Agriculture is essential for feeding the large and growing world population, but it can also generate pollution that harms ecosystems and human health. Here, we explore the human health effects of air pollution caused by the production of maize—a key agricultural crop that is used for animal feed, ethanol biofuel and human consumption. We use county-level data on agricultural practices and productivity to develop a spatially explicit life-cycle-emissions inventory for maize. From this inventory, we estimate health damages, accounting for atmospheric pollution transport and chemistry, and human exposure to pollution at high spatial resolution. We show that reduced air quality resulting from maize production is associated with 4,300 premature deaths annually in the United States, with estimated damages in monetary terms of US$39 billion (range: US$14–64 billion). Increased concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) are driven by emissions of ammonia—a PM2.5 precursor—that result from nitrogen fertilizer use. Average health damages from reduced air quality are equivalent to US$121 t−1 of harvested maize grain, which is 62% of the US$195 t−1 decadal average maize grain market price. We also estimate life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions of maize production, finding total climate change damages of US$4.9 billion (range: US$1.5–7.5 billion), or US$15 t−1 of maize. Our results suggest potential benefits from strategic interventions in maize production, including changing the fertilizer type and application method, improving nitrogen use efficiency, switching to crops requiring less fertilizer, and geographically reallocating production.
This is a preview of subscription content
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $8.25 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Data supporting the findings of this study beyond those found in the Supplementary Information are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Smith, P. et al. in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) 812–922 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
Tilman, D. et al. Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change. Science 292, 281–284 (2001).
Lelieveld, J., Evans, J., Fnais, M., Giannadaki, D. & Pozzer, A. The contribution of outdoor air pollution sources to premature mortality on a global scale. Nature 525, 367–371 (2015).
Bauer, S., Tsigaridis, K. & Miller, R. Significant atmospheric aerosol pollution caused by world food cultivation. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 5394–5400 (2016).
Tilman, D., Balzer, C., Hill, J. & Befort, B. Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 20260–20264 (2011).
Foley, J. et al. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 478, 337–342 (2011).
Pope, C. A. & Dockery, D. Health effects of fine particulate pollution: lines that connect. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 56, 709–742 (2006).
GBD 2015 Risk Factors Collaborators. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet 388, 1659–1724 (2016).
Graff Zivin, J. & Neidell, M. Air pollution’s hidden impacts. Science 359, 39–40 (2018).
Tessum, C., Marshall, J. & Hill, J. A spatially and temporally explicit life cycle inventory for gasoline and ethanol in the United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 11408–11417 (2012).
Smith, T. et al. Subnational mobility and consumption-based environmental accounting of US corn in animal protein and ethanol supply chains. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E7891–E7899 (2017).
Tessum, C., Hill, J. & Marshall, J. InMAP: a model for air pollution interventions. PLoS ONE 12, 0176131 (2017).
Green, T., Kipka, H., David, O. & McMaster, G. Where is the USA Corn Belt, and how is it changing? Sci. Total Environ. 618, 1613–1618 (2018).
Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2014); https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-08/documents/ee-0568-50.pdf
Quick Stats (US Department of Agriculture, 2018); https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov
Technical Support Document: Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866 (Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, United States Government, 2016); https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-12/documents/sc_co2_tsd_august_2016.pdf
Fertilizer Use and Price (US Department of Agriculture, 2018); https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/fertilizer-use-and-price.aspx
2014 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) Data (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2017); https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2014-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data
Pan, B., Kee Lam, S., Mosier, A., Luo, Y. & Chen, D. Ammonia volatilization from synthetic fertilizers and its mitigation strategies: a global synthesis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 232, 283–289 (2016).
Pinder, R., Adams, P. & Pandis, S. Ammonia emission controls as a cost-effective strategy for reducing atmospheric particulate matter in the Eastern United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 41, 380–386 (2007).
World of Corn 2018 (National Corn Growers Association, 2018); http://www.worldofcorn.com/pdf/NCGA_WOC2018_Metric.pdf
Hill, J. et al. Climate change and health costs of air emissions from biofuels and gasoline. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 2077–2082 (2009).
Springmann, M., Godfray, H. C., Rayner, M. & Scarborough, P. Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change cobenefits of dietary change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 4146–4151 (2016).
Springmann, M. et al. Mitigation potential and global health impacts from emissions pricing of food commodities. Nat. Clim. Change 7, 69–74 (2017).
Poore, J. & Nemecek, T. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science 360, 987–992 (2018).
Tilman, D. & Clark, M. Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature 515, 518–522 (2014).
GBD Results Tool (Univ. Washington Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, 2017); http://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool
Brandt, J. et al. Contribution from the ten major emission sectors in Europe and Denmark to the health-cost externalities of air pollution using the EVA model system—an integrated modelling approach. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 13, 7725–7746 (2013).
Paulot, F. & Jacob, D. Hidden cost of U.S. agricultural exports: particulate matter from ammonia emissions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 903–908 (2013).
