Discussion
This scoping review is among the first to map peer-reviewed publications over the past three decades at the intersection of climate change and SRHR in LMICs across WHO regions worldwide. We identified 75 articles investigating the impact of climate change on SRHR. Most of these articles were published in 2018 and were conducted on populations in African, Western Pacific and South-East Asian regions. Most studies employed quantitative methodologies and targeted newborns and women of reproductive age. Maternal and newborn health was the most researched aspect of SRHR in the context of climate change; meanwhile, we did not find any studies exploring the impact of climate change on induced abortion or reproductive cancers. Extreme temperatures and drought were the most studied climate change phenomena, especially as they relate to maternal and newborn health.
The exponential increase in the articles published since 2018 indicates a growing recognition of the need to understand the impact of climate change on SRHR. This aligns with the growing attention on climate change and health as a global research priority, as demonstrated by the 2017/2018 WHO surveys conducted among national health services on health and climate change, involving 101 countries. These highlighted the profiled countries’ expected health impacts of climate change with the aim to raise awareness of health and climate linkages.93 The fact that most articles relied on data from cross-sectional surveys implies that the captured climate impacts are either from ongoing or past extreme weather events. This poses challenges in ascertaining some impact associations found due to the risk of recall or social desirability biases and other systematic errors, for example, regarding identifying links between forced marriage and floods in a community where early and forced marriage are already highly prevalent. Using health records from registries on maternal/newborn health, HIV, abortion or reproductive cancers could allow for longitudinal analysis and impact comparisons of extreme climatic events at different times with higher validity.
While the intersection of climate change and maternal and newborn health has received significant attention in published articles, including a recent call to action by several UN actors,5 a substantial amount (73%) of these articles focused on the impact of extreme temperatures. Moreover, most of these articles were from the Western Pacific region, particularly China. Conversely, there is limited literature on the impact of floods, rainfall shocks, drought and cyclones on maternal and newborn health in regions prone to these climate change events and where the risk of maternal and newborn morbidity and mortality due to climate change is higher such as in African and South-East Asian regions.94 Filling such research gaps in these regions is critical to inform tailored interventions and policies. Further, certain climate change and SRHR areas are predominantly studied in certain regions, perhaps due to heightened vulnerabilities in those regions and subsequent investments for research. For instance, floods and cyclones are well studied in South-East Asia, mainly Bangladesh, likely owing to their susceptibility to such events.84 Articles on HIV, GBV and drought from the African region reflect the substantial challenges related to HIV and drought in this region.73–76 A recent review by Logie et al95 revealed an association between extreme weather events—such as hurricanes, floods, drought and storms—and adverse HIV outcomes attributable to limited access to antiretroviral treatment and deteriorating mental health. Notably, very few articles focused on Latin America and the Caribbean, although many communities in this region are highly vulnerable to weather extremes and are dependent on weather-sensitive activities such as agriculture and tourism.96
This scarcity of studies looking at climate change events and contraception, abortion or reproductive cancers revealed in this review could be partly due to a lack of reliable data across LMICs.97 Addressing these data gaps is crucial in the context of climate change. Furthermore, despite only one article that exclusively studied climate change and harmful practices in Kenya,31 reliable organisational reports have continued to highlight the implications of climate change on early and forced marriages and FGM across the African region.98 While FGM is a practice deeply embedded in culture and social norms, it is also a requirement for marriage in many settings, therefore, an increase in FGM can be a precursor to early marriage in response to existential and livelihood threats posed by climate change.31 Certain SRHR domains such as abortion, GBV and harmful practices may require a special long-term framework to study in the context of climate change in LMICs given that reporting and documentation of such incidences may be hindered due to sociocultural limitations in certain communities. Longitudinal research and greater involvement of local researchers and local stakeholders could improve measurement.
In all regions, the predominant study populations were newborns and women of reproductive age. Subsequent studies could endeavour to broaden the scope of research at the intersection of climate change and SRHR in LMICs to include other demographics such as boys, men and individuals with diverse sexual orientations, gender identities/expressions and sex characteristics. Additionally, studies could explore these associations among migrant and indigenous populations. Across all populations, more attention could be given to the ‘rights’ aspect of SRHR.99 In essence, the achievement of SRHR relies on adopting a rights-based approach to health; a perspective that emphasises that all individuals have a right to make decisions regarding their bodies and should have access to services that uphold and support that right.99
Implications for future research
Regarding the methods, several studies highlighted limitations related to the available health data for climate change research.32 36 37 This emphasises the need for improved climate-related routine health data collection. There were relatively very few articles that employed mixed quantitative and qualitative approaches where findings were merged and triangulated. Researchers could harness the power of both methods for a better understanding of climate change-related and SRHR-related topics. More registry-based data and longitudinal studies could also be helpful for studying rare impacts of climate change events on SRHR in LMICs, including those related to changes in air quality.
Over one-third of the articles were authored exclusively by authors from institutions in high-income countries, with limited involvement of institutions in LMICs. This may be due to imbalances of power and funding resources skewed towards high-income countries and, perhaps, an underappreciation of prioritising indigenous, context-specific knowledge in research.100 Considering that climate change disproportionately impacts LMICs, collaborating with local researchers in affected areas can be vital, especially when employing mixed methods and qualitative approaches. Moving forward, fostering cross-institutional collaborations between high-income countries and LMICs, as well as South-South partnerships, would not only enhance research capabilities and the validity, credibility and transferability of findings but also address ethical considerations100 and equitable partnerships in this critical field.
Limitations
There are limitations to this review. First, given the lack of standard classification of climate change factors, there is a possibility that the search may have left out other potential intersection areas, for instance, climate change and SRHR-related infectious diseases and social conflicts. Relatedly, our categorisation of SRHR domains and climate change phenomena is but one way to classify these issues, there could be others. For example, we did not find studies on broader sexual or menstrual health which could alter this categorisation in the future. Second, we excluded studies on projections and predictions which could have provided valuable insights concerning the future impacts of climate change on SRHR. Similarly, we also excluded one important factor related to climate change: air pollution. Given the broad range of air pollution factors, including the confounding or mediating effects, it is complicated to determine the impact of air pollution attributable to climate change. These factors are outside the scope of this review and best placed as a separate standalone review. Third, since this is a scoping review, we leave it to future systematic reviews to conduct critical appraisals to assess the quality of extant research. Fourth, by focusing on studies in LMICs, we excluded studies on forcibly displaced people, asylum seekers, refugees and other migrants originating from LMICs but located in high-income countries.