No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Environment and Health: An Overview of Current Trends at WHO and OECD
Abstract
Background: Environmental hazards are responsible for as much as a quarter of the total world-wide burden of disease. Therefore, appropriate management of environmental hazards is a critical part of the effort to improve human health. This review aims to summarize current issues, topics, and programs at international institutions such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in the area of environmental health. Results: The WHO European Center for Environmental Health (ECEH) plays a significant role in implementing environmental health policies and also takes the lead in related issues in Europe. It has developed an Environmental Health Information System and environmental health inequality indicators. In the environmental health area, the OECD focuses most on chemical management programs. It foresees that air pollution and chemical risk management will become the leading environmental health issues if appropriate measures are not taken. Several topics were identified that require greater effort in Korea, including cancer as an environment-related disease, an environmental health information system, and environmental health inequality issues. Conclusions: More active roles are expected from Korea in international societies, in part because of the introduction of the Environmental Health Act of 2008, and active involvement in related activities in WHO WPRO/SEARO. Understanding recent developments and concerns at major international organizations like WHO and the OECD will assist in the implementation of effective international collaboration and the identification of a better strategies for improving environmental health performances in Korea.
... WRW reuse should be encouraged, as it is linked to better governance of water [6], especially when freshwater demand is projected to increase by 55% by 2050 [7] owing to population growth and climate change [8,9]. However, most research on WRW reuse has focused on its potential applications in human or animal health and cosmetics, such as skin and hair care, and very little on agricultural use. ...
Washed rice water (WRW) is the leftover water after washing rice grains and is usually discarded. However, WRW contains nutrients leached from rice, making it a potential plant fertilizer. Reusing WRW promotes better water governance, particularly in the face of increased freshwater needs due to population expansion and climate change. Recent experiments in rain shelters have demonstrated the advantages of using WRW as fertilizer. Building on this, our study assessed WRW's efficacy in an open field against NPK fertilizer, both individually and in combination. The treatments were: R3 (3-day fermented WRW), N1 (full recommended NPK rate), N0.5R3 (half NPK rate and R3), and CON (tap water only). These treatments were tested over three consecutive planting cycles of choy sum (Brassica chinensis var. parachinensis) vegetable. At the end of each planting cycle, measurements were taken for the plant's growth, nutrient content and uptake, as well as various soil chemical properties and bacterial population. Plants were watered daily with 5 mm WRW (R3 and N0.5R3) or tap water (N1 and CON). N0.5R3 showed the best results in terms of plant growth, nutrient content, uptake, and soil nutrient levels. N0.5R3 supplied the most nutrients, especially N, P, and K. Increased plant growth also led to increased plant uptake of nutrients, including micronutrients. Macronutrients had a greater impact on plant biomass than micronutrients, as R3 and N1 had similar results. R3 soils had higher bacterial populations but were more acidic than N1 soils. The negative effect of NPK on bacteria was partially offset by combining NPK with WRW as N0.5R3. No carryover effects were observed, likely because of the high nutrient leaching from heavy rains. These findings confirm WRW's is an effective fertilizer in open fields, but measures like surface mulching are crucial to minimize nutrient leaching prior to its use.
... The use of washed rice water should be encouraged as the practice is part of better water management. Global demand for fresh water in 2025 is projected to increase by 55% (Park, 2013). The increase is due to climate change and an increase in world population, which prompted the United Nations to advocate for more effective water management (Paquin and Cosgrove, 2016), where wastewater is used and reused or recycled for other purposes, rather than being thrown away (Nabayi et al., 2022). ...
Arthrospira platensis culture requires macro and micronutrients. The nutrients needed by Arthrospira platensis according to Agustina and Herman (2021) are macronutrients consisting of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), sulfur (S), iron (Fe), magnesium (Mg), silicon (Si), and calcium (Ca). Micronutrients consist of zinc (Zn), cobalt (Co), molybdenum (Mo), boron (B), and copper (Cu). Rice-washing wastewater contains macro and micronutrients needed for the growth of Arthrospira platensis. Almost all of the nutrients needed by Arthrospira platensis are found in the wastewater, except for Co. Previous studies have shown that rice-washing wastewater can be used for Arthrospira platensis culture, but the growth rate is still higher than Walne fertilizer 0.5 ml/L. Zarrouk fertilizer as a standard growth medium for Arthrospira platensis shows that this fertilizer has better growth results than Urea and NPK fertilizers. This research was conducted to determine the effect of rice-washing wastewater as a nutrient source for culture media or a combination of Zarrouk fertilizer and rice-washing wastewater so that it can be used to increase the biomass and carotenoid pigments of Arthrospira platensis. This research used a Factorial Completely Randomized Design (CRD) with 12 treatments and 3 replications. Arthrospira platensis quality test was carried out by testing dry biomass and carotenoid content. The ANOVA test results showed that this study's treatment had a significant effect on the carotenoid content and biomass of Arthrospira platensis. The treatment with the highest effect of biomass and carotenoids was obtained in the treatment of 1.5 ml/L of rice-washing wastewater
... Reusing washed rice water ought to be encouraged because its practice is a part of better water governance. Global freshwater demand is expected to increase by 55% by 2050 (Park, 2013). This increase is mainly due to detrimental climate change and increasing world population, driving the United Nation to advocate for more effective water governance. ...
