COVID 19: URGENTCALL TO PROTECTPEOPLE AND NATURE

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements
The report was written by Dalberg Advisors, and the teamcomprised of Wijnand de Wit, Arianna Freschi, Emily
Trench.
The report was made possible by generous contributionsof time and expert knowledge from many individuals andorganizations.

CALL FOR GLOBAL ACTION

4EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

6

1. THE SYMPTOM:NEW ZOONOTIC DISEASES ARE EMERGINGAT AN ALARMING RATE

Dalberg Advisors
Dalberg Advisors is a strategy consulting firm that works
to build a more inclusive and sustainable world where
all people, everywhere, can reach their fullest potential.
We partner with and serve communities, governments,
and companies providing an innovative mix of services –advisory, investment, research, analytics, and design – tocreate impact at scale.

10

2. THE DIAGNOSIS:HOW HUMANITY’S BROKEN RELATIONSHIP
WITH NATURE IS DRIVING ZOONOTIC DISEASE EMERGENCE

WWF

14

		 CASE STUDY 1: THE ROLE OF WILDLIFE MARKETS AND 		
		 ILLEGAL TRADE IN 2002-2003 SARS PANDEMIC
16

WWF is one of the world’s largest and most experienced
independent conservation organizations, with over 5 million
supporters and a global network active in more than 100
countries.

		 CASE STUDY 2: THE ROLE OF DEFORESTATION IN EBOLA 				 OUTBREAKS IN WEST AND CENTRAL AFRICA
18

WWF’s mission is to stop the degradation of the planet’s
natural environment and to build a future in which humans
live in harmony with nature, by conserving the world’s
biological diversity, ensuring that the use of renewable
natural resources is sustainable, and promoting the
reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption.

		 CASE STUDY 3: THE ROLE OF AGRICULTURE AND LIVESTOCK 				 PRODUCTION IN NIPAH VIRUS OUTBREAK IN 1998
20

Published in June 2020 by WWF – World Wide Fund For
Nature(Formerly World Wildlife Fund), Gland, Switzerland.

3. THE OUTCOMES:THE COSTS OF HUMANITY’S BROKEN RELATIONSHIP
WITH NATURE

Any reproduction in full or in part must mention the title
and credit theabove-mentioned publisher as the copyright owner.
© Text 2020 WWF

24

4. THE OPPORTUNITY:

All rights reserved

WHY THIS MOMENT IS A KEY OPPORTUNITY
FOR TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE

Design: Ender Ergun

28

5. THE PATH FORWARD:
A NEW DEAL FOR NATURE & PEOPLE TO RESTOREHUMANITY’S RELATIONSHIP WITH NATURE
ENDNOTESWWF International
Rue Mauverney 28,
1196 Gland, Switzerland
www.panda.org

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

Dalberg
Rue de Chantepoulet 71201 Geneva, Switzerland
www.Dalberg.com

32
37© Day’s Edge Productions / WWF-US
Cover photography: © Jabruson / naturepl.com

3

WWF’S CALL FOR GLOBAL ACTION TO REDUCE
THE RISK OF FUTURE PANDEMICS AND HEALOUR BROKEN RELATIONSHIP
WITH NATURE

CALL
FOR
GLOBALACTION

Humanity’s broken relationship with nature comesat a cost. That cost is revealing itself in terrible ways during
the current COVID-19 pandemic: from the mounting loss oflife and untold suffering of families to the global economic
shock that’s destroying jobs and livelihoods. The longer thecrisis continues, the greater the threat will be to global peace,security and stability. Yet, there is a real opportunity in the
midst of this tragedy to heal our relationship with nature andmitigate the risk of future pandemics.
New zoonotic diseases are emerging at an alarming
rate. The COVID-19 health crisis reconfirms how people andnature are interlinked, and how our negative impact on thenatural world increases the risk of future pandemics. As highrisk wildlife continues to be exploited and the natural world
encroached upon, the risk is growing. In our increasingly
globalized world, the probability is higher than ever thata new disease becomes a global pandemic, with serious
consequences for our health, economies and ecosystems.
This is a pivotal moment to build a safer future
for people and the planet. COVID-19: Urgent Call toProtect People and Nature shows that the key drivers forthe emergence of zoonotic diseases are land-use change,
expansion and the intensification of agriculture and animal
production, and the consumption of high-risk wildlife. WWF
urges governments, companies and individuals to tackle
these key drivers and so create a healthier world for people
and our planet.
Although we cannot always foresee and preventthese diseases, we can act to heal our relationshipwith nature and reduce the risk of future pandemics.

WWF CALLS ON ALL GOVERNMENTS TO:●● Halt the high-risk wildlife trade and increase enforcement
to combat illicit wildlife trade.
●● Introduce and enforce legislation and policy actions toeliminate deforestation and conversion from supply chains.
●● Commit to and provide adequate finance for the
implementation of an ambitious post-2020 Global
Biodiversity Framework.
●● Commit to a New Deal for Nature and People, that puts
nature on the path of recovery for the benefit of all people
and the planet, with three goals:• Protect and restore natural habitats

WWF CALLS ON ALL COMPANIES AND
INDUSTRIES TO:●● Implement and strengthen all voluntary environmental
measures during and after the crisis.
●● Deliver credible action to decrease the environmental
footprint of food supply chains, including promoting
sustainable production, ensuring supplier traceability
to points of origin, and encouraging consumers to makesustainable dietary choices.
●● Support policies and legislation that ensure all production
and consumption of agricultural commodities are free fromdeforestation and conversion of natural ecosystems.

• Halve the footprint of production and consumption.

●● Incorporate a One Health approach within all business andfinancing decisions, particularly risks related to threats to
global health.

●● Incorporate a One Health approach – linking the healthof humans, animals and our shared environment – within
decision-making on wildlife and land-use change.

●● Develop and implement innovative financial mechanisms
and solutions that have positive environmental and social
outcomes.

• Safeguard the diversity of life●● Design COVID-19 economic recovery packages that
ensure a green and just transition and facilitate increased
investment in sustainable and resilient business models.
●● Support vulnerable communities to protect their foodsecurity and livelihoods in sustainable and resilient ways,
including the recognition of indigenous peoples’ land andwater rights.

WWF CALLS ON CIVIL SOCIETY
ORGANIZATIONS TO:●● Support vulnerable communities directly affected by thecrisis and its environmental drivers, ensuring that they areadequately represented in recovery efforts.
●● Work together with governments and industries to develop
sustainable solutions that reduce illegal and high-riskwildlife exploitation and transform our food systems.
●● Increase accountability of international institutions,
governments and industries that fail to take action in thewake of the crisis.

