Healthcare Industry Focuses on Environmental Practices

Rising temperatures and extreme weather are causing more hospitalizations and deaths each year. Changing weather patterns are affecting the spread of water-, vector-, and food-borne diseases. Conditions ranging from asthma to obesity are exacerbated by air pollution and stifling heat.

But an industry mandated to improve health is a major contributor to the climate crisis at hand. According to global figures, the healthcare sector’s climate footprint is equivalent to about 5% of net global emissions. This makes him the fifth-largest emitter in the world, after China, the United States, India and Russia.

The heart of the healthcare system and pharmaceutical companies exists to make patients better. But if the by-product of their efforts is diminishing positive outcomes, the industry needs to seriously consider its environmental practices.

Enter healthcare marketers and communicators. As recently as five years ago, there was little industry discussion on such topics, but pressure is mounting to take some responsibility for their role in the climate crisis and take meaningful steps to reverse the damage. increase.

Dr. Elisabeth Baka, managing director of Deloitte and the future of health and wellness innovation, said: Previously, these issues were discussed in the context of reporting. Now they’re raised to the level of legitimate business concern, she added Baca.

Matthew Meyer, Ph.D., assistant professor of anesthesiology and sustainable health researcher at the University of Virginia Health System, believes that some big pharmaceutical companies are tackling the challenges at hand. He cites the transparency of the Environmental/Climate Impact Dashboard on Pfizer’s public website. The dashboard not only discloses many of the company’s scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions, but also information on water consumption, waste disposal, energy use and how they have evolved over time. To do.

Pfizer and its pharmaceutical companies need to think about how they may not live in a world closely aligned with the Paris Agreement and work to build resilience to an increasingly hostile climate, says the COO of climate intelligence firm Surbest. says Karan Chopra.

But the path to sustainability for pharmaceutical companies and the healthcare system is not linear. Most experts believe that enacting fundamental changes that simultaneously enhance the health of patients and the planet will face strong operational and regulatory headwinds.

In November 2022, several major pharmaceutical companies and public health agencies will join forces to reduce emissions and accelerate the delivery of net-zero healthcare systems through the Sustainable Markets Initiative, the Systems of Health Task Force (SMI). announced action. AstraZeneca, GSK, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Roche, Samsung Biologics, Sanofi, Karolinska Institutet, Sustainable Healthcare Coalition, UNICEF, University of Pavia and World Health Organization — are being celebrated as significant milestones. Its system-wide approach focuses on three main areas that drive health-related emissions. Products and Supply Chain (50%). Patient care (45%), including care facilities and direct patient evacuation. and R&D (5%).

Most supply chain emissions are caused by early stage processes such as raw material extraction processing, but extend to material processing, pharmaceutical synthesis, packaging and distribution. To decarbonize the entire supply chain, manufacturers will need to work with their suppliers, a complex undertaking.

The SMI Task Force has set a goal of stopping the global average temperature from rising more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and meeting the Paris Agreement target of net zero emissions by 2045 of 1.5 degrees Celsius. At the same time, we have set short-term emission reduction targets.

To get there, members of the private sector will commit to a set of common supplier standards, switching their operations to 80%-100% renewable electricity by 2030, and signing Power Purchase Agreements in India and China by 2023. promised to evaluate They are also evaluating green heat solutions and green transport corridors (both by 2025) and plan to transition their fleet to zero-emission vehicles by 2030.

Chopra acknowledges the obvious caveat that the global pharmaceutical supply chain is a complex beast, but believes the initiative represents a solid first step. This includes standardized methods for measuring and describing scope 3 emissions (those not directly generated by an organization), which he says represents a more “apples-to-apples” comparison. says.

4A Executive Vice President, Government Relations and Sustainability Alison Pepper agrees, adding that success will depend on the industry’s ability to transition its entire supply chain to renewable energy grids. But the pharmaceutical industry’s supply chain processes rely heavily on fossil fuels to heat low-molecular-weight hydrocarbons, she notes, making this task very complicated for the pharmaceutical industry. On the other hand, many companies’ manufacturing operations are based in Asia. The region is not building renewable energy infrastructure at a particularly brisk pace.

That’s why Chopra believes the industry needs to devise incentives to change the behavior of its supply chain partners. It’s not an impossible task, he added, noting that Walmart’s efforts to persuade suppliers to change their standards have been successful. increase.

Patient care activities, which account for a significant proportion of healthcare-related emissions, include hospital operations, waste and transportation. Similar to supply chain emissions, reducing patient care-related emissions will require collaboration among many stakeholders.

