Cargando…
How different COVID-19 recovery paths affect human health, environmental sustainability, and food affordability: a modelling study
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic arrived at a time of faltering global poverty reduction and increasing levels of diet-related diseases, both of which have a strong link to poor outcomes for those with COVID-19. Governments responded to the pandemic by placing unprecedented restrictions on internal...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9259001/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35809586 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(22)00144-9 |
_version_ | 1784741674527752192 |
---|---|
author | Maire, Juliette Sattar, Aimen Henry, Roslyn Warren, Frances Merkle, Magnus Rounsevell, Mark Alexander, Peter |
author_facet | Maire, Juliette Sattar, Aimen Henry, Roslyn Warren, Frances Merkle, Magnus Rounsevell, Mark Alexander, Peter |
author_sort | Maire, Juliette |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic arrived at a time of faltering global poverty reduction and increasing levels of diet-related diseases, both of which have a strong link to poor outcomes for those with COVID-19. Governments responded to the pandemic by placing unprecedented restrictions on internal and external movements, which have resulted in an economic contraction. In response to the economic shock, G20 governments have committed to providing US$14 trillion stimuli to support economic recovery. We aimed to assess the impact of different COVID-19 recovery paths on human health, environmental sustainability, and food sustainability. METHODS: We used LandSyMM, a global gridded land use change model, to analyse the impact of recovery paths from COVID-19. The paths were illustrated by four scenarios that represent different pandemic severities (including a single or recurrent pandemic) and alternate modes of recovery, including a transition of food demand towards healthier diets that result in changes to the food system: (1) solidarity and celery, (2) nothing new, (3) fries and fragmentation, and (4) best laid plans. For each scenario, we modelled the economic shocks of the pandemic and the impact of policy measures to promote healthier diets in the years after the COVID-19 pandemic, including the supply of and demand for food, environmental outcomes, and human health outcomes. The four scenarios use established future population growth and economic development projections derived from the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 2. We quantified the outcomes from more societally cooperative pandemic responses that result in reduced trade barriers and improved technological development against less cooperative responses. FINDINGS: Repeated pandemic shocks (the fries and fragmentation and best laid plans scenarios) reduce the ability of the lowest income countries to ensure food security. A post-pandemic recovery that includes dietary transition towards the consumption of less meat and more fruits and vegetables (the solidarity and celery scenario) could prevent 2583 premature deaths per million in 2060, whereas recovery paths that are focused on economic recovery (the fries and fragmentation scenario) could trigger an additional 778 deaths per million in 2060. The transition of dietary preferences towards healthier diets (the solidarity and celery scenario) also reduces nitrogen fertiliser use by 40 million tonnes and irrigation water by 400 km(3) compared with no dietary change in 2060 (the nothing new scenario). Finally, the scenario with dietary transition increases the affordability of the average diet. INTERPRETATION: The economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is most visible in low-income countries, where a reduction in growth projections makes a greater difference to the affordability of a basic diet. A change in dietary preferences is most impactful in reducing mortality and the burden of disease when income levels are high. At lower income, a transition towards lower meat consumption reduces undernourishment and diet-related mortality. FUNDING: The Global Food Security's Resilience of the UK Food System Programme project, with support from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, Natural Environment Research Council, and the Scottish Government. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9259001 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92590012022-07-07 How different COVID-19 recovery paths affect human health, environmental sustainability, and food affordability: a modelling study Maire, Juliette Sattar, Aimen Henry, Roslyn Warren, Frances Merkle, Magnus Rounsevell, Mark Alexander, Peter Lancet Planet Health Articles BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic arrived at a time of faltering global poverty reduction and increasing levels of diet-related diseases, both of which have a strong link to poor outcomes for those with COVID-19. Governments responded to the pandemic by placing unprecedented restrictions on internal and external movements, which have resulted in an economic contraction. In response to the economic shock, G20 governments have committed to providing US$14 trillion stimuli to support economic recovery. We aimed to assess the impact of different COVID-19 recovery