May 13, 2020April 5, 2024

Open letter to WHO and UN Environment Programme

COVID-19: Holistic, equitable solutions are required to improve human and planetary health and reduce zoonotic pandemic risks

Dear Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and Ms. Inger Andersen,

We, the undersigned individuals and organisations, commend the work the UN is doing to tackle the COVID-19 disease pandemic and its socio-economic consequences. The recently released UN Framework for the immediate socio-economic response to COVID-19 outlines the importance of shared responsibility and integration. However, more action is required, particularly on the environmental front. Urgent, far-reaching steps must be taken to reduce zoonotic pandemic risks and secure a better future not only for humans but also for nature, which underpins the health and well-being of all humanity. It is vital that any actions taken are appropriate and lead to socially just outcomes which contribute to – not detract from – the development of economically resilient livelihoods for those hundreds of millions of the world’s most vulnerable who depend on wild resources for their survival.

COVID-19 is inflicting unprecedented social and economic costs on countries and communities, with the poor and vulnerable hardest hit. The virus’s suspected links with a Chinese ‘wet market’ has led to calls to ban wet markets and restrict or end the trade and consumption – for medicines or food – of wildlife. However, indiscriminate bans and restrictions risk being inequitable and ineffective. Wet markets, wildlife trade and consumption, and disease risks are all complex subjects. Wet markets (not all of which sell wild meat) provide invaluable food security; billions of people worldwide trade or consume wild meat and rely on wildlife use for livelihoods, while diseases are transmitted from livestock as well as wildlife.

There is an urgent need to tackle wildlife trade that is illegal, unsustainable or carries major risks to human health, biodiversity or animal welfare. Certain high-risk activities may rightfully necessitate targeted and/or time-bound bans, or severe restrictions (and rigorous enforcement), but it is vital that any such action is specific, appropriate, and equitable. If those targeted bans or severe restrictions are implemented, they should be accompanied by the meaningful provision of suitable alternative livelihoods for people affected. Furthermore, long-term success will require a holistic approach, including tackling issues like land conversion and industrial agriculture, which are major drivers of pandemic risk as well as biodiversity loss. Any actions must be undertaken in a targeted and socially just manner with due regard for human rights.

We recommend that the WHO and UNEP use their individual and collective expertise to:

1. Work with the appropriate experts to identify areas and activities where wildlife trade and/or use poses high risks to zoonotic disease transmission, biodiversity conservation or welfare, and strengthen or develop tailored, locally appropriate strategies, with suitably improved regulation and enforcement, along the entire supply chain to reduce those risks;
2. Initiate a coordinated response to the risks of pandemic emergence and biodiversity loss through the UN Environmental Management Group to raise intergovernmental awareness of the important role biodiversity plays in underpinning human health, the health risks associated with habitat destruction, and the value of sustainable use of biological resources (in line with Article 1 of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and guided by its 2004 Addis Ababa Principles);
3. Build partnerships across WHO, UNEP and other key stakeholders including IUCN, FAO and WTO, to explore how health considerations could be better aligned with trade regulations within the CITES framework, in clear recognition that biodiversity loss, unregulated trade and human health are inextricably linked;
4. Effectively engage with the CBD’s ongoing process to develop the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework and associated resource mobilisation strategy to ensure biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and wisely used;
5. Support science- and human-rights-based, equitable approaches to conservation, in order to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, and deliver comprehensive improvements to both human and planetary health.

The reasons for our recommendations are set out in Annexe A, below the signatory list. 300 of the signatories (160 organisational signatories and 140 individual signatories) are shown below – more on online and will continue to be collected:

