Anthropogenic changes drive emerging infectious disease trends, study finds

September 23, 2026 at 08:26 PM2 min

This digest was compiled by AI from multiple sources — links to the originals are below.

Human-driven environmental changes are increasing animal susceptibility to infection and creating more opportunities for zoonotic spillover, leading to more outbreaks of familiar and new pathogens. The rising tide of emerging infections has brought global attention to ecological and social interventions that could mitigate the upstream drivers of disease emergence. Recent attention has often focused on curbing wildlife trade or deforestation, but other important options include reducing greenhouse gas emissions and ecosystem restoration.

Key Facts

Emerging infectious diseases transmitted by wildlife or arthropod vectors have had catastrophic social, economic and ecological impacts in recent decades.
Human-driven environmental changes are increasing animal susceptibility to infection and creating more opportunities for animal-to-human transmission.
Meta-analyses show ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss tend to increase wildlife disease prevalence.
The net impacts of habitat fragmentation, agriculture, urbanization, deforestation and climate change may be unpredictable and context-specific.
Human–wildlife contact patterns and social vulnerabilities to outbreaks vary between landscapes and populations but are rarely captured in wildlife-focused studies.

Anthropogenic Drivers

Human-driven environmental changes are both increasing animal susceptibility to infection and creating more opportunities for animal-to-human transmission. This trend is widely considered the result of an ongoing state shift in the biosphere. Ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss tend to increase wildlife disease prevalence. The net impacts of habitat fragmentation, agriculture, urbanization, deforestation and climate change may be unpredictable and context-specific.

Intervention Options

Recent attention has often focused on curbing wildlife trade or deforestation. Other important options include reducing greenhouse gas emissions to limit climate change, ecosystem restoration initiatives, human and livestock vaccination, improved access to point-of-care diagnostics and clinical care, the development of ‘One Health’ disease surveillance systems and workforces, and stricter biosecurity practices. These interventions are grounded in public health and ecological first principles, but there is limited scientific consensus on their potential benefits and relative priority.

Evidence Gaps

Insufficient evidence about the universality of many drivers of disease transmission and emergence limits scientific consensus. Downstream relationships between human infectious disease risk and climate change, biodiversity loss or land use may be idiosyncratic across diseases and regions. Human–wildlife contact patterns and social vulnerabilities to outbreaks vary between landscapes and populations, but are rarely captured in wildlife-focused studies.