The historical fingerprint and future impact of climate change on childhood malaria in Africa

A robust signal of climate sensitivity

Over the last century, the prevalence of childhood malaria has exhibited a strong concave relationship with temperature (Figure 2A). Closely tracking theoretical expectations that P. falciparum transmission by Anopheles gambiae mosquitoes should peak around 25.6°C ⁶, observed values of Pf PR₂₋₁₀ in our dataset peak around a monthly mean temperature of 25.8°C (Figure S1). Based on these biological expectations, we estimate the effect of temperature as a quadratic response term in the panel regression model, and find that prevalence peaks at 24.9°C (95% confidence interval across the 1,000 bootstrapped models: 22.5°C, 27.0°C). These results confirm that laboratory-based studies approximate malaria epidemiology in real populations quite well, and that temperature plays a substantial role in transmission dynamics: a 10°C increase or decrease from the optimal temperature lowers prevalence by ∼8 percentage points.

The relationship between precipitation and malaria prevalence is more complex, and likely less consequential for historical trends (Figures 2B, 2C). Contemporaneous monthly precipitation exhibits a nonlinear, but highly uncertain, relationship to prevalence (see Figure S12). To parsimoniously capture nonlinear effects and disentangle divergent impacts of low and high precipitation, we define precipitation shocks with two binary indicator variables, equal to one when monthly precipitation falls below 10% (we label this “drought”) or above 90% (we label this “flood”) percentiles of monthly precipitation calculated for each subnational unit. While drought and flood events are complex phenomena, which develop from the combination of multiple factors (e.g., soil conditions and topography) in addition to rainfall over varying timescales, we use this terminology for shorthand to indicate extremely low or high precipitation months. Although most effects are statistically insignificant, we find that drought shocks tend to decrease malaria prevalence 1-2 months later, while conversely, flood shocks have a positive effect on prevalence 2-3 months later. These effects and their timing are broadly consistent with expectations about how precipitation mediates the availability of mosquito breeding habitat: dry-out kills larvae and eggs, while inundation creates new breeding habitat ^47–54. Sensitivity analyses were also weakly suggestive of another established mechanism, in which floods may wash away eggs and larvae, reducing transmission in the shorter term (see Figures S10 and S12). Overall, extreme precipitation has a measurable effect on malaria prevalence, but may be less important than temperature; however, given the sparsity of weather station data ⁵⁵ and the uncertainty of precipitation reconstructions⁵⁶, it is also possible that our analysis unavoidably underestimates the effect of these variables due to measurement error.

Additional sensitivity analyses reinforce that these prevalence-climate relationships are both statistically robust and biologically consistent. Key findings are generally insensitive to alternative model specifications, such as the inclusion of lagged effects of temperature (Figure S7); higher-order polynomial effects of temperature (Figure S11); alternative definitions of drought and flood shocks (Figures S8-S10); and alternative spatiotemporal controls, which account differently for variation over space (at region, country, and state levels), time (including yearly and monthly variation), and interactions among space and time (Figure S6 and Table S2).

Historical impacts of climate change (1901-2014)

We find that human-caused climate change has, more likely than not, been responsible for a small increase in the average prevalence of childhood malaria across sub-Saharan Africa since 1901 (Figures 2D). Compared to counterfactual simulations without anthropogenic climate forcing, we estimate that by 2010-2014, climate change had caused an increase in continental mean Pf PR₂₋₁₀ of 0.08 percentage points (p.p.; 95% confidence interval: -0.30 p.p., 0.50 p.p.). Simulations with an attributable increase in continent-wide mean prevalence outnumber those with losses by two to one (proportion P₊ of 10,000 paired simulations with a positive difference = 0.66). These increases are almost entirely driven by rising temperatures; the effects of drought and flood events on prevalence show no distinguishable signal from anthropogenic emissions over time (Figure S4).

