10 Accounting for Health Impacts of Climate Change study estimates the total cost of business-as-usual climate change to equate an average reduction in global per capita consumption of 5%, now and forever. Once the impacts on the environment and human health (non-market impacts) are included, the total cost of business-as-usual increases from the estimated 5% to 11% (Table 3). In the case of a high climate scenario, the estimated total cost of business-as-usual increases from 6.9% to 14.4%, once non-market impacts are included. While the Stern Review includes “non-market” impacts, the report notes these are difficult to monetize and that the results from this monetization process are problematic in terms of concept, ethical framework, and practicalities. Perhaps more importantly for the purpose of this paper, it is to be noted that the Stern Review systematically refers to the “environment and human health” impacts of climate change, and not solely to the impacts on human health. As pointed out by Confalonieri et al. (2007), studies focusing on the welfare costs of climate change impacts (such as the Stern Review) rarely include health outcomes explicitly, and if they do, the studies are generally limited to assessing the costs of extreme heat- and cold-related mortality and malaria. A limited number of studies have strictly focused their effort on estimating the health costs of climate change. The UNFCCC report estimated the global adaptation costs for the health sector to be in the range of $4 billion–$12 billion per year in 2030 (UNFCCC 2007). The adaptation costs are for preventing the additional climate change–induced cases of solely diarrheal disease, malnutrition, and malaria in 2030 (Table 4). Note that malnutrition accounts for a very small proportion of the estimated total costs, while Table 3 Estimated Losses in Current per Capita Consumptiona Climate scenario Baseline climateb High climateb a b Economic Mean 5th percentile 95th percentile Market impacts 2.1 0.3 5.9 Market impacts + risk of catastrophe 5.0 0.6 12.3 Market impacts + risk of catastrophe + non-market impacts 10.9 2.2 27.4 Market impacts 2.5 0.3 7.5 Market impacts + risk of catastrophe 6.9 0.9 16.5 Market impacts + risk of catastrophe + non-market impacts 14.4 2.7 32.6 The numbers in the table represent the estimated reduction (in percentage terms) in per capita consumption, relative to the business-as-usual scenario. The two climate scenarios (baseline climate and high climate) are Policy Analysis for the Greenhouse Effect climate scenarios. The baseline climate scenario produces a mean warming of 3.9°C by 2100 (relative to pre-industrial level) and a 90% confidence interval of 2.4°C–5.8°C. The high climate scenario introduces the impacts of feedback effects increasing temperature changes to higher levels. It produces a 90% confidence interval increases to 2.6°C–6.5°C. Source: Stern, N. 2006. The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Table 4 Projected Costs to Manage Additional Climate Change–Related Cases of Diarrheal Diseases, Malnutrition, and Malaria in 2030 ($ million) Emissions Scenarioa Diarrheal Diseases Middle High Malnutritionb Middle High Malariab Middle High S550 1,706 6,024 63 131 1,859 3,876 S750 1,983 6,814 95 189 2,310 4,784 UE 2,731 9,010 72 146 3,664 7,537 a S550 = stabilization of emissions at 550 parts per million (ppm) carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent, S750 = stabilization of emissions at 750 ppm CO2 equivalent, UE = unmitigated emissions. b Middle point of the provided cost estimates presented in Ebi, K.L. 2008. Adaptation Costs for Climate-Change Related Cases of Diarrheal Disease, Malnutrition, and Malaria in 2030. Global Health.