WWF CALLS ON THE PUBLIC TO:●● Engage with our government representatives to ensure thatthey commit to a New Deal for Nature and People, takeaction to protect natural ecosystems, and strengthen theirnature and climate commitments.
●● Call on industries to demonstrate leadership throughdecreasing their negative impacts on society and theenvironment.
●● Shift their dietary and consumption habits to make moresustainable choices.

© Daniel Martínez / WWF-Peru

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY© Edward Parker / WWF

New zoonotic diseases are emerging at an alarming rate, driven byhumanity’s broken relationship with nature.
In recent decades, people have increasingly encroached upon
the natural world, resulting in escalating levels of contact
between humans, livestock and wildlife. As a result, thefrequency and number of new zoonotic diseases, originating
in animals and transmitted to people, has risen drasticallyover the last century. Every year, around three to four new
zoonotic diseases are emerging. These new diseases posea grave threat to human health, causing deadly pandemics
including HIV/AIDS, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome(SARS), and most recently COVID-19.
The increased emergence of zoonotic diseases is linked to twowidespread environmental risks:●● Driven by unsustainable food systems, thelarge-scale conversion of land for agriculture
is increasing interactions between wildlife,
livestock and humans. Land conversion is destroying
and fragmenting forests and other natural habitats
around the world, resulting in higher levels of contact
between wildlife, livestock and humans. This problem isonly set to worsen as the challenge of feeding a growing
population increases and diets shift.
●● Poor food safety standards, including permitting
the trade and consumption of high-risk wildlife
species, are increasing human exposure to animal
pathogens. Globally, demand for wild meat is growing,as either a delicacy or a necessity, driving increased
sale and consumption, and increasing the potential for
exposure to diseases during high-risk sourcing, handlingand preparation practices.
The risk of a new zoonotic disease emerging in
the future is higher than ever, with the potential
to wreak havoc on health, economies and global
security. The COVID-19 crisis exemplifies the devastating
costs of global pandemics. Between December 2019 and
May 2020, over 370,000 people died from COVID-19
related causes in more than 200 countries, which is justunder three times the number of people killed by armed
conflict and terrorism every year. The economic impact
has been estimated at between US$2.4 and US$8.8 trillion
in lost output, which is almost three times the GDP of the
UK. Almost half of the world’s workforce is at risk of losing
their livelihoods, with the social and economic effects
disproportionately affecting already marginalized groups,
including women and indigenous communities. The drastic
shifts driven by COVID-19 are also threatening global foodsecurity, with warnings that the number of people at risk of

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

acute hunger could rise from 135 million to 265 million by theend of 2020. Further, COVID-19 may impact global stability,with tensions escalating in volatile areas, and geopolitical
rivalries between countries predicted to worsen. Beyond
these devastating costs, the same forces driving an increased
risk of pandemics are also exacerbating the current planetary
emergency of nature loss and climate change, putting thehealth of current and future generations at risk.
The COVID-19 crisis demonstrates that systemicchanges must be made to address the environmental
drivers of pandemics. To date, attempts to increase
the sustainability of our food systems by addressing
deforestation and land conversion, as well as to tackle thesale and consumption of high-risk wildlife have made some
progress. However, many businesses have failed to meet theircommitments and some governments have either not put
in place, or failed to enforce, legislation. The pandemic has
shown that whether tackling environmental issues or healthcrises, solutions must recognize the deep interconnectednessof different systems. The crisis has demonstrated the powerof global responses to drive forward systemic changes,
with unprecedented shifts in the way that people behave –from respecting social distancing to, in certain countries,
hundreds of thousands of people volunteering to support thecrisis response. Consequently, an unparalleled opportunity
now exists to work together to address the unsustainable
pressures that are being placed on the environment.
Now is the time for transformative action to protect
natural ecosystems in order to reduce the risk of
future pandemics and build towards nature positive,
carbon neutral, sustainable and just societies.
A collective response to the crisis must protect nature by:•

Governments commit to a New Deal for Nature & People
to deliver credible action that halts and starts to reverse
the loss of biodiversity, putting nature on a path torecovery by 2030 for the benefit of all people and theplanet•Stopping illegal, unregulated and high-risk wildlife
trade and consumption, and enforcing hygienic and safe
practices across markets and restaurants•

Stopping land conversion, deforestation andfragmentation across natural ecosystems, while
sustainably feeding a growing global population•

Building a new relationship between people and nature
through a sustainable and just economic recovery.

7

1. THE SYMPTOM:NEW ZOONOTIC DISEASESARE EMERGING AT AN
ALARMING RATE
© Neil Ever Osborne / WWF-US

WWF INTERNATIONAL 20209

NEW ZOONOTIC DISEASES ARE EMERGING AT AN ALARMING RATE

The world is currently in the grip of the COVID-19 pandemic, an
unprecedented global health crisis that emerged from animal pathogens.
Between December 2019 and May 2020, COVID-19 infected
more than six million people worldwide, which is more thanthe population of New Zealand.1 Tragically, the disease has
killed more than 370,000 people in over 200 countries,
which is just under three times the number of people killed
by armed conflict and terrorism every year.2 The emergenceof COVID-19 has been linked to a disease prevalent inhorseshoe bats.3 Once it was transmitted to humans, thedisease spread rapidly through our globalized society,reaching individuals in every region of the world.
COVID-19 is the latest of several recent zoonotic
diseases emerging in people and demonstrates how
human health and nature are closely interconnected.
Interactions with nature can expose people to a wide rangeof animal diseases. In fact, approximately three to four
new infectious diseases emerge each year, most of which
originate from wildlife. Over the last 30 years, approximately
60-70 per cent of the new diseases that emerged in humans
had a zoonotic origin.4 Animal pathogens can infecthumans directly through contact with the wild animals
that are natural carriers of these diseases, or indirectly bytransmission through intermediate hosts, such as livestockand domestic or peri-domestic animals that live in proximity
to humans. These intermediate hosts act as “mixing vessels”
that can lead to the genetic variation of diseases, enablingthem to infect humans.5
Healthy ecosystems can help mitigate humanity’s
exposure and vulnerability to different healthrisks, including zoonotic diseases. Robust natural
ecosystems enable access to necessities such as clean air,water, medicines and food, which strengthen health andimmune systems as well as reduce vulnerability to all typesof disease. For example, a study found that in the US, trees
and forests removed 17.4 million tonnes of air pollution in
2010, which is equivalent to taking almost 4 million cars off
US roads for a year.6 The improved air quality alone led toan estimated reduction of more than 670,000 incidencesof acute respiratory symptoms.7 Further, when natural
ecosystems like forests remain intact, interactions between
major human population groups and wild host species areoften more limited.8 As a result, viruses circulate in natural
ecosystems without crossing over into humans. Similarly,
wild host species have fewer interactions with domesticatedanimals and livestock, which generally live in close proximity
to humans.9 It is therefore less likely for domestic animals
and livestock to become intermediate hosts of these diseases.
Some studies also suggest that greater biodiversity of species
in a natural ecosystem like a forest may hinder diseasetransmission. This may be attributable to what scientists
call the “dilution effect,” which makes it more difficult for asingle pathogen to spread rapidly or to dominate.10 Evidence
is not fully conclusive that this effect applies broadly acrossdiseases, although one study found significant evidence of
this effect in parasite systems and plant-herbivore systems.11
One study reviewing over 200 assessments found significant
evidence of the dilution effect weakening transmission inparasite systems and plant-herbivore systems.12
However, over the last century, there has been an
alarming increase in the number and frequencyof new zoonotic disease outbreaks. The frequency of
zoonotic disease outbreaks caused by a spillover of pathogens
from animal hosts to people may have more than tripled
in the last decade.13 The diversity of these pathogens has
also increased, with the number of new zoonotic diseases

