Refine
Year of publication
- 2021 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2) (remove)
Keywords
- Public health (2) (remove)
Biodiversity is a cornerstone of human health and well-being. However, while evidence of the contributions of nature to human health is rapidly building, research into how biodiversity relates to human health remains limited in important respects. In particular, a better mechanistic understanding of the range of pathways through which biodiversity can influence human health is needed. These pathways relate to both psychological and social processes as well as biophysical processes. Building on evidence from across the natural, social and health sciences, we present a conceptual framework organizing the pathways linking biodiversity to human health. Four domains of pathways—both beneficial as well as harmful—link biodiversity with human health: (i) reducing harm (e.g. provision of medicines, decreasing exposure to air and noise pollution); (ii) restoring capacities (e.g. attention restoration, stress reduction); (iii) building capacities (e.g. promoting physical activity, transcendent experiences); and (iv) causing harm (e.g. dangerous wildlife, zoonotic diseases, allergens). We discuss how to test components of the biodiversity-health framework with available analytical approaches and existing datasets. In a world with accelerating declines in biodiversity, profound land-use change, and an increase in non-communicable and zoonotic diseases globally, greater understanding of these pathways can reinforce biodiversity conservation as a strategy for the promotion of health for both people and nature. We conclude by identifying research avenues and recommendations for policy and practice to foster biodiversity-focused public health actions.
Introduction: Obesity is classified as a global epidemic and judged to be the greatest public health threat in Western countries. The tremendously increasing prevalence rates in children lead to morbidity and mortality in adults. In many countries, prevalence has doubled since the 1980s. Other countries show a continuous increase or stagnate at a very high level. Given these regional differences, this study aims to draw a global world map of childhood obesity research, including regional epidemiological characteristics, to comprehensively assess research influences and needs. Methods: In addition to established bibliometric parameters, this study uses epidemiological data to interpret metadata on childhood obesity research from the Web of Science in combination with state-of-the-art visualization methods, such as density equalizing map projections. Results: It was not until the 1990s that belated recognition of the dangerous effects of childhood obesity led to an increase in the number of publications worldwide. In addition, our findings show that countries’ study output does not correlate with epidemiologic rates of childhood obesity. In contrast, the primary driver of the research efforts on childhood obesity appears to be largely driven government funding structures. Discussion/Conclusion: The geographical differences in the epidemiological background of childhood obesity complicate the implementation of transnational research projects and cross-border prevention programs. Effective realization requires a sound scientific basis, which is facilitated by globally valid approaches. Hence, there is a need for information exchange between researchers, policy makers, and private initiatives worldwide.