Potential of shifting work hours for reducing heat-related loss and regional disparities in China: a modelling analysis

IF 21.6 1区 医学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Mengzhen Zhao PhD , Yuyou Chen PhD , Jing Shang PhD , Shihui Zhang PhD , Bo Lu PhD , Yanqing Miao PhD , Mingyu Lei PhD , Ruiyao Li BSc , Prof Wenjia Cai PhD , Prof Chi Zhang PhD
{"title":"Potential of shifting work hours for reducing heat-related loss and regional disparities in China: a modelling analysis","authors":"Mengzhen Zhao PhD ,&nbsp;Yuyou Chen PhD ,&nbsp;Jing Shang PhD ,&nbsp;Shihui Zhang PhD ,&nbsp;Bo Lu PhD ,&nbsp;Yanqing Miao PhD ,&nbsp;Mingyu Lei PhD ,&nbsp;Ruiyao Li BSc ,&nbsp;Prof Wenjia Cai PhD ,&nbsp;Prof Chi Zhang PhD","doi":"10.1016/S2542-5196(25)00079-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>As climate change intensifies, the economic losses caused by heat-related labour productivity loss are gaining increasing attention. Shifting work hours has become a prevalent practice to reduce outdoor workers' heat exposure. However, both the potential of this adaptation measure for reducing labour productivity and economic loss and how this potential will change in the future remain unclear. Answers to these questions at the subnational level are important for decision makers to promote the implementation of adaptations and the development of comprehensive strategies to tackle the residual consequences of climate change. This study aimed to model the potential of shifting work hours for reducing labour productivity and economic loss at the national and provincial level in China.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We did a modelling study to estimate the potential of shifting work hours for reducing heat-related labour productivity loss in China under different climate change scenarios. We used the China Hybrid Energy and Economic Research model, a dynamic multiregional computable general equilibrium model, to quantify the economic impacts of heat-related labour productivity loss from 2020 to 2100, with an exposure–response function between heat stress and labour productivity loss and bias-corrected climate change projections from the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration Earth Exchange Global Daily Downscaled Projections dataset conducted under the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). We used nine different scenarios: three climate change scenarios consistent with the shared socioeconomic pathway (SSP)–representative concentration pathway scenarios used in CMIP6 (SSP1–2·6, SSP2–4·5, and SSP5–8·5); three adaptation scenarios (SSP1–2·6_shift, SSP2–4·5_shift, and SSP5–8·5_shift); and three counterfactual scenarios (SSP1–2·6cf, SSP2–4·5cf, and SSP5–8·5cf). SSP1–2·6 is a scenario with less than 2°C warming by 2100 and low carbon emissions. SSP2–4·5 is a middle scenario with a 2·7°C rise in global mean temperature, representing current emission trends. SSP5–8·5 is an extreme scenario, with a 4·4°C rise in global mean temperature and high carbon emissions. The climate change scenarios and adaptation scenarios considered heat-related labour productivity loss caused by climate change in the future, whereas the counterfactual scenarios held loss constant at the 2020 level. The adaptation scenarios considered the impact of shifting work hours earlier when estimating labour productivity loss. We assumed that outdoor work hours could maximally be rescheduled to sunrise time. The economic growth pathways in the SSP1–2·6cf, SSP2–4·5cf, and SSP5–8·5cf scenarios were derived from SSP1, SSP2, and SSP5, respectively. We compared results for the different adaptation and climate change scenarios to evaluate the reduction potential of the adaptation measure. By comparing the climate, adaptation, and counterfactual scenarios separately, we also estimated the economic loss caused by heat-related labour productivity loss and economic loss. We did not consider specific mitigation measures but rather reflected the influence of mitigation efforts by comparing results under different climate change scenarios.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Shifting work hours could substantially reduce the impact of heat on labour productivity and economic development in China. The potential of this adaptation strategy for reducing loss was projected to increase with lower levels of temperature rise (ie, under improving mitigation efforts). Compared with the SSP2–4·5 climate change scenario, shifting work hours under the SSP2–4·5_shift scenario was projected to reduce up to 26·2% (uncertainty range 24·8–28·5) of national outdoor labour productivity loss in 2100, leading to a decrease in residual GDP loss from 4·3% to 3·8%. The potential for reducing labour productivity loss was projected to increase to 31·0% (uncertainty range 30·1–34·1) in 2100 under the SSP1–2·6_shift scenario. Considering this synergy between shifting work hours and mitigation measures, our results suggest that only simultaneous implementation of adaptation and mitigation measures could achieve the maximum reduction in residual economic loss. However, even with the implementation of ambitious mitigation measures and the most robust implementation of this adaptation measure, the residual damage resulting from heat-related labour productivity loss could not be completely avoided in our modelling results. Under the most optimistic SSP1–2·6_shift scenario, the residual GDP loss in 2100 was projected to be reduced to 2·0%, equivalent to 54% of the expenditure of China's basic medical insurance fund in 2020 (approximately US$303 billion). Moreover, our results suggested that shifting work hours might reduce development disparities among provinces (this measure cannot change the distribution patterns of economic loss). The largest avoided economic loss was projected in low-income provinces with large agricultural populations, including Guangxi, Guizhou, Hainan, and Jiangxi, whereas high-income regions, including Beijing and Shanghai, were projected to see low proportions of avoided economic loss. In 2100, the reduced economic loss was projected to be 9·4% of GDP loss in Beijing and 7·7% of GDP loss in Guangdong, compared with 42·3% of GDP loss in Guizhou and 19·2% of GDP loss in Sichuan under the SSP2–4·5_shift scenario.</div></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><div>This modelling study suggests that shifting work hours could substantially reduce heat-related labour productivity and economic loss and further reduce development disparities among regions in China. This study contributes to the broader discussion in the literature around the synergistic relationships and trade-offs that exist between climate change adaptation and mitigation measures. Our results show that there are important synergies between shifting work hours (ie, an adaptation measure) and mitigation measures. The effectiveness of this adaptation measure increases with escalating mitigation efforts. However, this single adaptation measure cannot eliminate economic losses entirely. To minimise residual economic loss, local governments will need to implement targeted policies that promote flexible work hours for different regions and develop an integrated adaptation strategy. Moreover, more aggressive mitigation efforts should be pursued together with adaptation measures to minimise residual economic loss.</div></div><div><h3>Funding</h3><div>National Key R&amp;D Program of China, National Natural Science Foundation of China, China Meteorological Administration Climate Change Special Program, Youth Innovation Team of China Meteorological Administration, and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48548,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Planetary Health","volume":"9 7","pages":"Article 101241"},"PeriodicalIF":21.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Planetary Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542519625000798","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

