Beyond climate change: Creating One Planet communities Climate and Health Alliance, Melbourne Tuesday 19th March 2019 Dr. Trevor Hancock Retired Professor and Senior Scholar School of Public Health and Social Policy University of Victoria

Outline We are undermining the ecological determinants of health The greatest threat to global health in the 21st century Welcome to the Anthropocene, We are undermining the ecological determinants of health Creating One Planet Communities/Regions Feeding a One Planet Region Advocacy is a duty

1. The greatest threat to global health in the 21st century

“Climate change is the greatest threat to global health in the 21st century. ” - WHO But is it?

How about this?

Living Planet Index 1970 - 2014 60% decline since 1970 Average abundance of 16,704 vertebrate populations representing 4,005 species monitored across the globe - mammals, birds, fish, reptiles and amphibians 60% decline since 1970 WWF. 2018. Living Planet Report - 2018: Aiming Higher. Grooten, M. and Almond, R.E.A.(Eds). WWF, Gland, Switzerland.

Or this?

Crossing Planetary Boundaries Novel entities = POPs, heavy metals, nano-particles etc Genetic diversity = extinctions per million species-years (E/MSY) Functional diversity = Biodiversity Intactness Index (BII) Steffen, Will et al (2015) Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet Science 15 January 2015 Steffen et al, 2015

Or this?

Global Ecological Footprint, 1961 - 2014 World biocapacity has increased about 27% in the past 50 years. Humanity’s Ecological Footprint has increased about 190% over the same period. Note more than ½ is carbon WWF. 2018. Living Planet Report - 2018: Aiming Higher. Grooten, M. and Almond, R.E.A.(Eds). WWF, Gland, Switzerland.

The greatest threat to health in the 21st century is the Anthropocene

Relationship between planetary health and human health Source: UN Environment Program (2019) Global Environment Outlook – GEO-6: Summary for Policymakers Nairobi: UNEP UNEP (2019) Global Environment Outlook

VIDEO https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvgG-pxlobk

Three aspects of the Anthropocene A geological phenomenon, a new geological epoch An ecological phenomenon – massive and rapid global ecological change A human phenomenon - we are the anthropos in the Anthropocene

Geologic aspects of the Anthropocene Layers containing Minerals Pure aluminum Tungsten carbide Glass Plastic Concrete Chemicals CO2 Nitrogen fertilisers POPs Radioactive particles Zalasiewicz, Jan (2016) A history in layers Scientific American Special 25(5): 104 – 11   Waters, C; Zalasiewicz, J; Summerhayes, C; Barnosky, A; Poirier, C et al (2016) The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene Science  Vol. 351 (Issue 6269) Plus changes in fossil assemblages Humans – 1/3 of mass of all land vertebrates Domesticated species – 2/3 Wild species - <5%

Ecological aspects of the Anthropocene Climate change Ocean acidification Ozone layer depletion Resource depletion Pollution and ecotoxicity Species extinctions ALL AT THE SAME TIME

It is the both the scale and the rapidity of change that matters . It is the both the scale and the rapidity of change that matters

The Great Acceleration Trends from 1750 to 2010 in indicators for the structure and functioning of the Earth System Note 1950 Steffen et al, 2015 Steffen, Will; Broadgate, Wendy; Deutsch, Lisa; Gaffney, Owen and Ludwig, Cornelia (2015a) The trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration The Anthropocene Review 2(1) 81–98

The human aspect of the Anthropocene - we are the ‘Anthropos’ in the Anthropocene

The IPAT Equation: Impact = Population x Affluence x Technology Societal & human forces driving change,1900 – 2011

The Great Acceleration The drivers Trends from 1750 to 2010 in globally aggregated indicators for socio-economic development Note 1950 Steffen et al, 2015 Steffen, Will; Broadgate, Wendy; Deutsch, Lisa; Gaffney, Owen and Ludwig, Cornelia (2015a) The trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration The Anthropocene Review 2(1) 81–98

My life in the Anthropocene I was born in 1948. From then to approx 2010/2012 Earth System trends CO2 + 26% Methane +59.5% Global surface temperature anomaly (0C) v 1961-1990 + 0.471 v - 0.036 Ozone loss (2012) Peak loss (1994) 50.8% 66.9% Ocean H ion +18% Marine fish capture + 4.6 x Nitrogen flux to coast 4.26 x Tropical forest loss (compared to 1% in 1700) 27.66% v 15.65% Agricultural land % of total (0.08% in 1750) 0.38% v 0.31% Terrestrial biosphere degradation (2.8% in 1700) 28.6% (2000) v 14% (1950) Socio-economic trends Population 2.73 x Real GDP (2005 US$) 11.1 x Urban population 4.74 x Primary energy use 5.14 x Fertilizer consumption 14.4 x Large dams 5.85 x Water use 3.28 x Paper production 5.38 x Transportation (vehicle #s) 7.23 Telecommunications (billion landlines and subscriptions) > 9,000 x International tourism arrivals 37 x Based on Great Acceleration data - Global (October 2014) Source: International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme - http://www.igbp.net/download/18.950c2fa1495db7081ebc7/1421334707878/IGBPGreatAccelerationdatacollection.xlsx

We may be the Anthropos in the Anthropocene But who is ‘we’?

