Climate change is creating “new vulnerabilities” for pandemics, according to new research.
The study, published in Science Advances, investigates nine zoonotic diseases – infections transmitted from animals to people – with high potential to cause severe public-health emergencies.
These diseases include the Zika virus, Ebola and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).
Overall, the research finds that 9% of the planet’s land area is currently at “high” or “very high” risk of an outbreak of these diseases.
The study authors find that higher temperatures, increased rainfall and water scarcity are “key drivers” of disease outbreaks.
However, the paper has received a mixed reception from other scientists.
While one expert not involved in the study praises it for its novelty and rigour, another tells Carbon Brief that the research fails to capture some of the key drivers of zoonotic disease.
They tell Carbon Brief that “this idea that you can do a one-size-fits-all global risk assessment is just untrue”.
Zoonotic disease
There are more than 200 known “zoonotic diseases” – infections or diseases that are transmitted to humans from pets, livestock or wild animals.
Zoonotic diseases are spread when the pathogen that causes the disease – such as a virus, bacterium, fungus or parasite – moves from animals to humans. This can be through a bite, blood, saliva or faeces.
Lyme disease, rabies and bird flu are examples of well-known zoonotic diseases. One of the most well-known, Covid-19, is thought to have killed hundreds of thousands of people since the SARS-CoV-2 virus was first recorded in humans in 2019.
Pathogens are typically carried by animals, called hosts. For example, dogs are the main hosts of rabies.
The World Health Organization (WHO) keeps a list of “priority diseases” for research and development. These are zoonotic diseases that have the potential to cause severe public health emergencies, such as epidemics – in which there is a sharp rise in cases in a specific region – and pandemics, where a disease occurs over a very wide area and crosses borders.
The WHO updates its list regularly. It currently features the following zoonoses:
- Zika virus
- Ebola virus and Marburg virus disease
- SARS and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV)
- Covid-19
- Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever
- Lassa fever
- Nipah disease and henipaviral diseases
- Rift Valley fever
- “Disease X” (a label created by the WHO in 2018 to represent a hypothetical, unknown pathogen that could cause a future epidemic)
The number of new zoonotic diseases is increasing rapidly.
Many different factors can influence the spread of zoonotic diseases. One of the most important is climate. Pathogens and the animals that carry them typically thrive in a warm and wet climate, so many zoonotic diseases are found in tropical regions.
The frequency of contact between humans and animals is another important factor. This means that when people live close to areas of high biodiversity, such as forests, there is a higher risk of zoonotic disease transmission.
Mapping risk
The authors of the new study collected data on “outbreaks” of the WHO priority zoonotic diseases over 1975-2020 from the Global Infectious Diseases and Epidemiology Network.
They exclude Covid-19 from their analysis, although it is a WHO priority disease, because its “overwhelming prevalence” resulted in worldwide coverage, making it difficult to identify spatial patterns.
The database defines an outbreak as two or more linked cases of the same illness, a number of cases that exceeds the expected number, or a single case of disease “caused by a pathogen that poses a significant threat to public health”, the study explains.
The authors identified 131 outbreaks of infectious diseases with epidemic and pandemic potential over 1975-2020
The authors then used satellite data to identify nine “risk factors” that can affect the transmission of zoonotic diseases:
- Annual maximum temperature
- Annual minimum temperature
- Water deficit
- Annual total rainfall
- Livestock density
- Frequency of land-use change
- Change in proximity between humans and forests
- Biodiversity loss
- Human population density
The authors used a “predictive model”, which makes use of machine-learning techniques, to combine these variables. This allows them to determine the risk of climate outbreaks from the WHO priority diseases in different regions.
Finally, the authors adjusted their results to account for a bias in how data on disease outbreaks is recorded. In developed countries and regions, diseases are more likely to be detected and recorded, while this is less likely in developing regions.
The map below shows the risk of a disease breakout across the world from the nine WHO priority zoonotic diseases. Darker colours indicate greater risk, while white indicates regions where not enough data was available.
