The Climate Health Institute (CHI) is different from most other research institutes at FHML. While it has a scientific coordinator, the institute does not employ any staff of its own. What it does do, explains FHML dean Annemie Schols, is “bring together knowledge, infrastructure and networks. UM researchers with good ideas about climate change and its health impacts can meet like-minded colleagues here”. The institute also helps translate research results into practice, “as we hope that climate-related research will lead to concrete policy changes”, says Schols.
High-risk neighbourhoods
In the example above, this would involve identifying high-risk neighbourhoods. “The municipality can then call to check up on older residents in those areas using an AI algorithm, arrange for home visits to be made, make sure they learn how to gradually acclimatise to periods of heat and give them access to well-cooled buildings in their neighbourhood at certain times.”
Another example is Valkenburg, where GPs have reported a marked rise in a range of health problems since the flooding of the Geul River in 2021. “These include psychological stress”, says Schols, “as well as fungal infections and other skin conditions.” The mayor “is keen for us to meet with local GPs” to explore how these problems could be addressed quickly in the event of another flood.
Five million euros
Around five million euros have currently been earmarked for a research programme on heat stress, air quality and water quality, as well as for a teaching programme. What these programmes will look like in concrete terms should become clear in the coming months, explains Schols. Part of the money comes from government “sector plans”, for which the faculty received funding from the ministry in 2023. The hospital and other faculty institutes are also contributing financially – a generous gesture, as the money will not go into their own budgets. Why were fellow institutes so supportive? According to Schols, it was “not a point of contention”. The institute directors wanted to show “genuine commitment” through their contributions. “They wanted a separate institute; they do not see it as a threat. No one was trying to secure the money for themselves.”