Search Climate Insights Directory

The report reviews global research on the intersection of climate change and health, finding that framing climate change as a public health issue—particularly through the use of trusted health professionals and positive, solutions-oriented messaging—can increase public engagement and support for climate policies across political divides. It notes a significant lack of representative data from the Global South and highlights the need for better integration of climate-health curricula in medical education and stronger engagement from public officials.

The report analyzes how different audiences perceive the intersection of climate change and health and evaluates the effectiveness of various communication frames. It finds that framing climate change as a public health issue, particularly by emphasizing the health benefits of solutions (gain framing) and the harms of air pollution, can increase public engagement and reduce political polarization. The document highlights health professionals as highly trusted messengers who are generally willing to engage in advocacy but face barriers such as lack of time and specialized knowledge. It also notes that public officials exhibit varying levels of awareness and face institutional barriers to prioritizing climate-health issues. The report concludes with a research agenda calling for more diverse geographic data, better integration of equity in messaging, and the expansion of climate-health curricula in medical education.

The paper identifies three main categories of rights-based claims: environmental justice, Indigenous rights and land claims, and artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) rights. It finds that claimants often use multi-scalar strategies, combining domestic litigation with mass protests and international advocacy. While some claims lead to the suspension of extractive activities or improved corporate engagement, others are met with state oppression or violence. The study highlights the critical role of civil society organizations (CSOs) as enablers and the importance of framing strategies to maximize available resources.

The report evaluates two ecotechnologies for nutrient recovery from anaerobic digestate: struvite precipitation and ammonia stripping. Findings indicate that struvite precipitation is highly effective, particularly around pH 9.5 and with a magnesium-to-limiting-reactant ratio up to 4:1. Struvite is found to be a suitable phosphorus fertiliser for various crops, often yielding results comparable to mineral fertilisers. Ammonia stripping is also identified as effective, though the evidence base is too heterogeneous for quantitative synthesis. The review highlights a need for more field-scale and long-term validation of these technologies, especially within the Baltic Sea Region.