The map shows that the southern hemisphere of the planet has a higher risk of pandemic breakout than the northern hemisphere, “with the majority of those areas located in Latin America and Oceania”. Meanwhile, very little risk is seen in Europe and North America.
The authors find that 9% of the world’s land surface, home to around 130 million people, is at “very high” or “high” risk of outbreaks of the diseases.
Lead author Dr Angela Fanelli is a researcher at the European Commission’s Joint Research Council. She tells Carbon Brief that “this study is the first to comprehensively examine the shared drivers of zoonotic diseases with epidemic and pandemic potential on a global scale”.
The authors also use data from the International Health Regulations to score countries based on their capacity to respond to zoonotic events at the animal-wildlife interface.
By integrating this data into their analysis, the authors developed an “epidemic risk index” which shows each country’s risk and capacity to respond to “zoonotic threats”. In this index, Papua New Guinea is ranked as the lowest – indicating the greatest risk of epidemics.
The full table is shown below, where a higher number indicates a greater risk of epidemics.
‘New vulnerabilities’
The authors went on to analyse the different factors that influence the risk of zoonotic breakout.
The charts below illustrate how, for most risk factors explored in the report, a higher value results in a greater risk score for zoonotic disease outbreak.
For example, the plot on the top left shows how higher maximum temperatures lead to a higher risk of disease outbreak.
The paper notes that higher temperature and annual rainfall levels “elevate the risk of disease outbreaks”. It suggests that this is because host species are better adapted to hotter, wetter conditions.
The paper also assesses water deficit, a measure that can capture the monthly differences between rainfall and potential evapotranspiration – the transfer of water from the ground into the air through a combination of evaporation and transpiration.
The authors find that “moderate water scarcity” is associated with the highest risk of outbreaks. This could be because moderate water scarcity can cause animals to group together around remaining water sources, allowing the pathogen to be transferred more easily, they suggest.
Meanwhile, they say that “excessively arid conditions” can cause the host population to die out, meaning the pathogen is unable to spread.
Fanelli tells Carbon Brief that the study highlights “several key mechanisms by which climate change could increase the risk of disease outbreaks”.
Climate change, she says, can make host populations “more susceptible to disease outbreaks” and result in water shortages that “compromise water quality, hygiene and sanitation, further increasing the risk of disease outbreaks.”
The authors warn that the changing climate is “creating new vulnerabilities” for zoonotic disease transmission as it “reshapes the geographic distribution of risk”.
The paper also finds that changes in land use can increase disease risk. When people cut down trees in areas of high biodiversity, they can suddenly come into contact with species that they do not usually interact with, providing an opportunity for pathogens to jump from humans to animals, the authors find.
Higher population densities of people or livestock are also linked to a higher risk of zoonotic diseases, because the pathogens are able to spread more easily.
Mixed reception
The study has received mixed responses from scientists not involved in the work.
Dr Ibrahima Diouf, a postdoctoral researcher on climate and health at Senegal’s Cheikh Anta Diop University, tells Carbon Brief that the research “offers a more holistic perspective” than studies that focus on a single disease and has a “sound, innovative and transparent” methodology.
He also praises the study for “bridg[ing] environmental modelling and public health planning”, and for capturing both hazard exposure and “national response capacity”. He says:
“This dual lens enables practical prioritisation of interventions. Countries like the Republic of Congo and Madagascar, which face both high risk and limited response capacity, emerge as key candidates for targeted support through regional or multilateral adaptation programmes.”
Dr Colin Carlson, an assistant professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health, tells Carbon Brief that this type of work “has been done before”:
“We’ve seen a lot of these studies that look at a hundred or so outbreaks and then use machine learning – an approach that will almost always find some kind of signal – to confirm their hypothesis that environmental degradation drives disease outbreaks.”
Carlson also criticises the study’s methodology, arguing that the variables the authors chose focus on “intact tropical rainforests and other tropical ecosystems” that are “hot, wet, biodiverse [and] populated”. He continues:
“That’s where a lot of disease outbreaks are, but that’s true as much because of poverty as because of the environment, if not more.”