Inequity in the Ecological Footprint The green line represents world average biocapacity per capita. Source: WWF Living Planet Report 2014 Summary (p 16) / Global Footprint Network, 2014

Inequity in the Ecological Footprint Since about 1970, the EF of high-income countries, as a group, has been between 5 and 6 global hectares per capita (gha/cap) For low-income countries it has been just over 1 gha/cap; World average biocapacity per person has declined from just under 3 to just under 2 gha/cap (Figure 35). Clearly, high-income countries are getting on average about 3.5 times their fair share, while low- income countries are getting less than their fair share.

Inequity in the Living Planet Index High-income countries - 10 % increase Middle-income countries - 18% decline Low-income countries - 58% decline WWF (2014) Living Planet Report 2014: Species and spaces, people and places Gland, Switzerland: WWF International Source: WWF Living Planet Report 2014 Summary (p 17)

Historical contribution to climate change Over the period from 1850 to 2012, the USA was responsible for 22% of total CO2 emissions and the EU for 18%; China, Russia, India and Brazil were responsible for 13, 6, 5 and 4 percent respectively, with the rest of the world accountable for 37%. It is estimated that by 2100 the USA and the EU will have contributed almost half (45%) of temperature increase resulting from overall Kyoto GHG emissions. Rocha et al., 2015

Inequitable carbon emissions “the poorest half of the global population – around 3.5 billion people – are responsible for only around 10% of total global emissions attributed to individual consumption” “50% of these emissions . . . can be attributed to the richest 10% of people around the world”. This latter group “have average carbon footprints 11 times as high as the poorest half of the population, and 60 times as high as the poorest 10%. The average footprint of the richest 1% of people globally could be 175 times that of the poorest 10%” Oxfam, 2015

2. We are undermining the ecological determinants of health

The Earth provides Oxygen Water Food Materials Fuels UV protection Waste decompositon and recycling A relatively stable and benign climate These are the most fundamental determinants of health

Global change and public health: The 2015 CPHA Report CPHA Project Document the potential health impacts of major global ecological changes Climate and atmospheric change Pollution and ecotoxicity Resource depletion Loss of species and biodiversity Identify the drivers of these changes Propose an action agenda for public health

Suggested citation Hancock, Trevor, Spady, Donald W. and Soskolne, Colin L. (Editors) (2015) Global change and Public Health: Addressing the Ecological Determinants of Health: The Report in Brief Available at https://www.cpha.ca/sites/default/files/assets/policy/edh-brief.pdf Available at https://www.cpha.ca/sites/default/files/assets/policy/edh-discussion_e.pdf https://www.cpha.ca/sites/default/files/assets/policy/edh-brief.pdf https://www.cpha.ca/sites/default/files/assets/policy/edh-discussion_f.pdf

Our ultimate message The population health impacts of the ecological determinants of health are large, and comparable to the impact of the social determinants of health The two interact and must be considered as a whole – we cannot continue to be ecologically blind

Planetary health “the health of human civilization and the state of the natural systems on which it depends”

Yet we are undermining the fundamental determinants “At the heart of this assessment is a stark warning. Human activity is putting such strain on the natural functions of Earth that the ability of the planet’s ecosystems to sustain future generations can no longer be taken for granted.” Board of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005

Mortgaging the health of future generations “we have been mortgaging the health of future generations to realise economic and development gains in the present. By unsustainably exploiting nature’s resources, human civilisation has flourished but now risks substantial health effects from the degradation of nature’s life support systems in the future.” Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission on Planetary Health Whitmee, S., Haines, A., Beyrer, C., Boltz, F., Capon, A.G., et al., (2015). Safeguarding human health in the Anthropocene epoch: Report of The Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission on Planetary Health, The Lancet, 386: (1007), pp. 1973–2028. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60901-1 (last accessed 11 August 2016).

3. Creating One Planet Communities

In Canada and Australia we act as if we had this . . . test

. . . when we actually have this

So we have to find a way to live together within the constraints of this one small planet, which means . . .

. . . an 80% reduction in Canada and Australia’s footprint

. . . while at the same time meeting basic needs and ensuring high levels of human and social development and good health for all

The greatest challenge to health in the 21st century How do we live equitably, in harmony and in good health on this one small planet we call home?