We are asking clinicians and HCPs to decarbonize their care environments. Adoption of environmental standards in labeling by regulatory bodies. Policy makers to promote healthier lifestyles. Align payer coverage with emissions reductions. of patient groups to standardize green care options. Pharmaceutical, biotech and device companies redesign their products to better environmental practices.

The SMI Task Force is working to develop end-to-end pathway-of-care emissions metrics and tools for specific diseases. These allow stakeholders to measure and track emissions throughout the care pathway.

But while the focus is often on reducing emissions from operations and processes, many products themselves are climate-harming. As an example, Meyer points to his own experience as an anesthesiologist, specifically his use of the common general anesthetic desflurane.

The drug has a 20-year global warming potential (GWP20) of about 3700, which means it traps 3,700 times more energy than carbon dioxide and is a major air pollutant. Meyer says the medical and health care community is not familiar with the role of current medicines in the climate crisis, but believes there is ample opportunity to opt for less climate-friendly alternatives to desflurane. The alternative, sevoflurane, is about 10 times less harmful to the environment.

Other products can be actively addressed with replacements. Pressurized metered dose inhalers for respiratory diseases such as asthma account for around 3% of total healthcare-related emissions from the UK’s National Health Service.

Deloitte Digital Managing Director Joanna Ruiz sees small steps that can create big positive changes over time. For example, pharmaceutical companies may avoid the flow of prescription drugs into sewage systems by arranging for the pickup of unused or expired products, she says.

In terms of emissions from the care environment, ultimately more patient care will be provided by telemedicine. However, Pepper warns that telemedicine requires considerable energy. As with many others, the transition to renewable energy sources won’t happen anytime soon.

R&D accounts for about 5% of healthcare emissions. The numbers have pledged the SMI Task Force to leverage digital health to decarbonize clinical trials and measure greenhouse gas emissions in Phase II and III trials. The goal is to reach the emission reduction target in 2030.

Beyond such efforts, the broader healthcare industry should charge innovators to develop sustainable products that address diseases likely to emerge as a result of climate change. Jon Bigelow, the recently retired executive director of Healthcare Communication, said government regulators could encourage companies to invest in developing antibiotics to combat climate-related changes in infectious disease patterns. suggests that there is

Meyer says he is actively working to develop technology that will make the operating room more sustainable. problem? There is not much funding specifically allocated for healthcare sustainability efforts. Moreover, he adds, the current regulatory environment is not conducive to sustainability. Even if the best-in-breed companies try to take the lead, others may not follow unless regulatory standards and risk/reward models are aligned.

Then there is the industry movement towards net zero emissions. The problem is that this target can be misleading given that we emit a lot of carbon and potentially achieve net zero by buying carbon offsets. Meyer stresses that net zero could lead to years of reduced emissions. Chopra believes quantifying the economic impact of climate change will lead to the creation of realistic incentives, investment priorities, and business practices. In other words, make it a shareholder issue.

Pepper likewise craves accountability, but ultimately penalties for failing to meet emissions and related sustainability goals. She proposes a sliding scale to account for regional discrepancies and believes provisions should be included to prevent economic discrimination.

Pharmaceutical companies and healthcare systems may not be driven by regulatory mandates alone. As such, Chopra advises that climate goals should be pushed in all areas of the business, from risk management and strategy to his M&A plans and other operational decisions.

Meyer believes companies need to appoint a Chief Sustainability Officer and give that individual the same internal clout as a CFO or COO to send a strong message about their commitment to a healthy environment. CSOs should be responsible for implementing environmental practices that help employers reap economic benefits, he said.

Pepper believes there is room for pre-competitive collaboration in the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries. Companies in this space are notoriously competitive, but mobilizing to decarbonize and share best practices would almost certainly be of great benefit to the industry as a whole.

But Chopra is concerned that the discussion of physical risk lags behind other industries. If medical institutions detail how to protect their assets and operations from climate change such as floods, heat waves, hurricanes and mega-blizzards, they will inevitably shut down operations or under optimal conditions for production. While many companies are aware of the potential negative impacts of climate change, Chopra said many companies have developed robust contingency plans. says there are very few. Cervest’s climate intelligence platform helps companies take proactive measures against these worst-case scenarios.

All of this confirms what should have been obvious to healthcare leaders for a long time. Investing in reducing harmful environmental impacts is good business in both the short and long term, in economic booms and recessions. Will the industry heed this call? We hope you don’t get any more substandard results before we find out.

From MM+M – Medical Marketing and Media January 1, 2023