Zoonotic diseases

Key definitions:

Zoonotic diseases are any
diseases originating from animals
and transmitted to humans. They
are caused by animal pathogens(e.g. bacteria, viruses, fungi or
animal parasites). The event inwhich an animal pathogen infects
a human and overcomes theirimmune system is called spillover.

Pathogen: an organismthat causes disease (e.g.
bacteria, viruses, fungior animal parasites)

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

Reservoir host: anorganism that carries apathogen, often withoutcausing disease for theorganism itself

Intermediate hostor vector: an organismthat carries a pathogen
as a result of crossinfection and thatcan be responsible
for transmitting thepathogen to humans

FIGURE 1: PATHOGEN FLOW AT THE
WILDLIFE-LIVESTOCK-HUMAN INTERFACE

infecting people quadrupling over the same time period.14
These increases are driven by more frequent contact between
humans and dangerous animal pathogens, as well as bycontact with a wider variety of species, resulting in theemergence of new forms of diseases in humans. These new
zoonotic diseases have posed a grave threat to human healtharound the world, causing global pandemics such as HIV/
AIDS, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Swine
Flu, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), Ebola andcurrently COVID-19.15

DOMINATED SYST
E
R
EM
U
S
NAT
Peridomestic

Livestock

Humans

The increase in zoonotic outbreaks is a symptom ofa broken relationship between humans and nature,and is likely to worsen. As population pressures mount,people increasingly encroach into natural ecosystems,
resulting in accelerating levels of contact between humans,
wildlife and livestock. This results in additional exposure to
new animal pathogens and creates dangerous conditions forspillover from one species to another. As the natural worldcontinues to be degraded, the risk of deadly new zoonotic
diseases emerging becomes higher than ever before.

Wildlife

HUMAN-DOMINATED
SYSTEMSFIGURE 2: THE CUMULATIVE DISCOVERY OF VIRUS
SPECIES KNOWN TO INFECT PEOPLE

MERSHendraSARS

200

Cumulative number of virus species

1. THE SYMPTOM

HIV

150

Zika

100

COVID-19

Avian flu
H5N1

50

1920

1940

1960

Nipah

1980

Swine flu
H1N1

2000

Ebola

2020

Year

11

2. THE DIAGNOSIS:HOW HUMANITY’S BROKENRELATIONSHIP WITH NATURE
IS DRIVING ZOONOTICDISEASE EMERGENCE© Jürgen Freund / WWF

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

13

FIGURE 3: KEY DRIVERS OF NEW ZOONOTIC DISEASESHOW HUMANITY’S BROKEN RELATIONSHIP WITH NATURE IS DRIVING ZOONOTIC DISEASE EMERGENCE

2. THE DIAGNOSIS

1

The risk of zoonotic diseases is accelerating, driven by two key factors: thetrade of high-risk live wild animals and their meat, and unsustainable foodsystems driving the large-scale conversion of land for agriculture.
Firstly, the sale and consumption of high-risk wild species,
both in and outside of wildlife markets, increases humancontact with wild species, risking greater exposure to zoonotic
diseases. Secondly, unsustainable food systems currently relyon the large-scale conversion of land for agriculture, whichfragments natural ecosystems and increases interactions
between humans, livestock and wildlife. These drivers arelinked to the emergence of the most recent zoonotic diseases,
including COVID-19, SARS and Ebola.

Risk 1: The illegal and high-risk trade andconsumption of wildlife
Many recent pandemics, including COVID-19, havebeen linked to the high-risk trade and consumptionof wildlife in markets and restaurants.16,17 Increasingly

Environmental risk

global sales of wild animals, their meat and other products inmarkets which restaurants increase human contact with wild
species and, in turn, increases exposure to zoonotic diseases.
Questions remain about the exact origins of COVID-19, but
all available evidence suggests that it is a zoonotic disease,meaning it jumped from wildlife to humans.18 Even if this is
not the case, wildlife markets (often stalls within larger, legal
wet markets) create possibilities for spillover, especially whenlive wild animals are held in confined spaces or otherwise
stressful conditions, in close proximity to meat, live domestic
animals and humans. By keeping different species in cramped
conditions together, the risk of genetic recombination
between different viruses and transmission to new species,
including humans, is escalated.19,20 The improper handling oflive domestic animals and their meat can also drive potential
disease exposure, particularly when these animals are
slaughtered on the premises or kept alongside other wildlife.

