Skip to Global Health Institute Full Site Menu Skip to main content
April 19, 2017

Responding To: Georgetown Reflects on CUGH 2017: "Healthy People, Healthy Ecosystems: Implementation, Leadership, and Sustainability in Global Health"

Global Commission on Pollution and Health - A Preview

Tyler Kall

On April 8, 2017, the Consortium of Universities for Global Health (CUGH) hosted its eighth annual conference, which focused on the link between our physical and planetary health. Dr. Philip Landrigan, a world-renowned pediatrician and epidemiologist, presented on the insufficiently appreciated impact of pollution on global health. Dr. Landrigan helped fight to rid the world of smallpox and now advocates for the protection of children from environmental pollution. He gave a preview of the findings in the upcoming report from the Global Commission on Pollution and Health (GCPH), and they leave no room to doubt the devastating economic and health effects of pollution.

The reported economic costs associated with pollution are staggering. Welfare damages (country-specific lost economic earning potential from pollution-related deaths) are estimated to have been over $4 trillion U.S. dollars (USD) in 2013. The value of air pollution deaths alone in 2013 are estimated to be $1.7 trillion USD in high-income countries, $1.3 trillion USD in upper-middle income countries, and $285 billion USD in low-middle income countries. The economic burden of pollution is estimated to have exceeded 5 percent of global GDP in 2013, and 6 percent of global GDP in 2015. These estimates are also likely underreported, as there is no available data on the economic impacts of cognitive impairment associated with exposure to pollution.

While in absolute dollar terms upper-middle and high-income countries are bearing the highest monetary costs from pollution, it is the low-middle and upper-middle income countries that have the highest number of pollution-related deaths and death rates. Less-developed countries contend with indoor air pollution, which kills three million people a year, and have inadequate regulations to restrict pollution-heavy industries. Developing countries also have greater exposure to harmful chemicals, since GCPH estimates that nearly 70 percent of chemical production now takes place in low and middle income countries.

The effects of pollution, however, are felt by all, regardless of income. GCPH found that pollution is the world’s third leading cause of death, exceeded only by combined dietary risk factors and hypertension. This crisis by far outstrips Ebola, malaria, war and murder, malnutrition, and AIDS. GCPH estimates that air, water, and soil pollution are responsible for nine million deaths a year.

Before climate change, the impact of pollution on public health went largely unstudied in academia. Now that there is such damning data that links pollution and negative health outcomes, action must be taken. Not nearly enough is being done to protect the most at-risk segments of society from the health consequences associated with pollution. Despite being the world’s largest environmental cause of death, GCPH estimates that funds to mitigate pollution account for less than 5 percent of foreign aid investments. Industry, health professionals, civic society, and governments need to redouble their efforts and reverse the disturbing trends. With trillions of dollars and millions of lives at risk, pollution is too costly to ignore.

Tyler Kall is a graduate student studying policy management at Georgetown University.


Other Responses