Organisational signatories

!Khaodi // Hoas Conservancy Kunene South, Namibia
1StopBorneo Wildlife, Brunei
African Wildlife Foundation (AWF), Kenya/International
Afrivet, South Africa
Ambrosisus A. Community Forest Kavango West, Namibia
Anabeb Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Asocaiman, Colombia
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, USA
Association OKANI, Cameroon
Aube Novelle pour la Femme et le Development (AFND), Democratic Republic of the Congo
Balepye Community, South Africa
Botswana Wildlife Producers Association (BWPA), Botswana
Cameroon Youth Biodiversity Network, Cameroon
CAMPFIRE Association, Zimbabwe
CIC – International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation, US/international
Climate Change Coalition Group, Zimbabwe
COMFAUNA (Comunidad de Manejo de Fauna Silvestre en Amazonía y América Latina, Latin America
Conservation Alliance International, Ghana
Conservation Alliance Sierra Leone, Sierra Leone
Conservation Frontlines Foundation, USA/South Africa
Conservation Outcomes, South Africa
Conservation Through Public Health, Uganda
Conservation Visions, Canada
Creative Conservation Solutions, Australia
Cuma CF Communioty Forest Kavango West, Namibia
Custodians of Professional Hunting and Conservation-SA, South Africa
Dallas Safari Club, USA
Earthmind, Switzerland
Eco Ranger Group, South Africa
EcoHealth Alliance, USA
Ecolife Expeditions, South Africa
Ehirovipuka Conservancy – Kunene Region, Namibia
Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa
Environmental Conservation Trust of Uganda (ECOTRUST), Uganda
Environmental Foundation for Africa, Sierra Leone
Epupa Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Erongo Regional Conservancy Association (North West), Namibia
Etanga Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
European Federation for Hunting and Conservation (FACE), Belgium
European Sustainable Use Group, UK
Farm Africa, UK/International
Fondation Camerounaise Terre Vivante (FCTV), Cameroon
Frankfurt Zoological Society, Germany/International
FundAmazonia, Peru
Fur Institute of Canada (FIC), Canada
Game Ranchers Forum, South Africa
Gcatjinga Community Forest Kavango West, Namibia
Gender CC Woman for Climate Justice, South Africa
Geo Wild Consult, South Africa
George Mukoya Conservancy Kavango East, Namibia
Giraffe Conservation Foundation, Namibia/International
Gonarezhou Conservation Trust, Zimbabwe
Greenhood Nepal, Nepal
Guide Outfitting Association of British Columbia, Canada
Hans Kanyinga Community Forest Kavango West, Namibia
Houston Safari Club, USA
Huab Conservancy ( Kunene Region), Namibia
Integrated Rural Development and Nature Conservation (IRDNC) , Namibia
Interdisciplinary Centre for Conservation Science and Oxford Martin Programme on the Illegal Wildlife Trade, UK
International Fur Federation, UK/International
Ipumbu Ya Tshilongo ( North Central ), Namibia
IUCN Group Sustainable Use and Management of Ecosystems (SUME), International
IUCN SSC Bear Specialist Group, International
IUCN SSC Caprinae Specialist Group, International
IUCN SSC-CEESP Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist Group (SULi), International
IUCN Wildlife Health Specialist Group, International
Wildlife Producers Association of Zambia, Zambia
IWMC World Conservation Trust, Switzerland/International
Jamma International, UK/International
Japan Falconiformes Center, Japan
Kahenge Community Forest Kavango West, Namibia
Kapinga Kabwalye Community Forest Kavango West, Namibia
Kasungu Wildlife Conservation for Community Development, Malawi
Katope Community Forest Kavango West, Namibia
Keystone Foundation, India
Kunene Conservancy Association (KRCCA), Namibia
Kunene River Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Likwaterera Community Forest Kavango West, Namibia
Lion Landscapes, Kenya
Mahenye Community Committee, Zimbabwe
Malagasy Youth Biodiversity Network, Madagascar
Marienfluss Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Masoka CAMPFIRE Association, Zimbabwe
Masoka Community, Zimbabwe
Maurisi Nekaro Conservancy Kavango East, Namibia
Mbeyo Community Forest Kavango West, Namibia
Mbire Rural District Council, Zimbabwe
Muduva Nyangana Conservancy (Kavango East), Namibia
Namibia Nature Foundation (NNF), Namibia
Namibian Chamber of Environment, Namibia
Namibian Organisation of CBNRM Support Organisations (NACSO), Namibia
Ncamacoro Community Forest Kavango West, Namibia
Ncaute Community Forest Kavango West, Namibia
Ngamiland Council of Non-Governmental Organisations (NCONGO), Botswana
Norwegian Pet Trade Association, Norway
Okandundumba Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Okanguati Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Okatjandjakozomenje Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Okondjombo Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Okongoro Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Ombazu Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Ombombo masitu Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Ombujokanguindi Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Ongongo Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Ornamental Fish International (OFI), The Netherlands
Orupembe Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Orupupa Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Otjambangu Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Otji West Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Otjikondavirongo Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Otjikongo Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Otjimboyo Conservancy ( Erongo Region), Namibia
Otjindjerese Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Otjitanda Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Otjombande Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Otuzemba Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Ozondundu Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
People for Pangolins, International
Puros Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Resource Africa South Africa, South Africa
Resource Africa UK, UK
Ruaha Carnivore Project, Tanzania
Safari Club International Foundation, USA
Sanitatis Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Save the Rhino Trust Namibia, Namibia
Sesfontein Conservancy Kunene, Namibia
Sheya Shuushona Conservancy ( North Central Regions), Namibia
Sidinda Community Comiittee, Zimbabwe
Sikunga Conservancy ( Zambezi Region), Namibia
Sorris Sorris Conservancy ( Southern Kunene), Namibia
South African Hunters and Game Conservation Association, South Africa
South African Wingshooters Association , South Africa
South African Youth Biodiversity Network, South Africa
South Asia Reptile Conservation Alliance, International
Southern African Wildlife Management Association, South Africa
Stellenbosch University, South Africa
Support for Women in Agriculture and Environment (SWAGEN), Uganda
Sustainable Users Network (SUN), UK
Tanzania Natural Resources Forum (TNRF), Tanzania
The Conservation Coalition Botswana (TCCB), Botswana
The Development Institute, Ghana
The Game Rangers Association of Africa (GRAA), South Africa
The Wildlife Society, USA
Torra Conservancy Kunene South, Namibia
Tsiseb Conservancy (Erongo Region), Namibia
Uibasen Conservancy (Southern Kunene) , Namibia
Uukwaludhi Conservancy (North Central Regions), Namibia
Wild Africa Conservation, Niger
Wild Sheep Foundation, USA
Wildlife & Environment Society of Southern Africa, South Africa
Wildlife Environmental Society of Malawi, Malawi
Wildlife Producers Association, South Africa
Wildlife Producers Association of Zambia, Zambia
Wildlife Ranching South Africa, South Africa
WILDOCEANS, South Africa
Women Environmental Programme (WEP), Nigeria
Women in Conservation ( Kunene Region), Namibia
Working Dogs for Conservation, USA
Zambia CBNRM Association, Zambia
Zambia National Community Resources Board Association, Zambia