As climate change intensifies, the economic losses caused by heat-related labour productivity loss are gaining increasing attention. Shifting work hours has become a prevalent practice to reduce outdoor workers' heat exposure. However, both the potential of this adaptation measure for reducing labour productivity and economic loss and how this potential will change in the future remain unclear. Answers to these questions at the subnational level are important for decision makers to promote the implementation of adaptations and the development of comprehensive strategies to tackle the residual consequences of climate change. This study aimed to model the potential of shifting work hours for reducing labour productivity and economic loss at the national and provincial level in China.

Methods

We did a modelling study to estimate the potential of shifting work hours for reducing heat-related labour productivity loss in China under different climate change scenarios. We used the China Hybrid Energy and Economic Research model, a dynamic multiregional computable general equilibrium model, to quantify the economic impacts of heat-related labour productivity loss from 2020 to 2100, with an exposure–response function between heat stress and labour productivity loss and bias-corrected climate change projections from the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration Earth Exchange Global Daily Downscaled Projections dataset conducted under the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). We used nine different scenarios: three climate change scenarios consistent with the shared socioeconomic pathway (SSP)–representative concentration pathway scenarios used in CMIP6 (SSP1–2·6, SSP2–4·5, and SSP5–8·5); three adaptation scenarios (SSP1–2·6_shift, SSP2–4·5_shift, and SSP5–8·5_shift); and three counterfactual scenarios (SSP1–2·6cf, SSP2–4·5cf, and SSP5–8·5cf). SSP1–2·6 is a scenario with less than 2°C warming by 2100 and low carbon emissions. SSP2–4·5 is a middle scenario with a 2·7°C rise in global mean temperature, representing current emission trends. SSP5–8·5 is an extreme scenario, with a 4·4°C rise in global mean temperature and high carbon emissions. The climate change scenarios and adaptation scenarios considered heat-related labour productivity loss caused by climate change in the future, whereas the counterfactual scenarios held loss constant at the 2020 level. The adaptation scenarios considered the impact of shifting work hours earlier when estimating labour productivity loss. We assumed that outdoor work hours could maximally be rescheduled to sunrise time. The economic growth pathways in the SSP1–2·6cf, SSP2–4·5cf, and SSP5–8·5cf scenarios were derived from SSP1, SSP2, and SSP5, respectively. We compared results for the different adaptation and climate change scenarios to evaluate the reduction potential of the adaptation measure. By comparing the climate, adaptation, and counterfactual scenarios separately, we also estimated the economic loss caused by heat-related labour productivity loss and economic loss. We did not consider specific mitigation measures but rather reflected the influence of mitigation efforts by comparing results under different climate change scenarios.

