Purpose of Review: Increasing wildfire size and severity across the western United States has created an environmental and social crisis that must be approached from a transdisciplinary perspective. Climate change and more than a century of fire exclusion and wildfire suppression have led to contemporary wildfires with more severe environmental impacts and human smoke exposure. Wildfires increase smoke exposure for broad swaths of the US population, though outdoor workers and socially disadvantaged groups with limited adaptive capacity can be disproportionally exposed. Exposure to wildfire smoke is associated with a range of health impacts in children and adults, including exacerbation of existing respiratory diseases such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, worse birth outcomes, and cardiovascular events. Seasonally dry forests in Washington, Oregon, and California can benefit from ecological restoration as a way to adapt forests to climate change and reduce smoke impacts on affected communities.Recent Findings: Each wildfire season, large smoke events, and their adverse impacts on human health receive considerable attention from both the public and policymakers. The severity of recent wildfire seasons has state and federal governments outlining budgets and prioritizing policies to combat the worsening crisis. This surging attention provides an opportunity to outline the actions needed now to advance research and practice on conservation, economic, environmental justice, and public health interests, as well as the trade-offs that must be considered.Summary: Scientists, planners, foresters and fire managers, fire safety, air quality, and public health practitioners must collaboratively work together. This article is the result of a series of transdisciplinary conversations to find common ground and subsequently provide a holistic view of how forest and fire management intersect with human health through the impacts of smoke and articulate the need for an integrated approach to both planning and practice.

Working in hot and potentially humid conditions creates health and well-being risks that will increase as the planet warms. It has been proposed that workers could adapt to increasing temperatures by moving labor from midday to cooler hours. Here, we use reanalysis data to show that in the current climate approximately 30% of global heavy labor losses in the workday could be recovered by moving labor from the hottest hours of the day. However, we show that this particular workshift adaptation potential is lost at a rate of about 2% per degree of global warming as early morning heat exposure rises to unsafe levels for continuous work, with worker productivity losses accelerating under higher warming levels. These findings emphasize the importance of finding alternative adaptation mechanisms to keep workers safe, as well as the importance of limiting global warming.

Recent research suggests that heat exposure may increase the risk of traumatic injuries. Published heat-related epidemiological studies have relied upon exposure data from individual weather stations. To evaluate the association between heat exposure and traumatic injuries in outdoor agricultural workers exposed to ambient heat and internal heat generated by physical activity using modeled ambient exposure data. A case-crossover study using time-stratified referent selection among 12,213 outdoor agricultural workers with new Washington State Fund workers’ compensation traumatic injury claims between 2000 and 2012 was conducted. Maximum daily Humidex exposures, derived from modeled meteorological data, were assigned to latitudes and longitudes of injury locations on injury and referent dates. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios of injury for a priori daily maximum Humidex categories. The mean of within-stratum (injury day and corresponding referent days) standard deviations of daily maximum Humidex was 4.8. The traumatic injury odds ratio was 1.14 (95% confidence interval 1.06, 1.22), 1.15 (95% confidence interval 1.06, 1.25), and 1.10 (95% confidence interval 1.01, 1.20) for daily maximum Humidex of 25–29, 30–33, and ≥34, respectively, compared to < 25, adjusted for self-reported duration of employment. Stronger associations were observed during cherry harvest duties in the June and July time period, compared to all duties over the entire study period. Agricultural workers laboring in warm conditions are at risk for heat-related traumatic injuries. Combined heat-related illness and injury prevention efforts should be considered in high-risk populations exposed to warm ambient conditions in the setting of physical exertion.

Humid heat impacts a large portion of the world’s population that works outdoors. Previous studies have quantified humid heat impacts on labor productivity by relying on exposure response functions that are based on uncontrolled experiments under a limited range of heat and humidity. Here we use the latest empirical model, based on a wider range of temperatures and humidity, for studying the impact of humid heat and recent climate change on labor productivity. We show that globally, humid heat may currently be associated with over 650 billion hours of annual lost labor (148 million full time equivalent jobs lost), 400 billion hours more than previous estimates. These differences in labor loss estimates are comparable to losses caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Globally, annual heat-induced labor productivity losses are estimated at 2.1 trillion in 2017 PPP$, and in several countries are equivalent to more than 10% of gross domestic product. Over the last four decades, global heat-related labor losses increased by at least 9% (>60 billion hours annually using the new empirical model) highlighting that relatively small changes in climate (<0.5 °C) can have large impacts on global labor and the economy.

The over one million agricultural workers in the United States (U.S.) are amongst the populations most vulnerable to the health impacts of extreme heat. Climate change will further increase this vulnerability. Here we estimate the magnitude and spatial patterns of the growing heat exposure and health risk faced by U.S. crop workers and assess the effect of workplace adaptations on mitigating that risk. We find that the average number of days spent working in unsafe conditions will double by mid-century, and, without mitigation, triple by the end of it. Increases in rest time and the availability of climate-controlled recovery areas can eliminate this risk but could affect farm productivity, farm worker earnings, and/or labor costs much more than alternative measures. Safeguarding the health and well-being of U.S. crop workers will therefore require systemic change beyond the worker and workplace level.