Towards compliance with the 2021 WHO air quality guidelines: A comparative analysis of PM2.5 trends in australia and china

In 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) released new Air Quality Guidelines (AQG) which significantly reduced the recommended annual mean concentration of fine particulate matter (PM<sub>2.5</sub>) in ambient air from 10 μg/m<sup>3</sup> (AQG 2005) to 5 μg/m<sup>3</sup> (AQG 2021). Recent studies have shown that this challenging new target may be close to or even below the background levels of PM<sub>2.5</sub> resulting from non-anthropogenic activities in many regions globally, such as areas affected by desert dust. This raises an important question: can countries achieve compliance with the new guideline for PM<sub>2.5</sub>? Here we investigated this question from the perspective of two countries that fall on opposite ends of the spectrum of ambient air pollution. We examined historical PM<sub>2.5</sub> trends based on observations of annual mean PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations from 2013 to 2024 in eight capital cities of each state in Australia and 31 capital cities of each province in mainland China. A statistical model was used to differentiate the contributions of meteorological variations and anthropogenic drivers to determining the annual trends of PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations. Subsequently, we analyzed and discussed the feasibility of meeting the guidelines for each city based on these results. Our findings demonstrate that compliance with the new guideline is largely achievable, or has the potential to be achieved, in more than half of the cities in Australia. Notably, there is a high probability that a city, after meeting the guideline, may return to the non-compliance again. In addition, in some cities, eliminating anthropogenic emissions may not lead to a significant further reduction in PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations, and they might not achieve compliance. In contrast, PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations are an order of magnitude higher in some cities in China, yet Lhasa holds the potential to become the first Chinese city to meet the guideline in the future. Meeting the new AQG is highly challenging for Chinese cities, and even if achievable, it will take a long time. However, it is certain that China still has significant potential for further reductions in PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations. This can be achieved through the ongoing implementation of emission control measures and the transition to the use of new sources of energy to reduce anthropogenic emissions. This study provides insights into the development of city-specific policies for air pollution control and management in both Australia and China.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environment International
Published
2025-03-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2025.109378
Citations
11
Primary Topic
Air Quality and Health Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
13.20

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Towards compliance with the 2021 WHO air quality guidelines: A comparative analysis of PM2.5 trends in australia and china

Jennifer Salmond, Jay Gao, Ningxin Jiang, Xuying Ma et al.
11 citations
Environment International
Air Quality and Health Impacts
13.20
article

Towards compliance with the 2021 WHO air quality guidelines: A comparative analysis of PM2.5 trends in australia and china

Jennifer Salmond, Jay Gao, Ningxin Jiang, Xuying Ma, Yunzhong Shen, Lídia Morawska, Zelei Tan, Yifan Wang, Xiaoqi Wang, Danyang Li, Jun Deng, Gao Jun, Haojie Wu, Bin Zou, Yuanyuan Fan, Xin Xu
article en
11 citations

Abstract

In 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) released new Air Quality Guidelines (AQG) which significantly reduced the recommended annual mean concentration of fine particulate matter (PM<sub>2.5</sub>) in ambient air from 10 μg/m<sup>3</sup> (AQG 2005) to 5 μg/m<sup>3</sup> (AQG 2021). Recent studies have shown that this challenging new target may be close to or even below the background levels of PM<sub>2.5</sub> resulting from non-anthropogenic activities in many regions globally, such as areas affected by desert dust. This raises an important question: can countries achieve compliance with the new guideline for PM<sub>2.5</sub>? Here we investigated this question from the perspective of two countries that fall on opposite ends of the spectrum of ambient air pollution. We examined historical PM<sub>2.5</sub> trends based on observations of annual mean PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations from 2013 to 2024 in eight capital cities of each state in Australia and 31 capital cities of each province in mainland China. A statistical model was used to differentiate the contributions of meteorological variations and anthropogenic drivers to determining the annual trends of PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations. Subsequently, we analyzed and discussed the feasibility of meeting the guidelines for each city based on these results. Our findings demonstrate that compliance with the new guideline is largely achievable, or has the potential to be achieved, in more than half of the cities in Australia. Notably, there is a high probability that a city, after meeting the guideline, may return to the non-compliance again. In addition, in some cities, eliminating anthropogenic emissions may not lead to a significant further reduction in PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations, and they might not achieve compliance. In contrast, PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations are an order of magnitude higher in some cities in China, yet Lhasa holds the potential to become the first Chinese city to meet the guideline in the future. Meeting the new AQG is highly challenging for Chinese cities, and even if achievable, it will take a long time. However, it is certain that China still has significant potential for further reductions in PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations. This can be achieved through the ongoing implementation of emission control measures and the transition to the use of new sources of energy to reduce anthropogenic emissions. This study provides insights into the development of city-specific policies for air pollution control and management in both Australia and China.

Environment InternationalVol. 198
Xi'an University of Science and Technology (CN), Tongji University (CN), Central South University (CN), University of Auckland (NZ), Queensland University of Technology (AU), Sydney Water (AU), Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (AU), Department for Environment and Water (AU), Institute of Earth Environment (CN), Lanzhou University (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, China Postdoctoral Science Foundation, China Scholarship Council, Australian Research Council
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Air Quality and Health Impacts
13.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.