This overall trend masks substantial regional heterogeneity in historical climate change impacts (Figure 3A; Figure S2), driven almost entirely by elevational and latitudinal gradients in temperature (Figure 3B,C). For example, attributable impacts across southern Africa are high in both magnitude and certainty, with an overall increase of 0.63 p.p. (95% CI: -0.04 p.p., 1.40 p.p.; P₊ = 0.97)—nearly an order of magnitude greater than the continental mean. In contrast, climate change has contributed to significantly lower malaria prevalence in west Africa (mean = -0.40 p.p.; 95% CI: -0.93 p.p., 0.00 p.p.; P₊ = 0.03), where temperatures already often exceed the biological optimum for transmission. In the central African basin, a stronghold of malaria endemicity with average temperatures close to the 25^°C optimum, the change in prevalence attributable to anthropogenic climate change is positive, relatively small, and uncertain (mean = 0.18 p.p.; 95% CI: -0.18 p.p., 0.62 p.p.; P₊ = 0.83). Finally, we estimate a meaningful overall increase in prevalence attributable to climate change in east Africa (mean = 0.34 p.p.; 95% CI: -0.13 p.p., 0.87 p.p.; P₊ = 0.91), but note that impacts are distributed unevenly along the steep elevational gradient: increases of up to 1-2 p.p. in the Ethiopian highlands and the greater Rift Valley region are accompanied by small but significant local declines throughout lowland areas in Ethiopia, Sudan, South Sudan, Eritrea, and Djibouti.

While these effects are meaningful, we caution that they are also far smaller than the reduction achieved through healthcare, mosquito nets, vector control, and economic development: previous work with the same dataset has estimated a reduction since 1900 of 16 p.p. (i.e., a continent-wide decline in average Pf PR₂₋₁₀ from 40% in 1900-1929 to 24% by 2010-2015⁴), while our estimates of historical climate-attributable changes rarely exceed 2 p.p. for any individual administrative region. Additionally, we estimate that average reductions in prevalence realized during the Global Malaria Eradication Program (1955-1969; estimated reduction averaged over the entire period: -4.80 p.p.) and recent programs like Roll Back Malaria and the Global Technical Strategy (2000– 2014; estimated reduction averaged over the entire period: -3.35 p.p.) were substantially larger than the cumulative effects of anthropogenic climate change in most regions (Table S2). Relatively small and spatially differentiated climate-related changes in burden could have been easily concealed by the greater impact of these programs, highlighting both the success of elimination programs and the importance of using an empirical approach like ours that can isolate the effect of climate from other co-evolving factors.

Future impacts of climate change (2015-2100)

Despite contemporary trends, we project that within the next quarter-century, the net impact of climate change will be a continent-wide reduction in malaria prevalence (Figure 2D; Table S1). This trend is driven largely by rising temperatures in lowland areas north of the equator, with greater possible reductions in higher emissions scenarios (Figure 4). In these scenarios, temperature-related declines are slightly offset by floods, which will become more frequent across the continent³⁶, although their impact on overall trends is trivial when compared to temperature (Figure S5). Even in a low emissions scenario (SSP1-RCP2.6), present-day increases from historical warming would essentially be offset by mid-century, stabilizing around an -0.08 p.p. (95% CI: -0.40 p.p., 0.17 p.p.) projected decline across sub-Saharan Africa (2048-2052, relative to 2015-2020). In a high emissions scenario (SSP5–RCP8.5), we project that losses would accelerate over time, reaching an average of -0.23 p.p. (95% CI: -0.79 p.p., 0.26 p.p.) by mid-century and -1.8 p.p. (95% CI: -4.6 p.p., -0.03 p.p.) by the end of the century (2096-2100)—a reduction that would be comparable in scale to some previous continent-wide eradication efforts.

Though the balance across regions will begin to shift, the geographic pattern of future changes is likely to reproduce present-day heterogeneity in impacts, as malaria transmission continues to shift along latitudinal and elevational clines in temperature (Figure 4; Figure S3). West Africa will experience the most dramatic transformation, especially in a high-emissions scenario (SSP5-RCP8.5), with a projected -1.0 p.p. (95% CI: -1.9 p.p., -0.35 p.p.) decline by mid-century, and a staggering -4.0 p.p. (95% CI: -8.8 p.p., -1.5 p.p.) region-wide decrease by 2100. Similar but shallower declines are projected in central Africa, where end-of-century reductions could reach between -0.06 p.p. (SSP1-RCP2.6; 95% CI: -0.41 p.p., 0.25 p.p.) and -1.2 p.p. (SSP5-RCP8.5; 95% CI: -3.9 p.p., 0.43 p.p.). On the other hand, localized increases will continue in the coldest parts of the Ethiopian highlands, the greater Rift Valley region, and coastal southern Africa, potentially reaching 5 percentage points or more in some areas. The overall effect is positive across east and southern Africa, except in the highest emissions scenario: in SSP5-RCP8.5, both regions start to experience declines by mid-century, with east Africa eventually falling -0.48 p.p. (95% CI: -2.4 p.p., 0.98 p.p.) below present-day levels.