A significant wastewater source in every household is washed rice water (WRW) because it contains leached nutrients (from washing the rice prior to cooking) that could be used as fertilizer. The paper reviewed the current understanding of the potential use of WRW as a plant nutrient source. WRW was shown to increase vegetables growth, such as water spinach, pak choy, lettuce, mustard, tomato, and eggplant. Different researchers have used various amounts of WRW, and their results followed a similar trend: the higher the amount of WRW, the higher the plant growth. WRW has also been used for other purposes, such as a source of carbon for microbial growth. WRW from brown rice and white rice had nutrients ranging from 40-150, 43-16306, 51-200, 8-3574, 36-1425, 27-212, and 32-560 mg L-1 of N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, and vitamin B1 (thiamine), respectively. Proper utilization of WRW could reduce chemical fertilizer use and prevent both surface and groundwater contamination and environmental pollution. However, only a few of the studies have compared the use of WRW with the use of conventional NPK fertilizer. The major drawback of WRW studies is that they lack depth and scope, such as determining the initial and (or) final soil physico-chemical properties or plant nutrient contents. Considering the rich nutrient content in WRW, it will impact plant growth and soil fertility when used as both irrigation water and plant nutrient source. Therefore, it is recommended that studies on WRW effect on soil microbial population, plant, and soil nutrient contents to be carried out to ascertain the sustainability of WRW use as a plant nutrient source.
The benefits of washed rice water (WRW) as a plant fertilizer, particularly over a consecutive application period, are not well studied. An experiment was therefore carried out to determine: the continuous effects of applying unfermented (F0) and 3-day fermented (F3) WRW on the: (1) soil chemical properties, soil bacterial count, and the growth and plant nutrient content of a test crop, choy sum (Brassica chinensis var. parachinensis), grown on three contrasting soil textures (sandy clay loam, clay, and silt loam); (2) nutrient leaching losses from these three soils due to the continuous
application of WRW; (3) crops’ improvement in water use, if any, in terms of its water productivity (WP) and water use efficiency (WUE); and (4) the relationship between soil bacterial count and plant growth parameters. The effects of F0 and F3 were compared with conventional NPK fertilizer and a control (only tap water; CON). Two factors, treatments and soil types, were used factorially in a randomized complete block design for three consecutive planting cycles. Results showed that NPK and F3 produced a significantly (p < 0.01) higher plant growth in terms of fresh and dry leaf weights and total leaf area by 5 to 61%, compared to that obtained in the other treatments. Furthermore, plants receiving either NPK or F3 had a significantly higher plant nutrient content (P, K, Ca, Mg, and Cu) in the third planting cycle. Clay soil treated with F3, NPK, and F0 had significantly higher NH+4 , P, Ca, Mg, Zn, and B, by 19 to 152% relative to the other soils, irrespective of treatments. Soil nutrient leaching losses of P, K, Ca, Mg, Cu, Zn, and B decreased with successive planting cycles for all treatments. However, soils treated with either F3 or F0 experienced higher leaching of NH+ 4 and NO-3 by 37 to 259% and 13 to 34%, respectively, relative to the NPK and CON. Plants treated with either NPK or F3 also had higher WP by 21 to 42% than the other treatments. For all the treatments, plants’ WUE increased with successive planting cycles; however, there was no significant difference between the treatments. F3 stimulated a significantly higher growth and yield of choy sum due to its nutrient and bacterial contents, and the continuous increase in plant growth with successive planting cycles indicated the carryover effects of the treatments, particularly by F3.
