推进和整合美国的气候和卫生政策:来自国家政策利益相关者的见解

IF 3.6
Julia Fine , Joshua Ettinger , John Kotcher , Matto Mildenberger , Anthony Leiserowitz , Edward Maibach
{"title":"推进和整合美国的气候和卫生政策:来自国家政策利益相关者的见解","authors":"Julia Fine ,&nbsp;Joshua Ettinger ,&nbsp;John Kotcher ,&nbsp;Matto Mildenberger ,&nbsp;Anthony Leiserowitz ,&nbsp;Edward Maibach","doi":"10.1016/j.joclim.2025.100485","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Many experts have called for integrating climate policy with health policy. We investigated U.S. federal policy stakeholders’ views on these goals and strategies for achieving them.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>We conducted 65 semi-structured interviews from January 2024 to April 2024 with stakeholders working on climate policy, health policy, the climate-health intersection, and related areas. We performed a qualitative content analysis of these interviews.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Most stakeholders perceived that federal climate policy and health policy were mostly separate, but were becoming more integrated. They believed further integration could increase support for climate policy and maximize its health benefits. Barriers included lack of funding; competing priorities; conservative opposition; low public awareness; lack of data; and silos in federal agencies and professional communities. Opportunities included growing awareness and policy support; new funding sources, data, and technologies; the president’s ability to take executive actions; policy windows in diverse sectors, including agriculture, transportation, and housing; and potential healthcare cost savings. Proposed strategies included enhancing communication, education, and research; strengthening intra- and interagency initiatives; participatory policymaking; mobilizing existing funding; focusing first on politically feasible policies; and persistent advocacy.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>These results extend previous observations of separations between climate policy and health policy and suggest ways to address these separations.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>There is potential to integrate U.S. federal climate policy and health policy, and doing so is perceived as advantageous by most. While there are barriers to climate-health policy integration and advancement, there are also promising opportunities, which may be more relevant under future presidential administrations or at the sub-federal level.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":75054,"journal":{"name":"The journal of climate change and health","volume":"25 ","pages":"Article 100485"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advancing and integrating climate and health policy in the United States: Insights from national policy stakeholders\",\"authors\":\"Julia Fine ,&nbsp;Joshua Ettinger ,&nbsp;John Kotcher ,&nbsp;Matto Mildenberger ,&nbsp;Anthony Leiserowitz ,&nbsp;Edward Maibach\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.joclim.2025.100485\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Many experts have called for integrating climate policy with health policy. We investigated U.S. federal policy stakeholders’ views on these goals and strategies for achieving them.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>We conducted 65 semi-structured interviews from January 2024 to April 2024 with stakeholders working on climate policy, health policy, the climate-health intersection, and related areas. We performed a qualitative content analysis of these interviews.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Most stakeholders perceived that federal climate policy and health policy were mostly separate, but were becoming more integrated. They believed further integration could increase support for climate policy and maximize its health benefits. Barriers included lack of funding; competing priorities; conservative opposition; low public awareness; lack of data; and silos in federal agencies and professional communities. Opportunities included growing awareness and policy support; new funding sources, data, and technologies; the president’s ability to take executive actions; policy windows in diverse sectors, including agriculture, transportation, and housing; and potential healthcare cost savings. Proposed strategies included enhancing communication, education, and research; strengthening intra- and interagency initiatives; participatory policymaking; mobilizing existing funding; focusing first on politically feasible policies; and persistent advocacy.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>These results extend previous observations of separations between climate policy and health policy and suggest ways to address these separations.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>There is potential to integrate U.S. federal climate policy and health policy, and doing so is perceived as advantageous by most. While there are barriers to climate-health policy integration and advancement, there are also promising opportunities, which may be more relevant under future presidential administrations or at the sub-federal level.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75054,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of climate change and health\",\"volume\":\"25 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100485\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of climate change and health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667278225000616\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of climate change and health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667278225000616","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

许多专家呼吁将气候政策与卫生政策结合起来。我们调查了美国联邦政策利益相关者对这些目标和实现这些目标的策略的看法。材料和方法从2024年1月到2024年4月,我们对从事气候政策、健康政策、气候-健康交叉和相关领域工作的利益相关者进行了65次半结构化访谈。我们对这些访谈进行了定性内容分析。结果大多数利益相关者认为,联邦气候政策和卫生政策在很大程度上是分开的,但正在变得更加一体化。他们认为,进一步整合可以增加对气候政策的支持,并最大限度地发挥其健康效益。障碍包括缺乏资金;竞争优先权;保守派反对党;公众认知度低;缺乏数据;以及联邦机构和专业团体的竖井。机会包括提高认识和政策支持;新的资金来源、数据和技术;总统采取行政行动的能力;不同部门的政策窗口,包括农业、交通和住房;以及潜在的医疗成本节约。建议的策略包括加强沟通、教育和研究;加强机构内和机构间倡议;参与式决策;调动现有资金;首先关注政治上可行的政策;以及坚持不懈的倡导。这些结果扩展了以前关于气候政策和卫生政策之间分离的观察结果,并提出了解决这些分离的方法。结论:将美国联邦气候政策和健康政策整合在一起是有潜力的,而且大多数人认为这样做是有利的。虽然气候健康政策的整合和推进存在障碍,但也存在有希望的机会,这些机会在未来的总统行政当局或联邦以下一级可能更为相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Advancing and integrating climate and health policy in the United States: Insights from national policy stakeholders

Introduction

Many experts have called for integrating climate policy with health policy. We investigated U.S. federal policy stakeholders’ views on these goals and strategies for achieving them.

Materials and methods

We conducted 65 semi-structured interviews from January 2024 to April 2024 with stakeholders working on climate policy, health policy, the climate-health intersection, and related areas. We performed a qualitative content analysis of these interviews.

Results

Most stakeholders perceived that federal climate policy and health policy were mostly separate, but were becoming more integrated. They believed further integration could increase support for climate policy and maximize its health benefits. Barriers included lack of funding; competing priorities; conservative opposition; low public awareness; lack of data; and silos in federal agencies and professional communities. Opportunities included growing awareness and policy support; new funding sources, data, and technologies; the president’s ability to take executive actions; policy windows in diverse sectors, including agriculture, transportation, and housing; and potential healthcare cost savings. Proposed strategies included enhancing communication, education, and research; strengthening intra- and interagency initiatives; participatory policymaking; mobilizing existing funding; focusing first on politically feasible policies; and persistent advocacy.

Discussion

These results extend previous observations of separations between climate policy and health policy and suggest ways to address these separations.

Conclusion

There is potential to integrate U.S. federal climate policy and health policy, and doing so is perceived as advantageous by most. While there are barriers to climate-health policy integration and advancement, there are also promising opportunities, which may be more relevant under future presidential administrations or at the sub-federal level.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
The journal of climate change and health
The journal of climate change and health Global and Planetary Change, Public Health and Health Policy
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
68 days
×
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