Broadly, our results suggest that the main effect of climate change mitigation will be to keep average temperatures in sub-Saharan Africa closer to the optimum range for malaria transmission. However, for many colder localities, emissions reductions would prevent substantial climate-driven increases in malaria prevalence. By mid-century, compared to a medium emissions scenario similar to current global projections (SSP2-RCP4.5) ⁵⁷, keeping global warming below +2°C (the target simulated by SSP1-RCP2.6) would prevent an estimated 163 excess cases of malaria per 100,000 children in southern Africa, as well as 24 excess cases per 100,000 children in east Africa. By the end of the century, these benefits would be even greater, with 496 and 40 excess cases averted per 100,000 children in southern and east Africa, respectively (Table S1). At a more local scale, these benefits could be at least an order of magnitude greater (Figure S3).

Malaria prevalence data

We use a recently published database of Plasmodium falciparum clinical prevalence in Sub-Saharan Africa⁴. This compendium, compiled by Snow et al. over more than two decades, is one of the most spatially and temporally complete publicly-available databases of infectious disease burden. The database covers the period from 1900 to 2015, though sampling has increased substantially since the turn of the century (pre-2000: n = 32, 533; post-2000: n = 17, 892). Most prevalence surveys used microscopy for diagnostics (n = 36, 805) but a substantial portion of data also derive from rapid diagnostic tests (n = 11, 154). The data have been compiled from a mix of archival research through public health documents, including the records of colonial governments and elimination campaigns from different periods; national survey data; electronic records published in peer-reviewed journals and grey data sources (e.g., World Health Organization technical documents); and a mix of other sources compiled by international organizations. Records were georeferenced in the original study using a standard set of protocols, with a 5km grid uncertainty threshold for point data, and broader areas stored as administrative polygons. In total, the data include a total of 50,425 prevalence surveys at a total of 36,966 unique georeferenced locations.

For our models, we used the estimates of malaria prevalence for children aged two to ten years old, as falciparum malaria has the highest mortality in children and pregnant women. The Snow et al. data cover all available prevalence surveys, including all age ranges, but were converted by the authors of the original study to a standardized estimate of prevalence in children aged 2-10 (Pf PR₂₋₁₀), using a catalytic conversion Muench model. For our model, we aggregated data by averaging Pf PR₂₋₁₀ at the first administrative level within-country (i.e., state or province level, or as shorthand, ADM1), using shapefiles provided by the Database of Global Administrative Areas dataset version 3.6 (www.gadm.org). This provided sufficient granularity to capture climate impacts and local heterogeneity in confounders, while ensuring sufficient data coverage within these units. This aggregation scale is supported by previous work that models this dataset at the same spatial resolution⁴.

Climate data

We used two sets of climate data in this study. The first is an observational dataset from the Climatic Research Unit (hereafter, CRU-TS; version 4.03 for model training and 4.06 for bias correction), which is constructed from monthly observations from extensive networks of meteorological stations from around the globe⁶⁶. CRU-TS provides land-only climatic variables at a high spatial resolution of 0.5° × 0.5° extending from 1901 to present (though our analysis is limited to the period 1901-2014). The second set of data is from ten global climate models (GCMs) selected from the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). In our historical analysis, we analysed (per GCM) one model realization of the “Historical” simulation, which includes anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, and one realization from the “Historical-Natural” simulation, which includes only solar and volcanic climate forcing. For both the Historical and Historical-Natural (hereafter and in the main text, “historical climate” and “historical counterfactual”) simulations, we analysed the period 1901-2014.

To investigate the continued effect of climate change on malaria prevalence between 2015 and 2100, we analysed three CMIP6 future climate change simulations from each of the 10 GCMs. Shared socio-economic pathways (SSPs) refer to the level of potential future global development (social, economic, and technological) and the implication for climate change mitigation and/or adaptation actions or policy ^{67, 68}. SSPs are combined with various possible future radiative forcings (representative concentration pathways; RCPs) to form the climate change scenarios used in CMIP6. Of the available SSP–RCP scenarios, we selected and used three. The first two suggest enhanced human development outcomes with increased potential towards a more sustainable (SSP1⁶⁹) or a less sustainable (SSP5⁷⁰) economy. The third, SSP2⁷¹, is a mid-way scenario, which assumes a future that mostly follows historical trends ⁶⁸. We selected these scenarios in combination with a low (SSP1-RCP2.6), intermediate (SSP2-RCP4.5), and high (SSP5-RCP8.5) greenhouse gas concentration scenario.