Findings

Shifting work hours could substantially reduce the impact of heat on labour productivity and economic development in China. The potential of this adaptation strategy for reducing loss was projected to increase with lower levels of temperature rise (ie, under improving mitigation efforts). Compared with the SSP2–4·5 climate change scenario, shifting work hours under the SSP2–4·5_shift scenario was projected to reduce up to 26·2% (uncertainty range 24·8–28·5) of national outdoor labour productivity loss in 2100, leading to a decrease in residual GDP loss from 4·3% to 3·8%. The potential for reducing labour productivity loss was projected to increase to 31·0% (uncertainty range 30·1–34·1) in 2100 under the SSP1–2·6_shift scenario. Considering this synergy between shifting work hours and mitigation measures, our results suggest that only simultaneous implementation of adaptation and mitigation measures could achieve the maximum reduction in residual economic loss. However, even with the implementation of ambitious mitigation measures and the most robust implementation of this adaptation measure, the residual damage resulting from heat-related labour productivity loss could not be completely avoided in our modelling results. Under the most optimistic SSP1–2·6_shift scenario, the residual GDP loss in 2100 was projected to be reduced to 2·0%, equivalent to 54% of the expenditure of China's basic medical insurance fund in 2020 (approximately US$303 billion). Moreover, our results suggested that shifting work hours might reduce development disparities among provinces (this measure cannot change the distribution patterns of economic loss). The largest avoided economic loss was projected in low-income provinces with large agricultural populations, including Guangxi, Guizhou, Hainan, and Jiangxi, whereas high-income regions, including Beijing and Shanghai, were projected to see low proportions of avoided economic loss. In 2100, the reduced economic loss was projected to be 9·4% of GDP loss in Beijing and 7·7% of GDP loss in Guangdong, compared with 42·3% of GDP loss in Guizhou and 19·2% of GDP loss in Sichuan under the SSP2–4·5_shift scenario.

Interpretation

This modelling study suggests that shifting work hours could substantially reduce heat-related labour productivity and economic loss and further reduce development disparities among regions in China. This study contributes to the broader discussion in the literature around the synergistic relationships and trade-offs that exist between climate change adaptation and mitigation measures. Our results show that there are important synergies between shifting work hours (ie, an adaptation measure) and mitigation measures. The effectiveness of this adaptation measure increases with escalating mitigation efforts. However, this single adaptation measure cannot eliminate economic losses entirely. To minimise residual economic loss, local governments will need to implement targeted policies that promote flexible work hours for different regions and develop an integrated adaptation strategy. Moreover, more aggressive mitigation efforts should be pursued together with adaptation measures to minimise residual economic loss.

