Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31239627›Full record

ArticleHealth and human rights2019

Tomorrow's Stewards: The Case for a Unified International Framework on the Environmental Rights of Children.

Karen E Makuch, Sunya Zaman, Miriam R Aczel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health and human rights, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Karen E MakuchLecturer in environmental law at the Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College, London, UK.
Sunya ZamanPhD student and research assistant at the School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Miriam R AczelPresident's Scholar PhD candidate at the Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College, London, UK, and co-director of the Aczel Foundation for Research and Education in Science and Mathematics.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper evaluates an approach for strengthening environmental rights for children to safeguard child health. We focus on children as beneficiaries of environmental rights on account of their vulnerability to environmental impacts on their physical and mental health. Current legal frameworks, unless explicitly identifying children as beneficiaries, arguably tend to be adult-centric. Our goal here is to develop a comprehensive rights-based framework to ensure that children are protected against adverse environmental impacts. We argue that approaches that safeguard children's rights to life, health, and education should include environment-related issues, standards, and protections for those rights to be fully implemented. We propose employing sustainable development as a framework under which to develop an international treaty to promulgate the environmental rights of the child, thereby promoting health, environmental stewardship, and quality of life for children and future generations. We further argue that children's environmental rights extend beyond basic "needs"-such as clean air, clean water, sanitation, and a healthful environment, among others-to include the right to benefit from access to nature of a certain quality and the wealth of educational, recreational, developmental, and health benefits that come with ensuring protection of the environment for children.

Indexed as

Child HealthChildEnvironmental ExposureEnvironmental HealthGlobal HealthHuman RightsHumansInternational Cooperation

Identifiers

PMID31239627
PMCPMC6586981

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.