Carlson tells Carbon Brief that “this idea that you can do a one-size-fits-all global risk assessment is just untrue”.
He adds that the work contributes to a “narrative that spillover [of pathogens from animals to humans] is a problem of the global south – and that pandemics happen because the people living in these countries are somehow unengaged in outbreak prevention or unwilling to leave nature alone”.
In Carlson’s view, this narrative is “wrong”.
The post Climate change is creating ‘new vulnerabilities’ for disease pandemics appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Climate change is creating ‘new vulnerabilities’ for disease pandemics
A first set of biodiversity plans filed by countries to reverse nature loss are “insufficient” to meet this decade’s global targets, including a landmark goal to protect at least 30% of the world’s land and marine ecosystems by 2030, a landmark UN report warned on Thursday.
The State of Biodiversity Action, put together by a panel of technical experts for the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), was released in Yerevan, ahead of the COP17 nature talks starting on Monday in the Armenian capital.
Over the next two weeks, governments will for the first time take stock of progress towards the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) agreed in 2022 – a set of 23 targets also known as the “Paris Agreement for nature” – and will decide on policy guidelines for ramping up ambition before the 2030 deadline. The UN report will be the main basis for these negotiations.
At a press conference in Armenia, UN Secretary-General António Guterres highlighted that, while there has been some progress on the GBF, the “bad news” is that less than half of country plans are on track to meet its targets.
If current commitments are met by the end of the decade, only 26% of land ecosystems and 12% of marine ecosystems will be protected – falling “real short” of the 30% target agreed in Montreal in 2022, Guterres said. “The war on nature has not yet ended,” he added.
UN Environment chief Inger Andersen said the report “sets the tone for the focus, ambition and urgent action we need to deliver” in Armenia, including by reducing subsidies that harm nature and mobilising new finance for biodiversity. “All leaders and all negotiators must respond to these findings,” she emphasised.
Andersen added that climate change amplifies threats to biodiversity, which makes protection all the more important as global warming is now almost certain to rise above a key threshold. “Exceedence of 1.5C increases the likelihood of forest diebacks, phenological shifts, warming oceans that become more inhospitable to species, irreversible tipping points and so much more,” she said.
-
Global deforestation slowed in 2025 but Brazil’s election could undo “fragile” gains
Countries remain 70% off track to meet a goal to end deforestation by 2030, as progress in Latin America offset by failures in Africa -
Carbon capture industry faces tough future, as UK raids green spending
Despite a spate of projects getting underway, the mood at an industry conference in London this week was low with government subsidies set to shrink -
World Bank and IMF should lead the financial system in responding to the climate crisis
Multilateral development banks have a vital role to play in delivering on donors’ climate finance promises and protecting the most vulnerable
Progress on land but ocean lags behind
The report shows that if countries meet all the biodiversity targets in their plans, this would protect about 27% of the world’s land and sea by 2030, a fivefold increase in the span of ten years.
Progress has been uneven, with most conservation efforts focused on terrestrial ecosystems. The report suggests that currently about 19% of land ecosystems are protected, up two percentage points from 2020, which UN authorities welcomed but said is not a fast enough pace.
However, the real gap is at sea, where only about 10% of the global ocean has some sort of protection. Coastal areas under national jurisdiction have done better, as currently 23% of this marine territory is protected, but the report shows most of the deep ocean is not.
Brian O’Donnell, director of Campaign for Nature, an advocacy group, said the new High Seas Treaty – which entered into force this year and will allow for the creation of Marine Protected Areas in the deep ocean – represents an opportunity, as only about 1.5% is under protection so far.
A group of environmental NGOs including WWF and Bloomberg Philanthropies has issued a call for governments to scale up ocean conservation and to designate $16 billion annually for marine protection measures, up from $1.8bn now.
SE Asia speeds up plan for connected clean power grid after oil shock
Some countries did not set a conservation target at all for both land and sea, the report says, blaming technical challenges like how to account for overlapping protected areas, difficulty recognising protections for private land and land-accounting methodologies changing over time.