Funding

National Key R&D Program of China, National Natural Science Foundation of China, China Meteorological Administration Climate Change Special Program, Youth Innovation Team of China Meteorological Administration, and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation.
轮班工作时间对减少中国热相关损失和区域差异的潜力:建模分析。
背景:随着气候变化的加剧,与热相关的劳动生产率损失造成的经济损失越来越受到关注。轮班工作时间已成为一种普遍做法,以减少户外工人的热暴露。然而,这种适应措施在降低劳动生产率和经济损失方面的潜力,以及这种潜力在未来将如何变化,都尚不清楚。对于决策者来说,在次国家层面回答这些问题对于促进适应措施的实施和制定应对气候变化残余后果的综合战略至关重要。本研究旨在建立中国国家和省一级轮班工作时间对降低劳动生产率和经济损失的潜力的模型。方法:我们做了一个模型研究,以估计在不同的气候变化情景下,轮班工作时间对减少中国与热相关的劳动生产率损失的潜力。利用中国能源与经济混合研究模型(一个动态的多区域可计算一般均衡模型),量化了2020 - 2100年热相关劳动生产率损失的经济影响。利用热应力和劳动生产率损失之间的暴露响应函数,以及来自美国国家航空航天局地球交换全球每日缩小预估数据集的偏差校正气候变化预估,这些数据是在耦合模式相互比较项目第6阶段(CMIP6)下进行的。我们使用了9个不同的情景:3个与共享社会经济路径(SSP)一致的气候变化情景——CMIP6中使用的代表性浓度路径情景(SSP1-2·6、SSP2-4·5和ssp5 - 8.5);3种适配场景(SSP1-2·6_shift、SSP2-4·5_shift和SSP5-8·5_shift);和3个反事实情景(SSP1-2·6cf、SSP2-4·5cf和SSP5-8·5cf)。SSP1-2·6是到2100年升温低于2°C且碳排放较低的情景。SSP2-4·5是全球平均温度上升2.7°C的中间情景,代表当前的排放趋势。ssp5 - 8.5是一个极端情景,全球平均气温上升4.4°C,碳排放量高。气候变化情景和适应情景考虑了未来气候变化造成的与热相关的劳动生产率损失,而反事实情景认为损失保持在2020年的水平不变。在估计劳动生产率损失时,适应情景考虑了提前轮班工作时间的影响。我们假设户外工作时间可以最大限度地重新安排到日出时间。SSP1 ~ 2·6cf、SSP2 ~ 4·5cf和SSP5 ~ 8·5cf情景下的经济增长路径分别来源于SSP1、SSP2和SSP5。我们比较了不同适应和气候变化情景下的结果,以评估适应措施的减排潜力。通过分别比较气候、适应和反事实情景,我们还估算了与热相关的劳动生产率损失和经济损失造成的经济损失。我们没有考虑具体的缓解措施,而是通过比较不同气候变化情景下的结果来反映缓解努力的影响。研究发现:在中国,轮班工作可以显著降低高温对劳动生产率和经济发展的影响。预计这一适应战略在减少损失方面的潜力将随着温度上升水平的降低而增加(即在改善缓解努力的情况下)。与SSP2-4·5气候变化情景相比,预计在SSP2-4·5_shift情景下,轮班工作时间将使2100年全国户外劳动生产率损失减少26.2%(不确定性范围24.8 - 28.5),导致剩余GDP损失从4.3%降至3.8%。在SSP1-2·6_shift情景下,预计到2100年减少劳动生产率损失的潜力将增加到31.0%(不确定性范围30.1 - 34.1)。考虑到轮班工作时间与缓解措施之间的协同作用,我们的研究结果表明,只有同时实施适应和缓解措施,才能最大限度地减少剩余经济损失。然而,即使实施了雄心勃勃的缓解措施和最有力地实施了这一适应措施,在我们的建模结果中,也不能完全避免与热有关的劳动生产率损失造成的残余损害。在最乐观的SSP1-2·6_shift情景下,预计2100年GDP剩余损失将降至2.0%,相当于2020年中国基本医疗保险基金支出(约3030亿美元)的54%。此外,我们的研究结果表明,轮班工作时间可能会缩小各省之间的发展差距(这一措施不能改变经济损失的分布格局)。 预计避免经济损失最大的是农业人口众多的低收入省份,包括广西、贵州、海南和江西,而高收入地区,包括北京和上海,预计避免经济损失的比例较低。2100年,在SSP2-4·5_shift情景下,预计减少的经济损失为北京GDP损失的9.4%,广东GDP损失的7.7%,而贵州GDP损失为42.3%,四川GDP损失为19.2%。解释:该模型研究表明,轮班工作时间可以大大降低与热有关的劳动生产率和经济损失,并进一步缩小中国地区之间的发展差距。本研究有助于文献中围绕气候变化适应与减缓措施之间存在的协同关系和权衡进行更广泛的讨论。我们的研究结果表明,轮班工作时间(即适应措施)与缓解措施之间存在重要的协同效应。这一适应措施的有效性随着减缓努力的升级而增强。然而,这种单一的适应措施并不能完全消除经济损失。为了最大限度地减少剩余的经济损失,地方政府将需要实施有针对性的政策,促进不同地区的灵活工作时间,并制定综合适应战略。此外,应在采取适应措施的同时采取更积极的缓解努力,以尽量减少剩余的经济损失。资助项目:国家重点研发计划、国家自然科学基金、中国气象局气候变化专项、中国气象局青年创新团队、中国博士后科学基金。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
28.40
自引率
2.30%
发文量
272
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Lancet Planetary Health is a gold Open Access journal dedicated to investigating and addressing the multifaceted determinants of healthy human civilizations and their impact on natural systems. Positioned as a key player in sustainable development, the journal covers a broad, interdisciplinary scope, encompassing areas such as poverty, nutrition, gender equity, water and sanitation, energy, economic growth, industrialization, inequality, urbanization, human consumption and production, climate change, ocean health, land use, peace, and justice. With a commitment to publishing high-quality research, comment, and correspondence, it aims to be the leading journal for sustainable development in the face of unprecedented dangers and threats.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信