Individual signatories

Vanessa Adams, University of Tasmania, Australia
Steve Alexander, Conservation and Wildlife Fund, Hwange National Park, Zimbabwe
Benjamin Allen, University of Southern Queensland, Australia
Shaista Andleeb, Wuhan University of Technology, China
Peter Apps, Botswana Predator Conservation, Botswana
Michael Archer, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Australia
Nathan J Bennett, IUCN CEESP/SSC SULi Central Asia, Canada
Duan Biggs, Griffith University, Australia
Bernd Blossey, Cornell University, USA
Hollie Booth, ICCS, University of Oxford, UK
Adri Kitshoff Botha, Wildlife Ranching South Africa, South Africa
Peadar Brehony, Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, UK
Peter Bridgewater, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Netherlands
Stephanie Brittain, Interdisciplinary Centre for Conservation Science, UK
Christopher Brown, Namibian Chamber of Environment, Namibia
Francois du Toit, Project Africa, Sweden
Donna-Maree Cawthorn, University of Mpumalanga, South Africa
Dan Challender, University of Oxford, UK
Philippe Chardonnet, IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group, France
Brian Child, University of Florida, USA
Simon Clulow, Macquarie University, Australia
John Clulow, University of Newcastle, Australia
Peter Coals GR, WildCRU, University of Oxford, UK
Bernard Coetzee, Global Change Institute, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa
Calvin Cottar, Cottars Wildlife Conservation Trust, Kenya
Alayne Cotterill, WildCRU, University of Oxford, UK
Marianne Courouble, International Biodiversity Consulting, France
Jeremy Cusack, Universidad Mayor, Santiago, Chile
Harriet Davies-Mostert, Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa
Emiel de Lange, School of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, UK
Amy Dickman, WildCRU, University of Oxford, UK
Egil Droge, WildCRU, University of Oxford, UK
Morné du Plessis, WWF South Africa, South Africa
Byron du Preez, Jesus College, University of Oxford, UK
Holly Dublin, IUCN SULi, Kenya
Sarah Durant, Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, UK
John E. Fa, CIFOR, UK
Christo Fabricius, Nelson Mandela University, South Africa and member of IUCN Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP), South Africa
Ruth Feber, WildCRU, University of Oxford, UK
Marco Festa-Bianchet, Canada
Svein A. Fosså, Norwegian Pet Trade Association (NZB), Norway
Edson Gandiwa, Chinhoyi University of Technology, Zimbabwe
Tuqa Jirmo, Lewa Wildlife Conservancy, Kenya
Jenny A. Glikman, San Diego Zoo, USA
Paul Goriup, NatureBureau, UK
Andrea Griffin , University of Newcastle , Australia
Sunetra Gupta, University of Oxford, UK
John Hanks, Independent Environmental Consultant, South Africa
Darragh Hare, Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, USA
Alasdair Harris, Blue Ventures, UK
Adam Hart, University of Gloucestershire, UK
Matt Hayward, University of Newcastle, Australia
Juan Herrero, Universidad de Zaragoza, Spain
Rachel Hoffmann, University of Cambridge, UK
Hiromasa Igota, Rakuno Gakuen University, Japan
Wei JI, IUCN SULi, China
Paul Johnson, University of Oxford, UK
Khalil Karimov, IUCN CEESP/SSC SULi, Tajikistan
Graham I.H. Kerley, Nelson Mandela University, South Africa
Ambika Khatiwada, National Trust for Nature Conservation, Nepal
Rebecca Klein, Cheetah Conservation Botswana, Botswana