paths on human health, environmental sustainability, and food sustainability. METHODS: We used LandSyMM, a global gridded land use change model, to analyse the impact of recovery paths from COVID-19. The paths were illustrated by four scenarios that represent different pandemic severities (including a single or recurrent pandemic) and alternate modes of recovery, including a transition of food demand towards healthier diets that result in changes to the food system: (1) solidarity and celery, (2) nothing new, (3) fries and fragmentation, and (4) best laid plans. For each scenario, we modelled the economic shocks of the pandemic and the impact of policy measures to promote healthier diets in the years after the COVID-19 pandemic, including the supply of and demand for food, environmental outcomes, and human health outcomes. The four scenarios use established future population growth and economic development projections derived from the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways 2. We quantified the outcomes from more societally cooperative pandemic responses that result in reduced trade barriers and improved technological development against less cooperative responses. FINDINGS: Repeated pandemic shocks (the fries and fragmentation and best laid plans scenarios) reduce the ability of the lowest income countries to ensure food security. A post-pandemic recovery that includes dietary transition towards the consumption of less meat and more fruits and vegetables (the solidarity and celery scenario) could prevent 2583 premature deaths per million in 2060, whereas recovery paths that are focused on economic recovery (the fries and fragmentation scenario) could trigger an additional 778 deaths per million in 2060. The transition of dietary preferences towards healthier diets (the solidarity and celery scenario) also reduces nitrogen fertiliser use by 40 million tonnes and irrigation water by 400 km(3) compared with no dietary change in 2060 (the nothing new scenario). Finally, the scenario with dietary transition increases the affordability of the average diet. INTERPRETATION: The economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is most visible in low-income countries, where a reduction in growth projections makes a greater difference to the affordability of a basic diet. A change in dietary preferences is most impactful in reducing mortality and the burden of disease when income levels are high. At lower income, a transition towards lower meat consumption reduces undernourishment and diet-related mortality. FUNDING: The Global Food Security's Resilience of the UK Food System Programme project, with support from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, Natural Environment Research Council, and the Scottish Government. The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2022-07 2022-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9259001/ /pubmed/35809586 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(22)00144-9 Text en © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Articles Maire, Juliette Sattar, Aimen Henry, Roslyn Warren, Frances Merkle, Magnus Rounsevell, Mark Alexander, Peter How different COVID-19 recovery paths affect human health, environmental sustainability, and food affordability: a modelling study |
title | How different COVID-19 recovery paths affect human health, environmental sustainability, and food affordability: a modelling study |
title_full | How different COVID-19 recovery paths affect human health, environmental sustainability, and food affordability: a modelling study |
title_fullStr | How different COVID-19 recovery paths affect human health, environmental sustainability, and food affordability: a modelling study |
title_full_unstemmed | How different COVID-19 recovery paths affect human health, environmental sustainability, and food affordability: a modelling study |
title_short | How different COVID-19 recovery paths affect human health, environmental sustainability, and food affordability: a modelling study |
title_sort | how different covid-19 recovery paths affect human health, environmental sustainability, and food affordability: a modelling study |
topic | Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9259001/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35809586 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(22)00144-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mairejuliette howdifferentcovid19recoverypathsaffecthumanhealthenvironmentalsustainabilityandfoodaffordabilityamodellingstudy AT sattaraimen howdifferentcovid19recoverypathsaffecthumanhealthenvironmentalsustainabilityandfoodaffordabilityamodellingstudy AT henryroslyn howdifferentcovid19recoverypathsaffecthumanhealthenvironmentalsustainabilityandfoodaffordabilityamodellingstudy AT warrenfrances howdifferentcovid19recoverypathsaffecthumanhealthenvironmentalsustainabilityandfoodaffordabilityamodellingstudy AT merklemagnus howdifferentcovid19recoverypathsaffecthumanhealthenvironmentalsustainabilityandfoodaffordabilityamodellingstudy AT rounsevellmark howdifferentcovid19recoverypathsaffecthumanhealthenvironmentalsustainabilityandfoodaffordabilityamodellingstudy AT alexanderpeter howdifferentcovid19recoverypathsaffecthumanhealthenvironmentalsustainabilityandfoodaffordabilityamodellingstudy |