Does climate adaptation policy deliver a health dividend? Exposure, modeled health burden, and defensive capacity in China's climate-adaptive city pilots.
IF 4.1 3区 医学Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
{"title":"Does climate adaptation policy deliver a health dividend? Exposure, modeled health burden, and defensive capacity in China's climate-adaptive city pilots.","authors":"Cun Wang, Hantao Gong","doi":"10.3389/fpubh.2026.1987084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Climate policy is widely expected to yield a health dividend: cleaner air can improve health without a simultaneous expansion of defensive capacity. We distinguish exposure reduction from defensive adaptation in China's 2017 climate-adaptive city pilot, using a 2011-2022 panel of 264 cities, including 21 treated units. A difference-in-differences design examines fine particulate matter (PM2.5) exposure, while the Global Exposure Mortality Model translates exposure into modeled pollution-related health burden. Physicians, hospital beds, and employee-insurance enrolment measure selected defensive inputs. The pilot is associated with a 3.87 μg/m<sup>3</sup> lower PM2.5 (95% confidence interval -6.49 to -1.25; wild-bootstrap <i>P</i> = 0.0067). The estimate remains negative after pollution-convergence adjustments but is smaller and imprecise in the matched sample. The central accounting model implies an approximately 8.10% lower burden (conditional 95% confidence interval -11.32 to -4.76%), not an observed mortality reduction. Average capacity estimates are imprecise and cannot establish the absence of defensive adaptation. A physician-based coupling calibration admits positive and negative contributions and cannot bound the total defensive response. Among nine pre-policy capacity interactions, telecommunications intensity is positively associated with bed expansion (+4.40 per 10,000 residents; pointwise 95% confidence interval 2.47-6.32; adjusted <i>P</i> = 0.021), although pre-trend concerns limit causal interpretation. Other interactions remain uncertain. The main estimate is close to an illustrative detection threshold, warranting caution with non-significant findings. The results support an exposure-related health co-benefit under explicit accounting assumptions. Assessment incentives, coordination, and financing are possible explanations for uneven responses, but their roles are not identified by these estimates.</p>","PeriodicalId":12548,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Public Health","volume":"14 ","pages":"1987084"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13717398/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1987084","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Climate policy is widely expected to yield a health dividend: cleaner air can improve health without a simultaneous expansion of defensive capacity. We distinguish exposure reduction from defensive adaptation in China's 2017 climate-adaptive city pilot, using a 2011-2022 panel of 264 cities, including 21 treated units. A difference-in-differences design examines fine particulate matter (PM2.5) exposure, while the Global Exposure Mortality Model translates exposure into modeled pollution-related health burden. Physicians, hospital beds, and employee-insurance enrolment measure selected defensive inputs. The pilot is associated with a 3.87 μg/m3 lower PM2.5 (95% confidence interval -6.49 to -1.25; wild-bootstrap P = 0.0067). The estimate remains negative after pollution-convergence adjustments but is smaller and imprecise in the matched sample. The central accounting model implies an approximately 8.10% lower burden (conditional 95% confidence interval -11.32 to -4.76%), not an observed mortality reduction. Average capacity estimates are imprecise and cannot establish the absence of defensive adaptation. A physician-based coupling calibration admits positive and negative contributions and cannot bound the total defensive response. Among nine pre-policy capacity interactions, telecommunications intensity is positively associated with bed expansion (+4.40 per 10,000 residents; pointwise 95% confidence interval 2.47-6.32; adjusted P = 0.021), although pre-trend concerns limit causal interpretation. Other interactions remain uncertain. The main estimate is close to an illustrative detection threshold, warranting caution with non-significant findings. The results support an exposure-related health co-benefit under explicit accounting assumptions. Assessment incentives, coordination, and financing are possible explanations for uneven responses, but their roles are not identified by these estimates.
期刊介绍:
Frontiers in Public Health is a multidisciplinary open-access journal which publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research and is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians, policy makers and the public worldwide. The journal aims at overcoming current fragmentation in research and publication, promoting consistency in pursuing relevant scientific themes, and supporting finding dissemination and translation into practice.
Frontiers in Public Health is organized into Specialty Sections that cover different areas of research in the field. Please refer to the author guidelines for details on article types and the submission process.