Illegal and high-risk tradeand consumption of wildlife

Human activity• Wild meat consumption as adelicacy or as alternative protein• Unsafe and unhygienic practices
in trade

2

Unsustainable food systems• Land-use change for agriculture• Habitat fragmentation• Agriculture intensification

Wet markets are typically large collections of stalls selling
fresh meat, fish, fruits and vegetables. In some instances,
wet markets may sell live animals (wild and/or domestic)
as well as slaughter animals on the premises.
Wildlife markets specifically sell wild animals for meat,as pets, or for other purposes (e.g., use in traditional
medicine).
High-risk taxa are groups of species that pose a particularrisk for the transfer of zoonotic diseases. They are:rodents, bats, shrews and shrew-like relatives, primates,
carnivores and ungulates. Rodents carry 85 known
zoonotic diseases, carnivores 83, primates 61, ungulates
52, bats 25, and shrews 21.21

The demand for wild meat as a culinary delicacy
is growing around the globe, driving increased
consumption in markets and restaurants. In someregions, urban dwellers want to consume wild meat as it isconsidered a delicacy and a status symbol, valuing its links tohigh socioeconomic status and food-related curiosity. In 2018,
for example, the price of pangolin meat in some restaurants
in Viet Nam was around US$300 per kilogram.22 Similarly,
a survey of wildlife consumption in three provinces in China
found that high-grade restaurants and hotels accounted
respectively for 41 per cent and 34 per cent of places where
wild meat was consumed.23 Domestic and foreign tourists
are also driving demand, with local tourism suppliers
often promoting the consumption of wild animals in travel
destinations as a unique experience based on local traditions.24

Edward Parker / WWF

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

Outcome• Increased
exposure
to animal
pathogens at
the interface
between nature,humans andlivestock• Increased
vulnerability
to animal
pathogens

Impact• Increased riskof zoonotic
diseaseemergence• Broadernegativeenvironmental
consequences,includingclimate change
and biodiversity
loss

across international borders for commercial purposes, often
in cramped and unhygienic conditions. This leads to the
movement of possible host species across these borders,enabling transmission between species and geographies (seecase study 1). For example, the live trade of dromedaries
from the Horn of Africa to the Arabic Peninsula, particularly
to markets in Saudi Arabia, has been linked to the emergenceof MERS.26 At a national level, wild animals are oftentransported from forests and other natural ecosystems
into urban areas, with limited safe-handling, hygiene andtransport regulations, leading to possible transmission acrossthe supply chain.
Wild meat is also consumed as a source of protein
in some regions, particularly in rural communities
in developing countries, exposing individuals todangerous pathogens.27 The hunting, transportation,and cooking practices used in consuming wild meat for
subsistence often do not follow any food safety standards.28
Recent disease outbreaks, such as the 2014 Ebola outbreak29
have been associated with the sourcing, hunting andbutchering of wild animals such as bats and chimpanzees,
suspected of hosting zoonotic diseases.30 As the numberof people experiencing acute hunger after the COVID-19
pandemic is predicted to rise significantly, there is a risk thatthe consumption of wild meat as a source of food security
will grow. Given that protein consumption is essential tonutrition and health, there is an urgent need to ensurethat the communities that depend on wild meat can obtainsafe and sustainable sources of protein, and prepare themhygienically, or be assisted in developing alternative protein
sources.

The unsafe trade and transport of high-risk wildlife
to new urban locations, for consumption or otherpurposes, also creates conditions for spillover.25
Every year, hundreds of thousands of wild animals are traded

15

CASE STUDY 1: THE ROLE OF WILDLIFE MARKETS AND ILLEGAL TRADE
IN THE 2002-2003 SARS PANDEMIC
Suspected host species:
Horseshoe bats (reservoir), Himalayan palm
civets and raccoon dogs (intermediate) 31

Number of deaths:

774

32

Risk 2: Unsustainable food systems driving thelarge-scale conversion of land for agriculture

Estimated economic impact:

US$41.5billion33

Land conversion for food and livestock production isdestroying and fragmenting natural habitats aroundthe world. The amount of land converted for food andlivestock production is increasing at a rapid rate in order tofeed a growing global population. Since 1990, 178 million
hectares of forest have been cleared, which is equivalent tothe size of Libya, the 18th largest country in the world. The
loss of primary forest and grasslands has continued to growin recent years, mainly driven by commodity production andshifting agriculture.42,43 Most habitat loss associated with
agriculture is attributed to just three commodities: beef, soyand palm oil.44 As a result of extensive land conversion, about
70 per cent of forests globally are now within 1 kilometre of aforest edge and are exposed to further fragmentation.45 Not
only forests are at risk – over half of the original Cerrado
and North American grassland prairies have also been lost.46
Widespread land conversion has severe consequences for thenatural world. Both forest and non-forest ecosystems, such as
grasslands, have extremely rich biodiversity, play importantroles in storing carbon and are often major water sources.
Land conversion for agricultural activities has caused 70 per
cent of planetary biodiversity loss and half the loss of tree
cover globally to date.47

In 2002, the SARS-CoV virus spread from an animal
host and infected humans in the Guangdong province ofsouthern China.34 The virus rapidly spread to 26 countries
and resulted in more than 8,000 cases in 2003. SARS, thedisease caused by this virus, was highly fatal. Over 700
people around the world died from the disease, almost 9 percent of infected cases.
Although the evidence is not conclusive, the initial disease
outbreak is likely attributed to human contact with
infected palm civets and raccoon dogs in a wildlife market
in Guangdong province. This was substantiated by thediscovery of SARS-like viruses in these animals in Chinese
wildlife markets after the initial outbreak.35 Researchers
also found that several of the early SARS patients inGuangdong were involved in selling or preparing wildlife for
consumption, likely increasing their exposure to the virus.36
Additionally, patient case data clearly implicates civets indirectly transmitting SARS-CoV to humans. In particular,
two cases in 2003 were directly linked to a restaurant inGuangzhou where six SARS-CoV-positive civets were housedin cages.37 Although researchers cannot be certain that theinitial transmission from animals to humans took place
in a wildlife market, it is likely that wildlife markets andrestaurants were central to the spread of SARS.

Habitat fragmentation is the process during which a large
expanse of habitat is transformed into many patches of asmaller total area that are isolated from each other.48

Studies have also linked the SARS outbreak with the illegal
wildlife trade in small carnivorous mammals throughunregulated handling practices. A significant proportion of
the animals sold in wildlife markets enter China through aregional network of legal and illegal wildlife trade. Although
it is difficult to pinpoint the true extent of the illegal wildlife
trade in this region in the early 2000s, it is known that live
species including turtles, civets and other small carnivores
were exported to Chinese wildlife markets from Viet Nam
and Lao PDR.38 Some researchers therefore suggest thatan infected host species was imported from a neighbouring
country, potentially transmitting the virus to other wild
animals during transportation. Although there is no
definitive evidence, this explanation is plausible given thatthe regional wildlife trade system involved a high level ofcontact between species that would not usually have contact
in their native habitats.39
Estimates of the total macroeconomic impact vary. However,the World Bank estimates that the global economic impact
was US$41.5 billion, or around US$4 million per case.40
The SARS pandemic led to an estimated GDP decrease of 1
per cent in China and 0.5 per cent in Southeast Asia, due tocosts associated with healthcare spending, business closures,
reductions in manufacturing, and the contraction of the
tourism industry.41

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

Extensive land conversion, deforestation andhabitat fragmentation are not only catastrophic forecosystem health, they also increase interactions
between humans and wildlife. Globally between 1945
and 2005, land-use change has contributed to almost half ofzoonotic disease events emerging in humans.49 For example,
extensive deforestation and fragmentation in West andCentral Africa is linked to several Ebola outbreaks in theseregions (see case study 2). Forest fragmentation brings
wildlife into closer contact with humans in areas where
wildlife and people increasingly share the same spaces
and compete for the same resources.50 Likewise, humanencroachment into ecosystems such as forests may increase
the number and density of host species in forest fragments,
increasing the likelihood of interactions with humans.

