EcoHealth Alliance, 520 Eighth Avenue, Suite 1200, New York, NY 10018, United States of America (USA).
One Health Institute, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, USA.
Bull World Health Organ. 2021 May 1;99(5):342-350B. doi: 10.2471/BLT.20.272690. Epub 2021 Mar 2.
To describe and quantify the extent of wildlife and environment sector inclusion in country evaluation and prioritization tools for health security, and to provide practical recommendations for global and national action to improve pandemic prevention and preparedness.
To assess coverage of wildlife and other environmental aspects, we reviewed major health security reports (including World Organisation for Animal Health Performance of Veterinary Services reports, and World Health Organization Joint External Evaluations and follow-on National Action Plans for Health Security) published by 107 countries and territories. We extracted information on stated coverage gaps, wildlife surveillance systems and priority diseases. We also searched National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans published by 125 countries to assess whether disease surveillance or prevention activities were included.
We noted that the occurrence frequency of keywords indicative of wildlife, environment, biodiversity and climate factors varied with type of report and between countries. We found that more than half (57.9%, 62/107) of the reporting countries did not provide any evidence of a functional wildlife health surveillance programme. Most countries (83.2%, 89/107) indicated specific gaps in operations, coordination, scope or capacity. Only eight of the 125 countries (6.4%) publishing a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan reported tangible activities related to wildlife health or zoonotic disease.
Overall, despite their importance for pandemic prevention, wildlife and environmental considerations are neglected in health security priorities and plans. Strengthening wildlife health capacity and operations should be emphasized in One Health efforts to monitor and mitigate known and novel disease risks.
描述并量化野生动物和环境领域在卫生安全国家评估和优先排序工具中的纳入程度，并提供全球和国家行动的实际建议，以改善大流行病的预防和准备工作。
为了评估野生动物和其他环境方面的涵盖范围，我们审查了 107 个国家和地区发布的主要卫生安全报告（包括世界动物卫生组织兽医服务绩效报告以及世界卫生组织联合外部评估和后续的国家卫生安全行动计划）。我们提取了有关已说明的覆盖范围差距、野生动物监测系统和优先疾病的信息。我们还搜索了 125 个国家发布的国家生物多样性战略和行动计划，以评估疾病监测或预防活动是否包括在内。
我们注意到，指示野生动物、环境、生物多样性和气候因素发生频率的关键词在报告类型和国家之间存在差异。我们发现，超过一半（57.9%，62/107）的报告国家没有提供任何有关功能野生动物健康监测计划的证据。大多数国家（83.2%，89/107）表示在运作、协调、范围或能力方面存在具体差距。在发布国家生物多样性战略和行动计划的 125 个国家中，只有 8 个（6.4%）报告了与野生动物健康或人畜共患病有关的实际活动。
总体而言，尽管野生动物和环境因素对大流行病的预防很重要，但它们在卫生安全优先事项和计划中被忽视。在监测和减轻已知和新出现的疾病风险方面，应加强野生动物健康能力和运作，这应成为“同一健康”努力的重点。
