Projecting the overall heat-related health burden and associated economic costs in a climate change context in Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extreme heat represents a major health risk for the world's population, that is amplified by climate change. However, the health costs associated with these heat events have only been little studied. To stimulate the implementation of effective interventions against extreme heat, a more comprehensive economic valuation of these health impacts is crucial. In this study, a general framework for assessing historical and projected heat-related health costs is presented and then applied to the province of Quebec (Canada). First, heat-related mortality and morbidity, as well as the number of extreme heatwaves, were computed for a historical (∼2000) and projected (∼2050) period under two shared socioeconomic pathways (SSP). Then, these heat-related numbers were converted into 1) direct healthcare costs, 2) indirect productivity costs and 3) intangible societal costs, using the best available cost information. Results showed that historical heat-related health costs were respectively 15M$, 5M$ and 3.6G$ (in 2019 Canadian dollars) annually for the direct, indirect and intangible components in Quebec, Canada. Under a middle-of-the-road scenario (SSP2–4.5), there was a 3-fold increase in total costs due to climate and population change (10.9G$ annually), while under a pessimistic scenario (SSP5–8.5), the increase was 5-fold (17.4G$). Total costs were mostly driven by intangible impacts, such as loss of life (∼90–95%) and of well-being during heatwaves (∼5–10%). Given that heat-related health costs are already significant, and likely to increase substantially in the future, this study has demonstrated the vital need to reduce its burden now and in the future by adopting more measures to mitigate climate change and adapt to heat. • Heat-related health costs computed for 1990–2019 and 2040–2069 in Quebec, Canada. • Considered costs were direct healthcare, indirect productivity and intangible costs. • Annual historical costs were 15M$ (direct), 5M$ (indirect) and 3.6G$ (intangible). • Total heat-related costs increased by 3X (SSP2–4.5) and 5X (SSP5–8.5) in 2050. • Total costs were mainly driven by loss of life (∼90–95%) and of well-being (∼5–10%).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".