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted from the paint manufacturing industry include substances that are highly volatile, such as toluene, and highly carcinogenic, such as benzene. In the Republic of Korea, the emission of volatile organic compounds is regulated under the Clean Air Conservation Act, but it is found that individual substances are systematically insufficient. Although the Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (PRTR) is maintained to report the expected emissions from each plant every year, actual measurements are not performed. This study measured and analyzed VOCs at the site fenceline boundary. The ratio of PRTR and VOCs speciation results for xylene and toluene was similar to that of xylene 29% and toluene 28%, but ethylbenzene accounted for 2% in PRTR. Still, the actual measurement result showed a big difference of 11%. Because it is a solvent that is treated in large quantities in the resin manufacturing process and the reactivity of ethylbenzene, it is vaporized at high temperature and high pressure, resulting in many measurements. This study classified a large amount of VOCs emitted through the fence line monitoring system in the paint manufacturing industry and confirmed which VOCs were emitted the most. We compared whether this produced similar results to the actual emission survey method conducted by the EPA. Some substances have produced similar results, but certain substances have significant differences. This indicates that priority VOCs should be selected for each location through continuous measurement.
Environmental nuisances, including ambient air pollution, are thought to contribute to social inequalities in health. There are two major mechanisms, which may act independently or synergistically, through which air pollution may play this role. Disadvantaged groups are recognized as being more often exposed to air pollution (differential exposure) and may also be more susceptible to the resultant health effects (differential susceptibility).
European research articles were obtained through a literature search in the Medline database using keywords 'Socioeconomic Factors, Air Pollution, Health' and synonymous expressions.
Some studies found that poorer people were more exposed to air pollution whereas the reverse was observed in other papers. A general pattern, however, is that, irrespective of exposure, subjects of low socio-economic status experience greater health effects of air pollution. So far as we are aware, no European study has explored this relationship among children. Conclusion: The housing market biases land use decisions and may explain why some subgroups suffer from both a low socio-economic status and high exposure to air pollution. Some data may be based on inaccurate exposure assessment. Cumulative exposures should be taken into account to explore health problems more accurately. The issue of exposure and health inequalities in relation to ambient air quality is complex and calls for global appraisal. There is no single pattern. Policies aimed at reducing the root causes of these inequalities could be based on urban multipolarity and diversity, two attributes that require long-term urban planning.
The scientific evidence on the health effects of waste-related exposure is not conclusive. Differential exposure to waste by socio-economic status (SES) is often documented, but the interplay between environmental and social factors, crucial for policy making, is not well known. This review aims at investigating the role of health inequalities and inequities in waste management.
Grey and peer-reviewed literature, published after 1983, was reviewed from Europe and the USA.
Available data provide consistent indications that waste facilities are often disproportionally more located in areas with more deprived residents, or from ethnical minorities. This applies to waste incinerators, landfills, hazardous waste sites, legal and illegal. In studies considering health effects (mainly from Europe), risks are estimated with standardization for SES. Such standardization almost always decreases risk estimates for several cancers and reproductive outcomes. However, effect modification is not investigated in these studies.
The patterns of association between waste-related environmental pressures and SES suggest that some of the observed inequalities in exposure and health represent a case of environmental injustice as they are the result of social processes and may be prevented, at least partly. Disentangling the possible health effects remains difficult, due to limitations in the methodology. It seems important to investigate if disadvantaged people are more vulnerable, i.e. risks differ in different social groups living in the same area. Notwithstanding these open questions, public health officers and decision makers should identify waste management policies to minimize their potential health impacts and their unequal distribution.
On 10–12 March 2010, ministers of environment and health of the 53 countries in the WHO European Region (and a number of international governmental and non-governmental organizations) will meet in Parma, Italy, on the occasion of the Fifth Ministerial Conference on Environment and Health. One major item in their agenda is going to be the increasing challenge of inequities in exposure to environmental hazards. These inequities emerge both between and within countries, and are significantly influenced by social conditions.1 The recent economic crisis has further exposed the potential exacerbating effect that social factors may have on inequities and their consequences for health.2
To support its Member States in developing more informed policies on the environmental dimension of health inequities, WHO commissioned evidence reviews on the occurrence and extent of social inequities in exposure to selected environmental risk factors with a specific focus on inequities affecting children.3 Social factors considered in these reviews were socioeconomic status (income, education, employment), age, gender, ethnicity, or being part of a minority group. Summaries of the reviews on social inequities in housing4, waste management5, air pollution6 and children's environment7 are published in this issue of the EJPH. The compiled evidence was reviewed by 40 experts from 20 countries at a consultation meeting convened by WHO in Bonn on 9–10 September, 2009, resulting in a set of policy recommendations on possible measures to be undertaken to alleviate the inequities and their health burden. …
Housing conditions and environmental quality of residential areas are differentially distributed in the population. Less affluent population groups are more often affected by inadequate housing conditions and higher environmental burden in their residential neighbourhoods. A synthesis of the dispersed evidence on health-related housing characteristics and social status is needed to provide support for housing policies addressing social inequities.