© Ronald Petocz / WWF

17

CASE STUDY 2: THE ROLE OF DEFORESTATION IN EBOLA OUTBREAKS IN WEST AND CENTRAL AFRICA
Suspected host species:
Fruit bats (reservoir),primates (intermediate) 51

Number of deaths:

11,325(2014-2016 outbreak) ;
52

2,268

Estimated economic impact:(2018-2020 outbreak)53

US$5.9-8.9billionglobal support (2014-2016 outbreak)
55

Bats and zoonotic disease emergence

Bats are natural reservoir hosts since they can carryhigh viral loads and shed viruses without becoming
sick themselves.71 Bats also roost in colonies that cancontain tens of millions of individuals, enabling viruses
to spread rapidly. Because they are highly mobile, bats
can carry viruses to many types of habitats, including
urban areas, and potentially expose many otherspecies, including both domestic animals and humans.
Other animals can be infected in multiple ways throughexposure to the blood, saliva, urine or faeces of bats.72

Although it is difficult to trace the exact drivers forthese specific outbreaks, many researchers have directly
linked the rates of deforestation in West and Central
Africa to an increased likelihood of Ebola outbreaks. In
deforestation fronts in these regions, forest loss is rapidly
increasing at a rate already higher than 0.5 per cent per
year. In the Guinean forests, which span West Africa, thecultivation of crops including cacao, palm oil and rubber
is driving extensive forest clearance and widespreadfragmentation.59 The Congo Basin, which contains 20 per
cent of the world’s tropical forests, is losing over 1 million
hectares of tree cover per year, driven by increasing
smallholder forest clearance for agriculture as well aslarge-scale commercial logging.60,61 Rapid deforestation
risks leaving these ecosystems severely fragmented anddegraded.

Despite these risks, culling bats will not prevent future
zoonotic disease outbreaks and may even increase
the risk of a zoonotic disease spilling over to humans.
Previous culls have been unsuccessful, with culls in
Latin America failing to reduce rabies prevalence73 andattempts to cull bats in Uganda leading to increased
prevalence of Marburg virus in the region.74,75 Culls
can drive bat populations to migrate to new areas,
facilitating the spread of disease. In addition, increased
physiological stress may increase the amount of virusthat bats shed.76 By culling bats, there is also a risk
of further disrupting ecosystems. In particular, bats
are essential for insect control and plant pollination,with over 300 species of fruit dependent on bats forpollination.

Researchers believe that the extensive deforestationin these regions increases contact between humans
and potential Ebola host species, such as fruit bats andprimates, leading to greater potential for transmission
from hosts to humans.62 The underlying assumption isthat transmission is more likely in fragmented forests due
to an increased density of some host species and closer
proximity between humans and those host species.63 For
example, some researchers have shown that the numberof tropical fruit bats may increase in fragmented habitats(while insectivorous bats decrease), and the density ofsome primate populations may also increase following
habitat disturbance.64 Likewise, fragmentation creates
more entry points for humans to venture into natural
habitats to hunt or forage.65 Although the mechanisms ofEbola transmission are not certain, it is highly plausiblethat humans living close to fragmented forest edges havegreater exposure to zoonotic diseases due to an increased
risk of contact with host species.

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

billionin lost GDP for affected countries,54

Bats are frequently implicated in the emergence of
new zoonotic diseases. More than 200 viruses havebeen associated with bats, and there have been six
major outbreaks of zoonotic diseases in the past 25
years that scientists suspect were caused by bat-borne
viruses, including the COVID-19 pandemic.70

Over the last 20 years, there have been numerous Ebola
outbreaks in West and Central Africa. The virus is highly
infectious and often fatal, with a mortality rate of around50 per cent. The largest outbreak in recent years started
in Guinea in 2014 and then moved across land borders to
Sierra Leone and Liberia.56 During this outbreak, 11,325
people died from Ebola57 and 17,300 children lost one orboth parents to the virus.58

The 2014-2016 Ebola outbreak had devastating social andeconomic impacts. Researchers estimate that economic
losses were equivalent to around US$2.8-32.6 billion inlost GDP for the three affected countries – Sierra Leone,
Guinea and Liberia.66 In addition, more than 33 weeks
of education were lost due to school closures,67 andproduction volumes of staple crops were reduced by 12
per cent.68 More recently, 2,268 people died during the
2018-2020 Ebola virus outbreak in Democratic Republicof the Congo.69

US$2.8© Michel Gunther / WWF

When land is cleared for agriculture, wildlife
and livestock risk coming into closer proximity,
creating conditions for disease transmission into
intermediate hosts. Since most land is converted
for agricultural and livestock production, there is also a
growing level of contact between wildlife and livestock
animals. If farms lack sufficient bio-safety regulations
to limit livestock contact with external species, theseanimals risk becoming intermediate disease hosts. Thiscan assist with the genetic rearrangement of a virus into aform that can be transmitted to humans, as was the caseduring the 1997 Nipah virus outbreak (see case study
3).77,78 Intensified livestock farming practices can facilitate
the rapid spread of disease among animals, due to theirproximity. Small-scale or subsistence farming can also be
dangerous if not sufficiently regulated through bio-safety
protocols. Greater precautions must be taken with livestock
production to prevent these dangerous spillover events.