We apply a standard quantile-quantile (Q-Q) bias-correction^{72, 73} to the CMIP6 precipitation and temperature datasets for both of the historical simulations for the period 1901-2014, and all three future simulations for the period 2015-2100. Before the bias-correction, we first remap all simulated CMIP6 precipitation and temperature datasets to the same grid cell size (0.5° × 0.5°) as the CRU-TS observation data. We then perform for each CMIP6 model, the Q-Q bias correction at each grid-point by mapping the quantile values (q_i) for the empirical cumulative distribution functions for each of the 12 months over the period 1901-2014 (for each grid point) onto the corresponding quantiles in the observational dataset (CRU-TS), so that the observed precipitation or temperature values associated with q_i become the bias-corrected value in the simulations. For the counterfactual (and future) simulations, we first determine, at each grid-point, for each value of precipitation or temperature (for each month) over the period 1901-2014 (2015-2100) the equivalent quantile (q_j) in the factual simulation and then identify the precipitation or temperature value associated with q_j in the observational dataset as the bias-corrected value. We detrended both precipitation and temperature datasets before applying the bias-correction procedure, and then added the trends back after⁷³.

For every climate dataset (all CRU-TS and CMIP6 models), we extract the average value of monthly precipitation and temperature within each ADM1 unit. To construct polynomial variables for temperature and precipitation (see below), all data were transformed at the grid cell level prior to aggregation to the ADM1 unit; extreme precipitation cutoffs were defined at the ADM1 level and so were applied after aggregation.

Statistical model

The influence of climatic conditions on malaria prevalence has been heavily studied using transmission models based in vector ecophysiology and calibrated using laboratory experiments^{6, 7}. The important benefit of this approach is that the mechanistic links between a particular environmental condition (e.g., temperature) and malaria prevalence in the human population, such as effects on biting rate and survival probability, can be independently isolated. However, this approach is limited in its ability to generalize to real-world contexts, where complex socioeconomic factors interact with modeled relationships based on laboratory conditions. Clinical data, which measures malaria prevalence in human populations, has been used to validate modeled results (e.g., ref.⁶), but inconsistent findings arise due to challenges in statistically isolating the role of climate from the many correlated factors influencing prevalence, such as public health interventions, drug resistance, conflict and social instability, and economic shocks (e.g., refs. ^{19, 58, 74–76}).

This study seeks to provide generalizable population-scale evidence of the malaria-climate link across sub-Saharan Africa using field-collected clinical data and a statistical approach designed to isolate changing environmental conditions from spatiotemporal confounding factors. Specifically, we draw on the climate econometrics literature ⁷⁷, which has developed causal inference approaches to quantify and project the impacts of anthropogenic climate change on a host of socioeconomic outcomes, from agricultural yields⁷⁸, to civil conflict ⁷⁹, to all-cause mortality ⁴⁶. This approach is designed to approximate controlled experiments by semi-parametrically accounting for unobservable spatial and temporal confounding factors, isolating variation in the climate system that is as good as randomly assigned ⁸⁰. This approach is often referred to as “reduced-form”, as it allows for a causal interpretation of recovered relationships between socioeconomic conditions and the climate, but it does not easily enable the researcher to isolate individual mechanisms linking a changing climate to shifts in outcomes (e.g., mosquito population dynamics or parasite development rates). However, causal estimates enable counterfactual simulation in which climate is changed and all other factors are held constant; this is the exercise conducted here and in many applications of climate econometric frameworks. Moreover, these relationships can be used to calibrate more structured transmission models by providing empirical grounding from observational data.