The literature on social inequities and environmental risks related to housing and residential location was searched in health, environmental and geographical databases and reviewed to summarize the evidence. Household-level socio-economic status and income were considered as indicators of social status. The review was limited to European evidence.
Adequate studies were only available for few countries. Most studies identified the less affluent population groups as most exposed to environmental risks in the place of residence. Inequities were reported for risks experienced within the dwelling (such as exposure to dampness, chemical contamination, noise, temperature problems and poor sanitation) and related to residential location (neighbourhood quality, traffic-related pollution, proximity to pollution sites). Increased exposure to environmental risks within more affluent population groups was rarely identified.
The review indicates that social status and especially low income are strongly associated with increased exposure to environmental risks in the private home or related to residential location. However, due to the methodological variety of the available studies and the lack of data for many countries, it is not possible to provide a general assessment of the magnitude of inequity in Europe at the present time.
Socio-economic inequalities in the living environment are major contributing factors to health inequalities. Consequently, protecting children from undesirable environmental exposures by taking socio-economic conditions into account has been identified as a policy priority area in Europe. This review aims to evaluate the evidence on environmental inequalities among children in Europe and to discuss its policy implications.
A systematic literature search was conducted in various literature databases. Further sources for information were reviews, international reports and working documents for a WHO expert meeting on environmental inequalities in 2009. One major inclusion criterion for publications was consideration of socio-economic factors as influencing factors, not merely as confounder.
The overall pattern based on the available fragmentary data is that children living in adverse social circumstances suffer from multiple and cumulative exposures. A low socio-economic position is associated with an increased exposure of children to traffic-related air pollution, noise, lead, environmental tobacco smoke, inadequate housing and residential conditions and less opportunities for physical activity. For most topics and exposures reviewed here there were no studies investigating the modification of the exposure-response function by socio-economic factors. Due to a variety of methodological approaches and studies on one hand and lack of data for many topics and countries on the other hand it was not possible to quantify the magnitude of environmental inequalities.
Action is needed along the whole causal pathway of the social divide in environmental hazards with priority to policy measures aiming at removing socially determined differences in environmental conditions.
With respect to reducing mortality, advances in cancer treatment have not been as effective as those for other chronic diseases; effective screening methods are available for only a few cancers. Primary prevention through lifestyle and environmental interventions remains the main way to reduce the burden of cancers. In this report, we estimate mortality from 12 types of cancer attributable to nine risk factors in seven World Bank regions for 2001.
We analysed data from the Comparative Risk Assessment project and from new sources to assess exposure to risk factors and relative risk by age, sex, and region. We applied population attributable fractions for individual and multiple risk factors to site-specific cancer mortality from WHO.
Of the 7 million deaths from cancer worldwide in 2001, an estimated 2.43 million (35%) were attributable to nine potentially modifiable risk factors. Of these, 0.76 million deaths were in high-income countries and 1.67 million in low-and-middle-income nations. Among low-and-middle-income regions, Europe and Central Asia had the highest proportion (39%) of deaths from cancer attributable to the risk factors studied. 1.6 million of the deaths attributable to these risk factors were in men and 0.83 million in women. Smoking, alcohol use, and low fruit and vegetable intake were the leading risk factors for death from cancer worldwide and in low-and-middle-income countries. In high-income countries, smoking, alcohol use, and overweight and obesity were the most important causes of cancer. Sexual transmission of human papilloma virus is a leading risk factor for cervical cancer in women in low-and-middle-income countries.
Reduction of exposure to key behavioural and environmental risk factors would prevent a substantial proportion of deaths from cancer.
Korea: Ministry of Environment Press
- Ministry
- Environment
Available: http://www.who.int/about/structure/organigram/en/index.html [accessed 10
- Health World
- Organization
- Who
- Organigram
Mid and Long-term Master Plan for International Cooperation of S&T. Korea: Ministry of Education and Science Technology Press
Korea Institute of Science & Technology Evaluation and Planning (KISTEP). Mid and Long-term
Master Plan for International Cooperation of S&T.
Korea: Ministry of Education and Science Technology Press; 2012.
Available: http://www.oecd. org/env/2013-2014Brochure.pdf [accessed 10 The Environment, Health and Safety Programme: Managing Chemicals through OECD
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD). Available: http://www.oecd.
org/env/2013-2014Brochure.pdf [accessed 10 August
2013].
24. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD). The Environment, Health
and Safety Programme: Managing Chemicals
through OECD, 2009-2012. Available: http://www.
oecd.org/env/ehs/1900785.pdf [accessed 10 August
2013].