19

CASE STUDY 3: THE ROLE OF AGRICULTURE AND LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION
IN THE NIPAH VIRUS OUTBREAK IN 1998
Suspected host species:
Fruit bats (reservoir),pigs (intermediate) 79

Number of deaths:

105(1998 outbreak) ;80

260

Nipah is a relatively unknown virus, which was firstreported in 1998 during an outbreak among pig farmers
in Malaysia. Despite receiving relatively little media
attention, the World Health Organization has listed
Nipah virus as one of the 10 most important pathogens
to monitor and research to reduce the risk of a future
pandemic.83 The virus is often fatal in both pigs andhumans, with a 40 per cent mortality rate during theinitial outbreak in Malaysia that resulted in 105 deaths,
mostly of farm labourers working on pig farms.84
Research suggests that the spillover of Nipah from bats topigs and then to humans during the 1998 outbreak likely

Estimated economic impact:(2001-2018)81

US$671

million (1998 outbreak)resulted from the intensification of pig husbandry and mango
production.85 Between the 1970s and the 1990s, both pig
and mango production tripled in Malaysia, encroaching into
natural ecosystems.86 Farmers typically planted mango trees
alongside pig enclosures, which attracted fruit bats (known
carriers of the virus) to the area. Scientists believe that pigs
may have consumed fruit contaminated with bat saliva or
urine, leading to the spillover of the virus.87
At the farm where the first cases occurred, thousands ofpigs were kept in close proximity, and likely with limited
bio-safety regulations, enabling rapid transmission of thevirus within the population and resulting in the spillover82

to humans on the farm. Although the pathways towidespread circulation in humans are complex, it
seems likely that the dual production of mangos andpigs in intensified conditions created the right scenario
for multiple spillover events.
Subsequent outbreaks of Nipah in Bangladesh andIndia have led to a further 260 deaths, with an average
mortality rate of 75 per cent.88 In 1998, one million
pigs were culled as a result of the outbreak, driving the
Malaysian pig industry to near collapse and resulting
in US$671 million of economic losses.89

The pressure on nature from food systems
will continue increasing as the challenges of
feeding the growing population expands. Finding
sustainable solutions to ensure food security for a
growing global population is a key challenge of the 21st
century, with the world population projected to reachnearly 10 billion by 2050. Based on current trends,
global food demand is expected to increase anywhere
between 59 per cent to 98 per cent by 2050.90 The world’s
current unsustainable food systems mean that instead of
repurposing degraded land for sustainable agriculturaluse, forests, savannahs and grasslands continue tobe destroyed.91 Encroaching on natural habitats puts
humanity at a higher risk of exposure to diseases fromwildlife. Moreover, growing demand will likely lead tofurther intensification of agricultural production with thepotential for increased spillover from wild animals into
livestock.92 It will be necessary to find sustainable ways
to meet this demand for food, while protecting ecosystemand human health.

© Thomas Nicolon/WWF-DRC

WWF INTERNATIONAL 202021

3. THE OUTCOMES:THE COSTS OF HUMANITY’S
BROKEN RELATIONSHIP
WITH NATURE© Edward Parker / WWF

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

23

FIGURE 4: NUMBER OF DEATHS FROM MOST FATAL EMERGING ZOONOTIC DISEASES (1998-2020)
THE COSTS OF HUMANITY’S BROKEN RELATIONSHIP WITH NATURE

3. THE OUTCOMESCOVID-19 (GLOBAL)

370,000

SWINE FLU (GLOBAL)

18,449EBOLA (DRC, GUINEA, SIERRA LEONE, LIBERIA)

13,593

575,400
NUMBER OF DEATHS DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTED TO DISEASEWORST CASE ESTIMATEMERS (GLOBAL) 850
SARS (GLOBAL) 774
AVIAN FLU (GLOBAL) 440
NIPAH VIRUS (MALAYSIA, BANGLADESH, INDIA) 365

COVID-19 and other recent pandemics have exposed the grave dangers
linked to exploiting high-risk wildlife and encroaching on nature, with tragic
costs for communities around the world.

Sources: WHO data; CDC estimate of swine flu deaths: COVID-19 and Ebola death totals as of June 2020
Note: Exact number of deaths attributed to swine flu not known, with 18,449 deaths confirmed by WHO but CDC
modelling estimating up to 575,400: deaths fram Ebola include both 2014-2016 outbreak ard ongoing outbreak in DRC

FIGURE 5: ESTIMATED COST OF MOST FATAL EMERGING ZOONOTIC DISEASES (1998-2020)
BENCHMARKUK GDP

2,855
8,800

COVID-19 (GLOBAL, ESTIMATED)COVID-19 is a devastating wake-up call that humanity’s
broken relationship with nature affects not only the wildlife
and natural ecosystems whose habitats are being destroyed,
but also threatens human health. By continuing to damage
natural habitats, humans risk incurring the terrible costs of
new zoonotic diseases, as well as increased exposure to otherthreats such as climate change.
The devastating health impacts of recent pandemics
including COVID-19 are a stark illustration of thehuman costs of the encroachment on nature. Some
infectious zoonotic diseases can spread rapidly around theworld, resulting in human tragedy on a global scale. Between
December 2019 and May 2020, over six million people
globally contracted COVID-19, with more than 370,000
deaths recorded.93 This grim total is set to rise, with anadditional 190,000 people likely to die in Africa alone,94
and will almost certainly surpass other deadly outbreaks
experienced in recent decades such as the swine flu95
pandemic in 2009, in which up to 575,40096 people may havelost their lives (see Figure 4).
Unless the root drivers of zoonotic disease
emergence are addressed, the global economy andfood security will come under further threat. The
costs of COVID-19 are estimated to reach between US$2.4
trillion and US$8.8 trillion,97 or up to three times the size of
the GDP of the UK (see Figure 5).98,99 Due to the disruption
caused by the pandemic and the necessary response measures
put in place by governments, the global economy is projected
to contract by 3 per cent in 2020,100 and almost half of the
global workforce is in immediate danger of losing theirlivelihoods.101 The drastic social and economic shifts driven
by COVID-19 are also threatening global food security. It
has been warned that the number of people at risk of acutehunger after the pandemic could rise from 135 million to 265
million by the end of the year,102 due to disruption in foodsupply chains, movement and transport restrictions, andreductions in people’s purchasing power. Further, COVID-19
may be the worst but is certainly not the only recent
pandemic with a devastating economic impact on countries
or regions. SARS resulted in an estimated 1 per cent decreasein China’s GDP and a 0.5 per cent decrease in Southeast Asia,
damaging all sectors of the economy.
The increased risk of new zoonotic diseases suchas COVID-19 poses a threat to already marginalized
WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

