Health Co-benefits of Net-Zero Pathways vs. Transition Costs: A Literature Review

Net-zero pathways will generate substantial health co-benefits, which are often large, spatially concentrated, and realized in the near term. Since these features can substantially strengthen the case for ambitious mitigation, it is necessary to quantify these co-benefits and compare them across policy options within a cost-benefit analysis. Yet no previous work has systematically synthesised the methods and outcomes used in this literature to support robust and comparable policy conclusions. We systematically identify seventeen original studies that report monetized health benefits alongside transition costs for forward-looking 2 °C or net-zero scenarios. We extract comparable quantitative indicators (principally benefit-cost ratios) and document key modeling choices. Two main results emerge: first, all studies focus on health benefits arising from reductions in air pollution, while health benefits from active mobility and dietary change are largely not covered; second, with the exception of two Europe-focused studies, all conclude that, under a 2 °C-consistent pathway, health benefits exceed transition costs. Despite this convergence, substantial differences in analytical scope, temporal horizons, and valuation methods limit comparability and weaken the existing evidence. We therefore provide the first comprehensive overview of the underlying modeling approaches and show how these choices shape cost-benefit analysis outcomes. Finally, we propose targeted recommendations to strengthen scientific robustness and policy relevance, including improving comparability across studies, increasing regional analyses, reporting both tangible and intangible costs and benefits in a temporally explicit manner.