Emmanuel Koro, Environmental journalist, South Africa
Paige Lee, IUCN SSC Pangolin Specialist Group, UK
Gabriela Lichtenstein, National Research Council (CONICET), Argentina
Mohsin Lee Likoniwalla, Animal Care Centre, Nairobi, Kenya
Xin Liu, China Northeast Forestry University, China
Ewan Macdonald, Saïd Business School, University of Oxford, UK
Ian Macdonald, University of Cape Town, South Africa
Duncan MacFadyen, Oppenheimer Generations, South Africa
Masego Madzawmuse, IUCN CEESP and Southern Africa Trust, South Africa
Prince Dipati Maenetja, Balepye Community, South Africa
Reuben Malema, BE Products (Pty) Ltd, South Africa
Stefan Michel, IUCN Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist Group (SULi), Germany
EJ Milner-Gulland, University of Oxford, UK
Nick Mitchell, Zoological Society of London, UK
Axel Moehrenschlager, Centre for Conservation Research, Calgary Zoological Society, Canada
Vik Mohan, Blue Ventures, UK
Tom Moorhouse, University of Oxford, UK
Paola Mosig Reidl, CONABIO, Mexico
Victor K. Muposhi, Chinhoyi University of Technology, Zimbabwe
Aibat Muzbay, Kazakhstan Wildlife Foundation, Kazakhstan
Naveen Namboothri, Dakshin Foundation, India
Eric Djomo Nana, Agricultural Research Institute for Development (IRAD), Cameroon
Robert Nasi, CIFOR, Indonesia
Daniel Natusch, EPIC Biodiversity, Australia and France
Helen Newing, ICCS, University of Oxford, UK
Germain Ngandjui, Cameroon Canada Biodiversity Conservation Association, Cameroon
Andrew Norton, International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), UK
Christine Nyangweso, Kenya Wildlife Service, Kenya
Mike O’Brien, Fur Institute of Canada, Canada
Alegria Olmedo, University of Oxford, UK
Meera Anna Oommen, Dakshin Foundation, India
Josep Oriol, Okavango Capital, Kenya
Norman Owen-Smith, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa
Elisa Panjang, University of Cardiff, UK
Despina Symons Pirovolidou, European Bureau for Conservation and Development (EBCD), Belgium
Gail Potgieter, Felines Communication and Conservation Consultants, Namibia
Madhu Ramnath, NTFP Exchange Programme India, India
David Roberts, Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, UK
Tim Roberts , University of Newcastle , UK
Dilys Roe, IUCN Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist Group and International Institute for Environment and Development, UK
Ramón Peréz Gil Salcido, FAUNUM, Mexico
Lilian Sales, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Brazil
Chris Sandbrook, University of Cambridge, UK
Ed Sayer, North Luangwa Conservation Programme, Zambia
Charlotte Searle, WildCRU, Universty of Oxford, UK
Catherine E. Semcer, Property and Environment Research Center, USA
Orynbassar Shaimukhanbetov, Kazakhstan Wildlife Foundation, Kazakhstan
Kartik Shanker, Indian Institute of Science and Dakshin Foundation, India
Pasang Dolma Sherpa, Center for Indigenous Peoples’ Research and Development (CIPRED), Nepal
Janusz Sielicki, Falcon Society, Poland
Keith Somerville, Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, UK
Anna Spenceley, IUCN WCPA Tourism and Protected Areas Specialist Group, UK
Oliver Springate-Baginski, School of Development Studies, University of East Anglia, UK
Aarthi Sridhar, Dakshin Foundation, India
Don Stacey, Masebe Ranch, Zambia
Mark Stanley-Price, WildCRU, University of Oxford, UK
Paolo Strampelli, WildCRU, University of Oxford, UK

