large cities seem to benefit more from presence of green areas in their living environment than other groups in large cities. This research shows that the percentage of green space in people's living environment has a positive association with the perceived general health of residents. Green space seems to be more than just a luxury and consequently the development of green space should be allocated a more central position in spatial planning policy.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production.

            Growing evidence demonstrates that climatic conditions can have a profound impact on the functioning of modern human societies, but effects on economic activity appear inconsistent. Fundamental productive elements of modern economies, such as workers and crops, exhibit highly non-linear responses to local temperature even in wealthy countries. In contrast, aggregate macroeconomic productivity of entire wealthy countries is reported not to respond to temperature, while poor countries respond only linearly. Resolving this conflict between micro and macro observations is critical to understanding the role of wealth in coupled human-natural systems and to anticipating the global impact of climate change. Here we unify these seemingly contradictory results by accounting for non-linearity at the macro scale. We show that overall economic productivity is non-linear in temperature for all countries, with productivity peaking at an annual average temperature of 13 °C and declining strongly at higher temperatures. The relationship is globally generalizable, unchanged since 1960, and apparent for agricultural and non-agricultural activity in both rich and poor countries. These results provide the first evidence that economic activity in all regions is coupled to the global climate and establish a new empirical foundation for modelling economic loss in response to climate change, with important implications. If future adaptation mimics past adaptation, unmitigated warming is expected to reshape the global economy by reducing average global incomes roughly 23% by 2100 and widening global income inequality, relative to scenarios without climate change. In contrast to prior estimates, expected global losses are approximately linear in global mean temperature, with median losses many times larger than leading models indicate.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              What are the Benefits of Interacting with Nature?

              There is mounting empirical evidence that interacting with nature delivers measurable benefits to people. Reviews of this topic have generally focused on a specific type of benefit, been limited to a single discipline, or covered the benefits delivered from a particular type of interaction. Here we construct novel typologies of the settings, interactions and potential benefits of people-nature experiences, and use these to organise an assessment of the benefits of interacting with nature. We discover that evidence for the benefits of interacting with nature is geographically biased towards high latitudes and Western societies, potentially contributing to a focus on certain types of settings and benefits. Social scientists have been the most active researchers in this field. Contributions from ecologists are few in number, perhaps hindering the identification of key ecological features of the natural environment that deliver human benefits. Although many types of benefits have been studied, benefits to physical health, cognitive performance and psychological well-being have received much more attention than the social or spiritual benefits of interacting with nature, despite the potential for important consequences arising from the latter. The evidence for most benefits is correlational, and although there are several experimental studies, little as yet is known about the mechanisms that are important for delivering these benefits. For example, we do not know which characteristics of natural settings (e.g., biodiversity, level of disturbance, proximity, accessibility) are most important for triggering a beneficial interaction, and how these characteristics vary in importance among cultures, geographic regions and socio-economic groups. These are key directions for future research if we are to design landscapes that promote high quality interactions between people and nature in a rapidly urbanising world.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                18 November 2020
                November 2020
                : 17
                : 22
                : 8562
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0411, USA; marleenw@ 123456usc.edu
                [2 ]Phoenix Australia Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health and Department of Psychiatry, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC 3053, Australia; mod@ 123456unimelb.edu.au (M.L.O.); wlau@ 123456unimelb.edu.au (W.L.)
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: palinkas@ 123456usc.edu ; Tel.: +1-858-022-7265; Fax: +1-213-740-0789
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0974-7330
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4349-0022
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2366-2464
                Article
                ijerph-17-08562
                10.3390/ijerph17228562
                7698950
                33218141
                4c89ea7d-e410-4df8-ad5c-c188df2a8734
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 06 October 2020
                : 15 November 2020
                Categories
                Review

                Public health
                mental health services,climate change,disasters,trauma,prevention,treatment
                Public health
                mental health services, climate change, disasters, trauma, prevention, treatment

                Comments

                Comment on this article