Health impact assessment and community involvement in land remediation decisions

Improving human health outcomes with a low-cost intervention to reduce exposures from lead acid battery recycling: Dong Mai, Vietnam

This study details the first comprehensive evaluation of the efficacy of a soil lead mitigation project in Dong Mai village, Vietnam. The village's population had been subject to severe lead poisoning for at least a decade as a result of informal Used Lead Acid Battery (ULAB) recycling. Between July 2013 to February 2015, Pure Earth and the Centre for Environment and Community Development (Hanoi, Vietnam) implemented a multi-faceted environmental and human health intervention. The intervention consisted of a series of institutional and low-cost engineering controls including the capping of lead contaminated surface soils, cleaning of home interiors, an education campaign and the construction of a work-clothes changing and bathing facility. The mitigation project resulted in substantial declines in human and environmental lead levels. Remediated home yard and garden areas decreased from an average surface soil concentration of 3940mg/kg to <100mg/kg. One year after the intervention, blood lead levels in children (<6 years old) were reduced by an average of 67%-from a median of 40.4μg/dL to 13.3μg/dL. The Dong Mai project resulted in significantly decreased environmental and biological lead levels demonstrating that low-cost, rapid and well-coordinated interventions could be readily applied elsewhere to significantly reduce preventable human health harm.

Comprehensive planning for classification and disposal of solid waste at the industrial parks regarding health and environmental impacts

The aim of this study is the comprehensive planning for integrated management of solid waste at the industrial parks. The share of each industrial group including food, metal, chemical, non-metallic minerals, textile, electrical and electronical, and cellulose industries were 48.2, 14.9, 6.7, 22, 0.9, 0.6, and 6.5 percent, respectively. The results showed that nearly half of total industrial waste produced from the range of biological materials are biodegradable and discharging them without observing environmental regulations leads to short-term pollution and nuisance in the acceptor environment. Also some parts of case study waste were recyclable which is considerable from viewpoint of economical and environmental pollution. Long-term impacts will appear due to improper site selection of disposal from the spatial standpoint. In this way, an approach for site selection using several socioeconomic, physical, and environmental criteria based on multicriteria decision making model (MCDM) is introduced. Health risks and environment pollution such as soil and surface water may be done. It is essential to revise the studied industries layout, particularly those units which produce special waste which should be more cautious. Also stricter enforcement is required as an effective step in reducing the harmful impacts of it.

A rapid equity focused health impact assessment of a policy implementation plan: An Australian case study and impact evaluation

BACKGROUND

Equity focused health impact assessments (EFHIAs), or health equity impact assessments, are being increasingly promoted internationally as a mechanism for enhancing the consideration of health equity in the development of policies, programs and projects. Despite this there are relatively few examples of examples of completed EFHIAs available. This paper presents a case study of a rapid EFHIA that was conducted in Australia on a health promotion policy implementation plan. It briefly describes the process and findings of the EFHIA and evaluates the impact on decision-making and implementation.

METHODS

The rapid EFHIA was undertaken in four days, drawing on an expert panel and limited review of the literature. A process evaluation was undertaken by email one month after the EFHIA was completed. An impact evaluation was undertaken two years later based on five semi-structured interviews with members of the EFHIA working group and policy officers and managers responsible for implementing the plan. A cost estimation was conducted by the EFHIA working group.

FINDINGS

The EFHIA made both general and specific recommendations about how the health equity impacts of the policy implementation plan could be improved. The impact evaluation identified changes to development and implementation that occurred as a result of the EFHIA, though there was disagreement about the extent to which changes could be attributed solely to the EFHIA. Those responsible considered the recommendations of the EFHIA in the next versions of their ABHI implementation plans. Factors that influenced the impact of the EFHIA included consolidating understandings of equity, enabling discussion of alternatives, and differing understandings of the purpose of the EFHIA. The EFHIA cost US$4,036 to undertake.

CONCLUSIONS

This EFHIA was conducted in a short timeframe using relatively few resources. It had some reported impacts on the development of the implementation plan and enhanced overall consideration of health equity. This case highlights some of the factors and preconditions that may maximise the impact of future EFHIAs on decision-making and implementation.