We develop a statistical model using monthly survey-based malaria prevalence data for children aged 2-10 (Pf PR₂₋₁₀) covering all of sub-Saharan Africa over 115 years. Our outcome variable is the average prevalence for each first administrative unit i (e.g., province or state) in country c during month m and year t, which we denote Pf PR_icmt. We estimate prevalence as a flexible function of monthly temperature T_icmt and precipitation P_icmtvariables as follows: where f (·) and g(·) represent nonlinear transformations of grid-cell level temperature and precipitation conditions, respectively, and where ℓ subscripts indicate monthly temporal lags. In our main specification, we model f (·) as a quadratic in contemporaneous average temperature, while g(·) contains a vector of dummy variables indicating whether an administrative unit’s monthly rainfall can be categorized as drought (defined as ≤ 10% of the long-run location- and month-specific mean) or flood (defined as ≥ 90% of the long-run location- and month-specific mean) during month m − ℓ We allow for up to three monthly of lags (i.e., L = 3) for these extreme precipitation conditions in our main specification, based on hypotheses from prior literature regarding the timescales of larvae drying and of “flushing” ^{47, 50, 81}. A variety of sensitivity analyses detailed below demonstrate that key findings are robust to including lags for temperature (Figure S7), to the drought and flood cutoffs used for precipitation (Figures S8-S10), and to alternative functional forms of temperature (Figure S11).

Equation 1 uses a suite of semi-parametric spatiotemporal controls to isolate plausibly random variation in climatological conditions, following standard practices in the climate impacts literature. ^{43, 77} First, α_i is a vector of indicator variables for each of 853 first administrative units (i.e., “ADM1” units) across our multi-country sample. These spatial “fixed effects” control for all time-invariant characteristics of an administrative unit that may confound the relationship between temperature, rainfall, and prevalence. For example, higher altitude regions may exhibit cooler temperatures, but they also may be composed of lower-income and more geographically isolated communities with limited access to malaria prevention interventions. By controlling for mean conditions in each location, these spatial fixed effects avoid conflating climate conditions with other geographic correlates.

Second, γ_rm is a vector of region-by-month-of-year indicator variables, where regions are defined using the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) regional definitions of Western, Southern, Central, and Eastern Africa (see Figure 2 in ref.⁸²). These spatiotemporal fixed effects account for region-specific seasonality in prevalence that may spuriously relate to seasonally-varying climatological conditions. We allow these seasonal controls to vary by region because of large differences in climatological seasonality and in malaria cyclicality across sub-Saharan Africa ⁸³, and we show below that our main findings are robust to more stringent seasonality controls defined at the country level (Figure S6). Third, h_c(·) is a nonlinear, country-specific function that controls for country-specific gradual trends that may confound the malaria-climate relationship, particularly under historical conditions of anthropogenic climate change. In our main specification, we model h_c(·) as a quadratic. Figure S6 shows that our results are robust to multiple alternative approaches to controlling for long-run trends that may vary across space.

Finally, the indicator variables are equal to one when an observation falls into the 1955-1969 or 2000-2015 period, respectively. These two periods saw substantial malaria intervention programs across the subcontinent, leading to considerable declines in malaria that were unrelated to changes in the climate ^{4, 84}. These indicator variables control for shocks to prevalence during these two periods, and the coefficients δ₁ and δ₂ allow for differential effectiveness of the two distinct intervention periods. While these variables are highly statistically significant (Table S2), our main findings are robust to their exclusion (Figure S6).

Together, these set of flexible controls imply that the residual variation in temperature and precipitation events used to identify the functions f (·) and g(·) is month-to-month variation over time within the same location, after controlling for gradual country-specific trends, regional seasonality, and the aggregate effects of two substantial malaria prevention intervention programs. When reporting regression results directly, we cluster standard errors ε_icmt at the ADM1 level to account for serial correlation within the same location. When computing bootstrap samples (e.g., shown in Figure 2), we repeatedly re-estimate Equation 1 after block-resampling the full dataset using ADM1-level blocks to account for this same serial correlation.

Statistical model sensitivity and robustness

In this section, we describe a set of model sensitivity analyses that probe the robustness of our empirical model. Specifically, we investigate sensitivity of our key findings to: alternative spatiotemporal controls; inclusion of dynamic temperature effects; alternative definitions of extreme rainfall events; and alternative functional forms for the prevalence-temperature relationship.