SWINE FLU (GLOBAL) 50

ESTIMATED TOTAL COST (US$ BILLION)SARS (GLOBAL) 42

WORST CASE ESTIMATEAVIAN FLU (GLOBAL) 21
EBOLAVIRUS (GUINEA, SIERRA LEONE, LIBERIA) 9
MERS (SOUTH KOREA) 8
NIPAH VIRUS (MALAYSIA) 1© John P. Starr / WWFgroups, including indigenous communities andwomen. COVID-19 has highlighted that indigenous peoples
can be particularly vulnerable to the health and economic
impacts of pandemics. For example, in the Navajo Nationof North America, the reported COVID-19 infection rate is
10 times higher than the general population of Arizona.103
Likewise, in Brazil, COVID-19 has affected at least 34
indigenous communities, many of which live in areas withno health facilities.104 Lockdowns and travel restrictions
have also disproportionately affected indigenous people,
as many work in the informal economy and rely on income
from markets, handicrafts, seasonal work and tourism tosupport themselves.105 For example, many of the Batwa
people of Uganda, usually reliant on income throughoffering low-cost labour, have lost their livelihoods due
to lockdown measures.106 Furthermore, the economic andsocial impacts of pandemics such as COVID-19 have a clear
gender bias. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, there
have been widespread reports of surges in gender-based
violence, as women are confined with their abusers during
quarantine. For every three months that lockdowns continue,
an additional 15 million cases of gender-based violence are
expected.107 In addition, many women now have lower accessto key health services including sexual and reproductive
health, as well as maternal, new-born and child healthservices.108,109

Sources: World Bank data: EcoHealth Alliance data: IMF/ADB estimates of COVID-19 economic impact
Note: MERS data for countries outside South Korea not available

Pandemics can threaten global and national peaceand security, increasing the urgency for public
institutions to address their drivers. Although the
COVID-19 crisis has resulted in short-term ceasefires insome regions, tensions have escalated in other volatile areas.
As governments redeploy security personnel to tackle thehealth crisis and foreign countries recall troops stationed
in-country, violent attacks by extremist groups in hotspots in
sub-Saharan Africa increased by 37 per cent between Marchand April. In particular, Boko Haram launched the group’s
deadliest attack against Chad’s army since its insurgency
spread into Chad.110,111 The long-term political and economic
effects of pandemics may pose an even greater threat to
global stability. COVID-19 and the associated lockdown
measures threaten national stability, particularly in fragile
states, which already faced severe economic and politicalinstability prior to the pandemic.112 On the global stage,
geopolitical rivalries between countries are set to worsen,
as countries grapple with differing economic impacts of the
COVID-19 crisis.113
Moreover, pandemics can further endanger thenatural world, with environmental monitoringand enforcement already suffering as a result of
COVID-19. In Brazil, the federal environmental agency
has announced cuts to enforcement duties, which include
protecting the Amazon from accelerating deforestation,
resulting in increased threats from illegal logging andland conversion.114 The loss of the tourism sector is further
depleting funding for monitoring and enforcement inprotected and community conservation areas, resulting inincreases in encroachment, illegal logging, and poaching insome areas.115,116,117 Further, pressures from the crisis haveled governments and companies to relax regulations andsustainability efforts. The US Environmental Protection
Agency announced it would not enforce environmental

8,800

reporting requirements for those with a “COVID-related
justification.”.118 Similarly, China has extended deadlines forcompanies to meet environmental standards and delayed thescheduled development of a large solar farm.119
The rapid spread of new zoonotic diseases also posesa grave threat to wildlife and ecosystem dynamics.
Many endangered primates such as gorillas died during
numerous Ebola outbreaks in Gabon and the Democratic
Republic of the Congo between 1997 and 2004, with mortality
rates of up to 97 per cent in some gorilla populations.120
During avian flu outbreaks over recent decades, mass deaths
among wild birds from different species have been reported
around the world.121 Zoonotic disease outbreaks can damage
natural ecosystems, affecting prey populations, biodiversity,and the delivery of ecosystem services.122
The same forces driving increased pandemics
are also furthering environmental degradation
through climate change and biodiversity loss. Foodand land-use systems currently cause up to 30 per cent of
total greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to climatechange.123,124 Widespread land conversion and deforestation
disrupts the vital role of ecosystems in capturing and storing
greenhouse gases. When forests are cleared or burned, they
release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, contributing torising global temperatures. Agricultural production processes
further contribute to global warming with high levels ofgreenhouse gas emissions associated with fertilizer use,energy consumption and livestock production.125 This in turncreates further risks to human health, with climate change
set to increase deaths from heat strokes, malnutrition anddisease transmission.126 Over the coming decades, emissions
driven by food systems are predicted to increase, generating
further climate shifts and resulting in severe repercussions
for the health of both humans and nature.12725

4. THE OPPORTUNITY:
WHY THIS MOMENT IS A
KEY OPPORTUNITY FOR
TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE© NACSO/WWF-Namibia

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

27

WHY THIS MOMENT IS A KEY OPPORTUNITY FOR TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE

4. THE OPPORTUNITY

Limited progress has been made in tackling high-risk wildlife trade,and deforestation and fragmentation, despite numerous interventionsattempting to address these issues.
Some governments and private sector actors are increasingly
committed to protecting terrestrial ecosystems andbiodiversity, in line with the Sustainable Development Goal
(SDG) 12 (Sustainable Production and Consumption) and
SDG 15 (Life on Land). However, the 2019 SDG Progress
Report noted that despite these initiatives, the overall trendsof land degradation and biodiversity loss are continuing at
an alarming rate.128 Similarly, the Progress Assessment of
the New York Declaration on Forests (NYDF) on ending
deforestation and restoring forestlands found “little evidence
that these goals are on track, and achieving the 2020 targets
is likely impossible”.129
State-driven policies and regulations have taken
important steps in regulating land-use change but
have faced significant challenges with enforcement.
Several national governments have designated protectedareas in their countries, safeguarding these lands fromchanges in use. Globally, 15 per cent of land area is currently
protected, falling just short of the 17 per cent target set
for 2020 by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
under the Aichi Biodiversity Targets.130 However, protection
varies significantly across key deforestation fronts, withless than 5 per cent of land protected in New Guinea andLiberia, compared to over 50 per cent in Venezuela.131
Effective management of protected areas also varies, as somenational or jurisdictional governments face challenges with
enforcement capacity and many protected and conserved
areas remain chronically underfunded. Fewer than 20 per
cent of countries have met their commitment to assess
the management of protected areas.132 Similarly, althoughindigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) own
around 50 per cent of the world’s land, governments only
legally recognize around 10 per cent, meaning that thesecommunities do not have representation in environmental
decision-making. This failure to recognize IPLC rights
reduces the essential role that they can play in protecting thisland from deforestation and fragmentation.133
With regard to wildlife trade, most countries
have regulations to ensure the safety and hygieneof legal trade but monitoring and enforcement
remains an issue. Customs and trade bureaus struggle
to identify wildlife subject to trade controls, and there isa lack of accountability for those violating trade laws andsafety regulations.134 Further, in the absence of effective

