Health complementarities and demand for improved energy products - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Health complementarities and demand for improved energy products

Marc Jeuland – Sanford & DGHI 2016 Energy Research Collaboration Workshop May 10 2016

General motivation (I): Environmental burden of disease

 Several ‘preventable’ diseases continue to

contribute significantly to the global burden of disease

General motivation (II): Environmental burden of disease

3 Fraction of DALYs attributable to the environment (WHO, 2016) Fraction of DALYs attributable to the environment, by country (WHO, 2016)

4 Fraction of DALYs attributable to the environment (WHO, 2016)

Comparative risk assessment: 33% of respiratory illness is related to HAP (WHO, 2016), 17% of lung cancer, 18% of IHD, 26% of stroke, & 24% of COPD

• Household air pollution from use of dirty fuels

and stoves: Now the leading environmental risk factor for global disease

General motivation (II): Environmental burden of disease

5 Fraction of DALYs attributable to the environment (WHO, 2016)

Comparative risk assessment: 34% of diarrheal diseases are related to drinking water (WHO, 2016)

• Lack of access to safe water and sanitation:

Consistently among top 2-3 environmental risk factors for global disease

General motivation (II): Environmental burden of disease

Also a variety of other conditions (parasitic, bacterial, vector-related)

General motivation: Environmental burden

• f disease

 Several ‘preventable’ diseases continue to

contribute significantly to the global burden of disease

 The donor / policy community thinks of these

as separate problems, for good reason:

 Makes problems manageable  Different agencies / community actors are involved

(or invested) in each

 Resources are limited, and multiple interventions are

expensive, and complicated to manage (well)

 It is hard to make comparisons of incommensurable

• utcomes

3 potential problems with this separation

• 1. Complementarities across interventions

 Higher water quality reduces diarrhea, which

improves overall health and resistance to acute respiratory illness (ARI)

• 2. Substitution across interventions

 Investing in water quality depletes resources that

would have been used for preventing ARI

• 3. Under-investment due to multiple risks

 Susceptible population may see little value in

reducing one risk if other risks remain high

Research question: Which of these explanations is most relevant to observed behavior?

My current/recent work on these issues

• 1. Systematic reviews of studies on

adoption of clean stoves & fuels (Lewis & Pattanayak 2012) → Reveal correlations with other risk-reducing behaviors

• 2. Effect of higher quality sources of

water on water treatment (Jeuland et

• al. 2016)

→ Negative compensating behavior

• 3. Sanitation promotion followed by

improved stove auctions (Work w/PhD student Jenny Orgill, in progress)

• 4. Demand for reduced risk of diarrheal

and respiratory disease (Work w/Pattanayak and others, in progress) → Stated preferences suggest tight budget constraints; and complex interactions

Stay with us!

9

http://www.dukeenergyhealth.org/