A separate report by Campaign for Nature suggests that the 30×30 goal could still be met with “increased ambition and commitment”, and says that around 50 countries have already protected about 30% of their land.
A group of environmental NGOs has warned that, beyond the 30% headline figure, protected areas need to be “high integrity” and recognise the stewardship of local communities and Indigenous peoples.
Developing countries call for finance
Rich countries will arrive at COP17 with shrinking aid budgets and geopolitical preoccupations – yet they will likely hear the same plea they’ve heard for the past few years: stepping up commitments will require finance.
A submission by African countries in August said the “implementation gap” has at its core a shortfall in the provision of funds, and that bridging it will require predictable and accessible finance.
Pacific island nations launched a similar call, arguing there is “a treaty obligation” that developing countries, including themselves, will effectively implement commitments depending on the finance and technology made available by developed nations.
To close this gap, the EU made a proposal at preliminary talks in Nairobi in August to expand the base of donors so that richer developing countries could voluntarily assume donor responsibilities. Saudi Arabia and Qatar rejected the idea, while China said this should not weaken the responsibility of developed nations.
Pre-COP draws attention to Pacific’s climate plight and 1.5C goal
So far, wealthy governments have missed a target to provide $20bn per year in international public finance for nature protection by 2025, reaching only about $16bn per year from 2023 to 2025, according to an OECD report. By 2030, the GBF aims for developed countries to directly transfer $30bn per year, and mobilise $200bn from all sources.
The UN report released on Thursday shows even slower progress in redirecting harmful subsidies such as those which encourage the overuse of fertilisers and the production and consumption of new fossil fuels, and below-market fees that encourage overfishing. UN Environment estimates that for every dollar spent protecting nature, $30 goes on destroying it.
UN biodiversity chief Astrid Schomaker told journalists in Yerevan that “if you hear there is no finance, please do not believe it” because economies are continuing to grow. “It is being spent on activities that harm the economy rather than those that work with nature and sustain life on this planet,” she said.
Guterres said developed countries tend to say they are grappling with budget constraints due to increased defence expenditure, which “in my view does not justify a reduction” in international aid. He added that existing resources can be multiplied if they are used to mobilise private capital.
Campaigners, companies and the Armenian government want to shift the needle on this situation at COP17 by highlighting how positive subsidies help restore biodiversity. They will launch a flagship call to action that will be taken forward by countries and groups working to reform damaging incentives.
Global review: the main act
The Global Review of Collective Progress – a bit like the Global Stocktake for climate action – is set to be the most important outcome from COP17, and it will be the first time this process unfolds at the biodiversity talks. The actions decided in Yerevan will respond to the gaps outlined in the State of Biodiversity Action report and determine whether countries can turn the tide of biodiversity loss this decade.
Overall, the report shows that while countries have taken action to address all 23 targets in the GBF, none “present a fully positive picture”. A target to strengthen the resilience of ecosystems to climate impacts is the only one with high relative progress, the report says, as government have already made effective interventions that show “a positive trend”.
The report assessed each country’s national targets, which define their contribution to the global goals, as well as their separate National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans (NBSAPs) outlining how they will achieve the national targets.
But it does not paint a complete picture, since at the cut-off date, only 89 NBSAPs and national targets from 162 countries had been submitted, leaving out a couple of dozen plans that arrived late. Pacific island nations said this might undercount commitments.
Many of those lacking an NBSAP are biodiversity-rich developing countries, which say they need financial and technical support to fully develop these plans. Some large nations pending an NBSAP include South Africa, Bolivia and Russia.
Since the GBF was agreed in 2022, governments have mostly focused on developing their biodiversity targets and plans, while the lion’s share of implementation is expected to happen towards the end of the decade, according to UN biodiversity chief Schomaker.
But O’Donnell said “accelerated political ambition” is still needed to improve commitments and translate them into effective protection on the ground or at sea.
The post Countries urged to ramp up “insufficient” nature policies at COP17 appeared first on Climate Home News.
Countries urged to ramp up “insufficient” nature policies at COP17