Giannadaki, D., Giannakis, E., Pozzer, A. & Lelieveld, J. Estimating health and economic benefits of reductions in air pollution from agriculture. Sci. Total Environ. 622–623, 1304–1316 (2018).
GREET Model (Argonne National Laboratory, 2018); https://greet.es.anl.gov
Tessum, C., Hill, J. & Marshall, J. spatialmodel/inmap: v1.5.1 Zenodo https://zenodo.org/record/2549859 (2018).
Tessum, C., Hill, J. & Marshall, J. Life cycle air quality impacts of conventional and alternative light-duty transportation in the United States. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 18490–18495 (2014).
Thakrar, S., Goodkind, A., Tessum, C., Marshall, J. & Hill, J. Life cycle air quality impacts on human health from potential switchgrass production in the United States. Biomass Bioener. 114, 73–82 (2018).
Zhang, Y., Heath, G., Carpenter, A. & Fisher, N. Air pollutant emissions inventory of large-scale production of selected biofuels feedstocks in 2022. Biofuel. Bioprod. Bior. 10, 56–69 (2016).
Wade, T., Claassen, R. & Wallander, S. Conservation-Practice Adoption Rates Vary Widely by Crop and Region (Economic Information Bulletin No. 147, US Department of Agriculture, 2015).
Crop Acreage Data (US Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, 2018); https://www.fsa.usda.gov/news-room/efoia/electronic-reading-room/frequently-requested-information/crop-acreage-data/index
ARMS Data:Economic Research Service (ERS) Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS) Tailored Reports (US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, 2018); https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/arms-farm-financial-and-crop-production-practices/arms-data/
MacDonald, J., Ribaudo, M., Livingston, M., Beckman, J. & Huang, W. Manure Use for Fertilizer and for Energy (2009); https://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/46168/PDF
Davidson, C. et al. CMU Ammonia Model v3.6 (The Environmental Institute, Carnegie Mellon Univ., 2004).
Lark, T., Salmon, J. & Gibbs, H. Cropland expansion outpaces agricultural and biofuels policies in the United States. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 044003 (2015).
Lu, C. et al. Increasing carbon footprint of grain crop production in the US Western Corn Belt. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 124007 (2018).
Manson, S., Schroeder, J., Van Riper, D. & Ruggles, S. IPUMS NHGIS: version 12.0 (Univ. Minnesota, 2017); https://doi.org/10.18128/D050.V12.0
American FactFinder (US Census Bureau, 2018); https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml
Krewski, D. et al. Extended Follow-up and Spatial Analysis of the American Cancer Society Study Linking Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality Report 140 (Health Effects Institute, 2009); https://www.healtheffects.org/system/files/Krewski140.pdf
Paolella, D. et al. Effect of model spatial resolution on estimates of fine particulate matter exposure and exposure disparities in the United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 5, 436–441 (2018).
Tessum, C., Hill, J. & Marshall, J. Twelve-month, 12 km resolution North American WRF-Chem v3.4 air quality simulation: performance evaluation. Geosci. Model Dev. 8, 957–973 (2015).
Tessum, C., Hill, J. & Marshall, J. InMAP: Intervention Model for Air Pollution: health impacts of air pollution: a tool to understand the consequences. InMAP http://spatialmodel.com/inmap/ (2018).
Tessum, C., Hill, J. & Marshall, J. Evaluation data for the Intervention Model for Air Pollution (InMAP) version 1.3. Zenodo https://zenodo.org/record/848824 (2017).
We thank R. Noe, K. Colgan and N. Domingo for assistance. This work was supported by the US Department of Energy (EE0004397), US Department of Agriculture (2011-68005-30411 and MIN-12-083), University of Minnesota Grand Challenges Initiative and Wellcome Trust (Our Planet Our Health; Livestock, Environment and People (LEAP); 205212/Z/16/Z). This publication was also developed as part of the Center for Clean Air Climate Solutions, which was supported under Assistance Agreement number R835873 awarded by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It has not been formally reviewed by the EPA. The views expressed in this document are solely those of authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the agency. EPA does not endorse any products or commercial services mentioned in this publication.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Figures 1–3
County-specific lifecycle emissions model inputs. This file contains the input values for use in GREET-cst. Included are maize yields, fertilizer rates and types, manure application rates, pesticide rates and types, machinery requirements and fugitive dust emissions.
About this article
Cite this article
Hill, J., Goodkind, A., Tessum, C. et al. Air-quality-related health damages of maize. Nat Sustain 2, 397–403 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0261-y
Optimization of China’s maize and soy production can ensure feed sufficiency at lower nitrogen and carbon footprints
Nature Food (2021)
Multimedia Tools and Applications (2021)
Assessing genotypic variation for nitrogen use efficiency and associated traits in Brazilian maize hybrids grown under low and high nitrogen inputs
Scientific Reports (2020)
Costs and benefits of agricultural ammonia emission abatement options for compliance with European air quality regulations
Environmental Sciences Europe (2019)