Do greenspaces really reduce heat health impacts? Evidence for different vegetation types and distance-based greenspace exposure.

Effect modifications Extreme heat Forest Greenspaces Mortality risk

Journal

Environment international
ISSN: 1873-6750
Titre abrégé: Environ Int
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 7807270

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
13 Aug 2024
Historique:
received: 17 04 2024
revised: 17 07 2024
accepted: 12 08 2024
medline: 28 8 2024
pubmed: 28 8 2024
entrez: 27 8 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

While vegetation type, population density and proximity to greenspaces have been linked to human health, what type and location of greenspace matter most have remained unclear. In this context, there are question marks over investment-style metrics. This paper aims at establishing what vegetation type may matter most in modifying heat-mortality associations, and what the optimal buffer distances of total and specific types of greenspace exposure associated with reduced heat-related mortality risks are. We conducted small-area analyses using daily mortality data for 286 Territory Planning Units (TPUs) across Hong Kong and 1 × 1 km gridded air temperature data for the summer months (2005-2018). Using a case time series design, we examined effect modifications of total and specific types of greenspaces, as well as population-weighted exposure at varying buffer distances (200-4000 m). We tested the significance of effect modifications by comparing relative risks (RRs) between the lowest and highest quartiles of each greenspace exposure metric; and explored the strength of effect modifications by calculating the ratio of RRs. Forests, unlike grasslands, showed significant effect modifications on heat-mortality associations, with RRs rising from 0.98 (95 %CI: 0.92,1.05) to 1.06 (1.03, 1.10) for the highest to lowest quartiles (p-value = 0.037) The optimal distances associated with the most apparent effects were around 1 km for population-weighted exposure, with the ratio of RRs being 1.424 (1.038,1.954) for NDVI, 1.191 (1.004,1.413) for total greenspace, and 1.227 (1.024,1.470) for forests. A marked difference was observed in terms of the paired area-level and optimal distance-based exposure to total greenspace and forests under extreme heat (p-values < 0.05). Our findings suggest that greenspace, particularly nearby forests, may significantly mitigate heat-related mortality risks.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
While vegetation type, population density and proximity to greenspaces have been linked to human health, what type and location of greenspace matter most have remained unclear. In this context, there are question marks over investment-style metrics.
OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
This paper aims at establishing what vegetation type may matter most in modifying heat-mortality associations, and what the optimal buffer distances of total and specific types of greenspace exposure associated with reduced heat-related mortality risks are.
METHODS METHODS
We conducted small-area analyses using daily mortality data for 286 Territory Planning Units (TPUs) across Hong Kong and 1 × 1 km gridded air temperature data for the summer months (2005-2018). Using a case time series design, we examined effect modifications of total and specific types of greenspaces, as well as population-weighted exposure at varying buffer distances (200-4000 m). We tested the significance of effect modifications by comparing relative risks (RRs) between the lowest and highest quartiles of each greenspace exposure metric; and explored the strength of effect modifications by calculating the ratio of RRs.
RESULTS RESULTS
Forests, unlike grasslands, showed significant effect modifications on heat-mortality associations, with RRs rising from 0.98 (95 %CI: 0.92,1.05) to 1.06 (1.03, 1.10) for the highest to lowest quartiles (p-value = 0.037) The optimal distances associated with the most apparent effects were around 1 km for population-weighted exposure, with the ratio of RRs being 1.424 (1.038,1.954) for NDVI, 1.191 (1.004,1.413) for total greenspace, and 1.227 (1.024,1.470) for forests. A marked difference was observed in terms of the paired area-level and optimal distance-based exposure to total greenspace and forests under extreme heat (p-values < 0.05).
DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS
Our findings suggest that greenspace, particularly nearby forests, may significantly mitigate heat-related mortality risks.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39190977
pii: S0160-4120(24)00536-1
doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2024.108950
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

108950

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Jinglu Song (J)

Department of Urban Planning and Design, Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, Suzhou 215123, China. Electronic address: Jinglu.Song@xjtlu.edu.cn.

Antonio Gasparrini (A)

Department of Public Health, Environment and Society, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK. Electronic address: Antonio.Gasparrini@lshtm.ac.uk.

Di Wei (D)

Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China; School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China; Hubei Engineering and Technology Research Center of Urbanization, Wuhan, China. Electronic address: diwei3-c@my.cityu.edu.hk.

Yi Lu (Y)

Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. Electronic address: yilu24@cityu.edu.hk.

Kejia Hu (K)

Institute of Big Data in Health Science, School of Public Health, Zhejiang University, Zijingang Campus, Hangzhou 310058, China. Electronic address: kejiahu@zju.edu.cn.

Thomas B Fischer (TB)

Environmental Assessment and Management Research Centre, School of Environmental Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK; Research Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, North West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa. Electronic address: fischer@liverpool.ac.uk.

Mark Nieuwenhuijsen (M)

Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), Doctor Aiguader 88, Barcelona 08003, Spain; Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Doctor Aiguader 88, Barcelona 08003, Spain; CIBER Epidemioloǵıa y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Melchor Fernández Almagro, 3-5, Madrid 28029, Spain. Electronic address: mark.nieuwenhuijsen@isglobal.org.

Classifications MeSH