Cedric Thibaut Kamogne Tagne, Fondation Camerounaise de la terre Vivante (FCTV), Cameroon
Simo Talla, University of Yaoundé, Cameroon
Francis Nchembi Tarla, Central African Bushmeat Action Group (CABAG), Cameroon
Taye Teferi , IUCN Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist Group (SULi), International
Scott Trageser, The Biodiversity Group, USA
Piotr Tryjanowski, Poznan University of Life Sciences, Poland
Michael ’t Sas-Rolfes, University of Oxford, UK
Dino Tumazos, COLCOM, Zimbabwe
Andrew van Heerden , The Conservation Imperative, South Africa
Nathalie VanVliet, Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), France
Diogo Veríssimo, ICCS, University of Oxford, UK
Karl Vernes, University of New England, Australia
Frederick J Verreynne, Botswana Wildlife Producers Association, Botswana
Jako Volschenk, University of Stellenbosch Business School, South Africa
Francis Vorhies, African Leadership University, Rwanda
Gretchen Walters, Institute of Geography and Sustainability, University of Lausanne, Switzerland
Dominic Whitmee, The Ornamental Aquatic Trade Association (OATA), UK
Matthew Wijers, WildCRU, University of Oxford, UK
Jane Wiltshire, Fellow of the African Wildlife Economics Institute of the University of Stellenbosch, South Africa
James Wood, University of Cambridge, UK
Shibao Wu, South China Normal University, China
Mary Wykstra, Action for Cheetahs in Kenya, Kenya

Annexe A

Pandemic risk reduction measures must not exacerbate poverty and inequality

Since its inception, the WHO has defined health as ‘a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being’. Health is inextricably linked to nature, which underpins our physical and mental wellbeing, and to poverty. The COVID-19 pandemic is far more than an immediate health crisis: it is also unleashing unprecedented economic and social chaos. It is currently estimated to be costing the global economy US$1 trillion in 2020 alone, with the International Labour Organisation predicting cutbacks equivalent to nearly 200 million full-time workers in just three months. Marginalised and vulnerable communities are likely to bear the brunt of these impacts, with UNDP warning that nearly half the jobs in Africa could be lost. Worldwide, nearly half a billion more people could be pushed into poverty, with the crisis disproportionately affecting women, leading to wide-ranging social impacts including human rights abuses,. Over half the global population could be living in poverty after the pandemic, with particularly severe impacts in sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa and the Middle East8.

As the COVID-19 crisis will deepen poverty and damage health, potentially for generations, it is unconscionable that measures aimed at preventing future pandemics should compound this by further disadvantaging the world’s most vulnerable people, for instance through indiscriminate bans on food markets, or unnecessary restrictions on wildlife trade. Millions of poorer households, especially in rural areas, are particularly dependent upon using wild resources for livelihoods and as insurance against economic shocks, whilst in urban areas millions more rely upon affordable produce from wet markets for food security. Over a billion people worldwide, including Indigenous Peoples and local communities (IPLCs), rely on using and trading wildlife, by selling and consuming wild meat, fish, insects and plants, extracting timber and forest products, and many other activities. Many of these activities are legal, regulated and essential for livelihoods, and pose no significant threat to human health or biodiversity – indeed, when well regulated, wildlife trade can actually be beneficial for conservation. Indiscriminate restrictions risk unnecessarily exacerbating poverty and inequality without commensurate benefits.

Wildlife trade must be addressed in a targeted, tailored and effective way

Wildlife trade, particularly in ‘wet markets’, has become a central part of the discourse around COVID-19, and it has been suggested that banning wet markets, and banning or severely restricting wildlife trade and consumption, could reduce future pandemic risks. However, these are complex topics. Wet markets underpin the informal food systems on which millions of urban and rural people depend. They sell a range of fresh produce: fruit and vegetables, fish, livestock and, sometimes, wildlife. Wildlife trade and consumption encompasses a wide variety of species, both common and rare, and a vast array of uses including food, medicines, clothing, textiles, pets and ornaments. Its drivers and dynamics are complex and varied. Even if wildlife trade bans were just focused on food, it is important to note that zoonotic diseases also emerge from domestic species. Focusing on Asian markets also ignores the fact that billions of people, in both the Global North and South, consume wild meat from both common and ‘exotic’ species. Furthermore, current proposals to ban all wildlife trade undermine both the spirit and efficacy of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), which seeks to regulate trade for the benefit of species conservation and enable trade that is legal, sustainable, and supportive of conservation and human livelihoods. It would be more productive for the WHO, UNEP and other stakeholders to work with CITES to align human health considerations with the objectives of the Convention.