10 principles of One Planet Living Bioregional Annual Review, 2015 -16

Happily, there are many health co-benefits . . . This is a wonderful opportunity (and challenge) if you are concerned about Healthy eating, physical activity or obesity Health inequity Air pollution Healthy built environments Climate change Social capital Governance for health . . . . and many other issues

One Planet Saanich A year-long project that brings together municipalities, organisations, businesses, schools and community groups in Canada (Saanich) Denmark (Elsinore) South Africa (Durban) Tarusa (Russia) the UK (Oxfordshire) to make our cities better places to live!  https://www.oneplanetsaanich.org/

Local ecological footprint = 2 – 3 planets Source: ecoCity Footprint Tool Victoria & Saanich Pilot Testing Results One Planet Conversations April 12th, 2018 Presented by: Dr. Jennie Moore Cora Hallsworth Source: Moore and Hallsworth, 2018

Source: One Planet Saanich Team, 2018 DRAFT District of Saanich One Planet Gap Analysis [SEPT 18, 2018] Source: One Planet Saanich Team, 2018

Conversations for a One Planet Region Vision The Greater Victoria Region achieves social and ecological sustainability, with a high quality of life and a long life in good health for all its citizens, while reducing its ecological footprint to be equivalent to one planet’s worth of bio-capacity. Mission The Mission of The Conversations is to establish and maintain community-wide conversations on One Planet living and a One Planet Region. https://creativelyunited.org/one-planet-region/ Learn – Discuss – Imagine – Design – Create

Getting to a One Planet Region First we need to talk and learn about it Then we need to imagine it Then we need to design and build it Physical, social, economic and cultural change And throughout, we need to measure how we are doing Learn – Discuss – Imagine – Design – Create

3 a) Feeding a One Planet Region DRAFT District of Saanich One Planet Gap Analysis [SEPT 18, 2018] Source: One Planet Saanich Team, 2018

“Eat food, not too much, mostly plants” (Michael Pollan, In Defense of Food) would be a good national food policy McEvoy CT, Temple N. and Woodside JV (2012) Vegetarian diets, low-meat diets and health: a review Public Health Nutr. 15(12): 2287-94

Environmental costs per consumed calorie “dairy, poultry, pork, and eggs are mutually comparable (to within a factor of 2) beef production requires 28, 11, 5, and 6 times more land, irrigation water, GHG [greenhouse gases], and Nr [reactive nitrogen], respectively, than the average of the other livestock categories” Eshel, Shepon, Makov and Milo, 2014 Eshel, Gidon; Shepon, Alon; Makov, Tamar and Milo, Ron (2014) Land, irrigation water, greenhouse gas, and reactive nitrogen burdens of meat, eggs, and dairy production in the United States Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(33): 11996–12001

GHG emissions by diet type, UK, 2014 Diet kgCO2e/day High meat-eaters (>=100 g/d) 7.19 Medium meat-eaters (50-99 g/d) 5.63 Low meat-eaters (<50 g/d) 4.67 Fish-eaters 3.91 Vegetarians 3.81 Vegans 2.89 Age-and-sex-adjusted mean GHG emissions (in kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents per day - kgCO2e/day) for a standard 2,000 kcal diet in the UK Scarborough et al, 2014 Scarborough, Peter; Appleby, Paul N.; Mizdrak, Anja; Briggs, Adam D. M.; Travis, Ruth C.; Bradbury, Kathryn E. and Key, Timothy J. (2014) Dietary greenhouse gas emissions of meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in the UK Climatic Change (2014) 125:179–192 DOI 10.1007/s10584-014-1169-1

The EAT-Lancet Commission “global consumption of fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes will have to double, and consumption of foods such as red meat and sugar will have to be reduced by more than 50 percent”. “a diet rich in plant-based foods and with fewer animal source foods confers both improved health and environmental benefits”

The new Canada Food Guide (2019)

Advocacy is a duty Hancock, Trevor (2015) Advocacy: Its not a dirty word, it's a duty (Editorial) Can J Public Health 106(3): e86 - 8

The ‘public’ in public health ‘The public’ - the collective sense of ‘people’ – the community We work in and with community We work in the public interest We work for the public – we are public servants ‘Public’ means public policy – which means political (but not necessarily partisan)

We are not neutral We are pro-health and anti- anything that harms health If we are not rocking the boat or ruffling feathers, we are not really doing our job and it has been that way for more than 600 years! See Cipolla, 1976 Cipolla, C. (1976) Public Health and the Medical Profession in the Renaissance. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

But we need a platform MOHs work for governments or Quangos (Health authorities) So their independence is threatened and must be protected – but how? ?? Become more like Auditor-General Academics with tenure have a DUTY to speak up – why else give them the privilege of tenure? We do not stop being citizens when we become a public servant or an academic Join professional organisations, NGOs or found one!

Good people should not stay silent “When bad men (sic) combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” Edmund Burke, 1770 Bad men (sic) need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men (sic) should look on and do nothing. John Stuart Mill, 1867

Dr. Trevor Hancock Thancock@uvic.ca Website: https://trevorhancock.org Contact Dr. Trevor Hancock Thancock@uvic.ca Website: https://trevorhancock.org