Alternative spatiotemporal controls

Our preferred empirical specification in Equation 1 includes first administrative unit fixed effects (i.e., indicator variables), region-by-month-of-year fixed effects, country-specific quadratic time trends, and two indicator variables for each of two malaria intervention periods (1955-1969 and 2000-2015). Figure S6 shows that our estimated prevalence-temperature relationship is highly robust to many alternative spatial and temporal controls. All panels in this figure include ADM1 fixed effects to control for time-invariant characteristics that may confound the relationship between prevalence and temperature, but each panel varies in the additional spatial and/or temporal controls included in the regression. A tabular version of these results is shown in Table S2. While the temperature at which prevalence peaks changes slightly across model specifications, it remains within a degree of the 25^◦C value from our preferred specification for most models, particularly those including time trends that are spatially differentiated. Predictably, stringent controls, such as region-by-year and country-by-month fixed effects, tend to increase statistical uncertainty. However, overall the estimated shape and magnitude of the prevalence-temperature relationship remain robust to alternative spatial and temporal controls.

Dynamic temperature effects

Our preferred empirical specification estimates contemporaneous (within one month) and lagged (up to three months) effects of extreme rainfall on malaria prevalence, but only contemporaneous effects of temperature. While it is possible that temperature also exhibits lagged effects, we show in Figure S7 that the cumulative effect of temperature on Pf PR₂₋₁₀ is very similar whether zero, one, two, or three months of lagged temperatures are accounted for. The prevalence response to temperature does become slightly stronger with three months of lags, suggesting that our historical and future climate projections shown throughout the main text may be somewhat conservative. However, overall these findings suggest that climate change impact projections are unlikely to change meaningfully under different assumptions of the lag structure of temperature exposure.

Alternative definitions of extreme rainfall events

Our main empirical specification defines drought as months for which total precipitation is less than or equal to 10% of the long-run location- and month-specific mean. Flood is analogously defined as months for which total precipitation is greater than or equal to 90% of the long-run location- and month-specific mean. Here, we investigate the sensitivity of our main findings to these definitions. To do so, we systematically vary both the drought and flood cutoff values, ranging from <1% to <20% for drought and from >85% to >95% for flood. Figure S8 shows that the relationship between malaria prevalence and temperature is insensitive to the definition of drought and flood events. Figure S9 shows that under most drought and flood definitions, extremely low precipitation events have a negative effect on prevalence with a lag of 1-2 months. However, this effect is rarely statistically significant. Figure S10 shows that extremely high rainfall events increase prevalence with a lag of 2-3 months, a result is statistically significant and highly robust to alternative drought and flood definitions. In general, these sensitivity analyses show that our main findings are not sensitive to the specific definitions of drought and flood used in estimation of Equation 1.

Alternative functional forms for the prevalence-temperature relationship

Following from theoretical and laboratory-based literature (e.g., refs.^{6, 7}), we model the prevalence-temperature relationship as quadratic. However, Figure S11 shows that this relationship is similar when more flexible functional forms are used. In particular, the temperature at which prevalence peaks changes little when higher order polynomials are estimated. Estimating higher order polynomials increases uncertainty, particularly in the tails of the temperature distribution, but point estimates are similar across the majority of the temperature support.

Projections

In both historical and future simulations, we apply the panel regression to estimate the effect of climate change on Pf PR₂₋₁₀. Our predictions capture the full range of statistical uncertainty (1,000 model estimates) and climate model uncertainty (10 climate models), producing a total of 10,000 estimates of historical or future impacts in any given scenario. Each of these 10,000 estimates is normalized to a long-run baseline (past: 1901-1930; present: 2015-2020) before estimates are averaged, creating an estimate of climate change impacts relative to that baseline. While the panel regression model accounts for historical variation through the fixed effects structure, we do not examine overall prevalence predictions for the historical model, and cannot apply it to predict future overall prevalence (i.e., no future estimates exist for non-climate effects in the model).

For overall trends, we generated continent-wide averages or four regional averages using the unweighted average of estimates for each ADM1 unit. This is a deliberate over-simplification, as we do not adjust averages based on either ADM1 units’ land area or the estimated population they contain; we made this decision based on the challenges of reconstructing historical population density at fine scales, as well as the need to otherwise make assumptions about how disease burden is allocated over space (e.g., the distribution of transmission across rural or urban areas). For similar reasons, we chose not to estimate the effect of prevalence changes on overall malaria incidence. Although some studies have attempted this using a linear conversion with total population⁸⁵, proper estimation of incidence (and the effects of treatment variables, through prevalence, on case burden) requires malaria transmission models that require substantially more demographic assumptions ⁸⁴. Future work could explore both of these methodologically-complex directions, and potentially generate finer-scale estimates of how many cases of childhood malaria, and resulting deaths, are attributable to climate change.