Suggestions that pandemics could be avoided by imposing a global ban on wildlife markets or indiscriminately restricting wildlife trade are simplistic and risk enormous unintended consequences, including criminalising and further impoverishing countless people. Externally-imposed bans can drive trade underground and enmesh it with other organised criminal activity, as occurred after the 2013-2016 Ebola outbreak. In that situation, regulations would become harder to enforce, with lower standards of hygiene and animal welfare, and higher likelihood of zoonotic disease outbreak. Furthermore, demand may remain if a legal supply is suddenly removed (especially if captive breeding is also banned, as some recommend9), risking a rise in black market prices and increased incentives for poaching. This could accelerate the exploitation and extinction of species in the wild. The risks associated with indiscriminate trade restrictions highlight the need for targeted regulation and enforcement tailored to each specific situation, at the appropriate level. This will increase the likelihood of achieving desired outcomes for conservation, health and animal welfare, while reducing unintended consequences for people and wildlife.

Holistic, far-sighted solutions are required to improve human and planetary health

This pandemic is a wake-up call with regard to our destructive relationship with nature. Wildlife trade is only one of many factors that must be addressed to reduce zoonotic disease outbreaks, secure biodiversity and improve human and planetary health. Habitat destruction and industrial agriculture play key roles in increasing zoonotic disease transmission from wildlife to humans, as people and their livestock come into ever closer proximity to wild species and pathogens. In addition to catastrophic ecological impacts, the destruction of nature, in conjunction with climate change, has long-term, devastating impacts on human physical and mental health.

The role of domestic species in zoonotic outbreaks such as pandemic influenza must also be considered. Disease risks and welfare in farmed-animal supply chains should also be examined robustly, with risk reduction strategies targeted at the highest-risk species, whether domestic or wild. More widely, holistic approaches should be developed which look beyond pandemics, such as limiting antibiotic use in livestock to reduce risks of antibiotic resistance, which poses a major danger to human health. Business as usual cannot continue, and the WHO and UNEP are well positioned to encourage governments and other agencies to fully recognise the interconnected nature of planetary and human health. There is a need for a ‘One Health’ coordinated approach both across the UN, including the WHO, UNEP, UNDP and the FAO, and beyond with other relevant organisations including the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and the World Trade Organisation (WTO). This synergistic approach would help develop and deliver a better, more equitable future for humans and the ecosystems which underpin our society.

Summary

The response to COVID-19 has demonstrated that transformational action is possible if governments and citizens are convinced that the risks of inaction outweigh the costs. We urgently need similar transformational action to safeguard nature, delivering critical long-term benefits for both human and planetary health as part of our response to COVID-19. Robust, long-lasting measures must be taken to safeguard and adequately fund the protection of nature and invest in science- and rights-based conservation and restoration. Devastating as the COVID-19 pandemic is, recovery from this crisis provides an unparalleled moment to create a better and more sustainable future. We must change our relationship with nature and develop appropriate strategies to equitably and sustainably manage the biodiversity upon which so many livelihoods depend. Changes must be inclusive, well-considered and socially and economically just, and every care must be taken not to exacerbate poverty and amplify existing inequalities.

The sustainable and inclusive management of nature is recognised throughout the UN as a key element to achieving poverty reduction objectives and meeting the Sustainable Development Goals. Indiscriminate restrictions on wildlife trade will devastate livelihoods, cause major harm to human health and well-being and undermine human rights, without significant benefits for biodiversity or health. Strategic, equitable, coordinated and holistic approaches are more likely to reduce pandemic risks, achieve a better future for both human and planetary health, and should be a core component of future WHO/UNEP recommendations.

CC: Achim Steiner, Administrator UNDP

Elizabeth M. Mrema, Acting Executive Secretary, Convention on Biological Diversity, CBD

Qu Dongyu, Director General, Food and Agriculture Organization, FAO

Ivonne Higuero, CITES Secretary General

Grethel Aguilar, Acting Director General, IUCN

Michelle Bachelet, UN Human Rights Commissioner

David Boyd, UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Environment

David Nabarro, Special Envoy to WHO DG on COVID-19