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

enforcement, illegal trade may increase. A ban on live
poultry exports from Thailand following the avian influenza
H5N1 virus led to the growth of illegal poultry trade which
contributed to the rapid spread of the disease in unregulated
Cambodian markets.135
The business sector has increasingly supported
market-based initiatives, such as voluntary company
actions, but significant scale and impact are lacking.
Market-based approaches include voluntary commitments toimprove supply chains (e.g., environmental assurance systems,
certification systems, traceability and monitoring of suppliers),
as well as monetary incentives for conservation outcomes (e.g.,
payment for environmental services schemes and sustainablefinance). The adoption of voluntary commitments, particularly
certification schemes, is growing among supply chain actors,
but overall is still small scale, particularly for companies
sourcing cattle or soy.136 As of May 2019, 481 companies havemade 850 commitments to address deforestation in their
supply chains, but only a small proportion of those exposed
to soy or beef have made a commitment.137 Commitments
are concentrated among consumer-facing businesses, while
upstream actors face lower incentives to participate. Market
segmentation allows buyers to focus on supply chain actors
with no environmental commitments. Even well-intentioned
companies and investors may find it difficult to monitor their
suppliers and investments, given lengthy supply chains andmultiple levels of aggregation of products. As a result, the
NYDF Progress Assessment noted in 2019 that “the private
sector is not on track to eliminate deforestation fromagricultural production.” 138
Finally, there is a lack of global coordination andno accountability mechanisms to address theenvironmental drivers of pandemics. The REDD+139
scheme is one of the most prominent examples of aninternational framework, aimed at reducing emissions ofgreenhouse gases through avoided deforestation, forest
conservation or sustainable forest management. Many
countries have integrated their REDD+ strategies within theirnationally determined contributions, or their stated efforts
to reduce national emissions.140 However, investments in
stopping deforestation in tropical countries comprise lessthan 1.5 per cent of the support committed by multilateral
institutions and developed country donors since 2010
(only US$3.2 billion out of US$256 billion). Similarly,© Jaime Rojo / WWF-US

the implementation of the 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets,developed by the CBD, has stalled due to governancechallenges within national jurisdictions, a lack of fundingfor environmental agencies, corruption and a lack ofparticipation from civil society.141 On the issue of illegal andhigh-risk wildlife trade, global monitoring mechanisms lackthe ability to regulate species that are considered high-riskfor public health reasons. The United Nations Convention
on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora (CITES) focuses on the trade of species but lacks amandate or focus on zoonotic risks.
The current crisis demonstrates that to maketrue progress on these issues, systemic change isrequired. Whether tackling environmental issues, healthcrises or economic challenges, solutions with a single focus
or leverage point are unlikely to be successful, given the
deep interconnections of different systems. Cross-cutting
responses are required, such as promoting more sustainable
and efficient food systems, encouraging healthier and moresustainable diets, reducing overproduction and consumption,and moving towards nature-positive and climate-neutral
financial systems that incorporate environmental risks intheir decision-making processes. These solutions must be
coordinated between different actors, including governments,
the private sector, the public, IPLCs, and environment,
animal and health specialists, leading to a general societal
shift to embrace a healthier relationship with the planet.
The COVID-19 crisis is a pivotal moment, in which
the world can and must take action. By tackling
the key drivers of illegal and high-risk wildlife trade andby increasing the sustainability of food systems througheliminating deforestation and conversion from supply
chains, stakeholders have the power to make transformativechanges to reduce the impact of environmental drivers on
human health. There is an opportunity to make these changes
by seizing key policy moments in 2020/2021. 2020 was
dubbed a “super year for Nature”, and despite some delays
and cancellations due to the COVID-19 crisis, many criticalevents for driving transformational shifts will still take place,including the UN Biodiversity Summit. Now is the moment toreframe humanity’s relationship with nature, reduce the riskof new zoonotic diseases emerging and recommit to the 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Now, more than ever, public support is aligned
toward driving forward a new sustainability agenda.
As governments are faced with the challenges of rebuilding
economies, stakeholders can work together to fix humanity’s
broken relationship with nature. Globally, there is increasing
momentum to introduce new environmental regulations
to reduce the future threats from pandemics. New WWFcommissioned research shows that there is overwhelming
public support across Southeast Asia for a ban on illegal andunregulated wildlife markets and decreasing willingness tobuy and consume wildlife. Similarly, a recent polling of public
opinion in 14 countries found that 65 per cent of respondents
supported a “green economic recovery” process that would
prioritize the environment and climate change within it.142
A similar phenomenon was observed in the US, as public
support for climate change mitigation measures significantly
increased following exposure to natural disasters linked toclimate change.143 It is therefore essential to build on the
momentum created by the COVID-19 crisis to tackle illegal
and high-risk wildlife trade and unsustainable food systems.
Now is the moment to seize the opportunity to “build backbetter”. This includes agreeing a New Deal for Nature andPeople to halt and reverse the loss of nature and biodiversity
towards a nature-positive world by 2030.
COVID-19 has also demonstrated the power ofglobal responses to solve urgent challenges. By theend of March 2020, over 100 countries worldwide had
instituted comprehensive response programmes. Government
investments in response and stimulus packages have been
unprecedented, representing 20 per cent of GDP in Germany(€750 billion), to 10 per cent of GDP in the US (US$2
trillion).144 There have also been significant shifts in the waythat individuals and communities behave, from respecting
social distancing where possible, to hundreds of thousandsof people volunteering to support community members andthe crisis response.145 The combination of governmental
and individual action demonstrates that by investing incrisis responses and changing behaviour, humanity cantake positive steps to mitigate urgent threats to humanhealth. An unparalleled opportunity now exists to address
the unsustainable pressures that are being placed on theenvironment, which are risking the health of current andfuture generations.

29

5. THE PATH FORWARD:
A NEW DEAL FOR NATURE& PEOPLE TO RESTOREHUMANITY’S RELATIONSHIP
WITH NATURE© Luis Barreto / WWF-UK

WWF INTERNATIONAL 202031

RESTORING HUMANITY’S RELATIONSHIP WITH NATURE

5. THE PATH FORWARD
Urgent action is necessary to address the planetary emergency and to reduce
the risk of future pandemics through systemic changes that create a moresustainable relationship with nature.
Now is the time for the world to take immediate steps toprevent future pandemics, and to support systemic changes
that will protect the health of both the planet and people overthe long term.
Governments, businesses and financial institutions
need to take fundamental, systemic action to reverse
the loss of nature, and put nature on a path torecovery to create a nature positive world by 2030.
Below are three recommendations which are essential
elements of a New Deal for Nature and People, and will help
avoid future pandemics:

These actions include:●● Strengthening government and civil society efforts to
reduce consumer demand for high-risk wildlife products,
particularly among those for whom wildlife is considered
a delicacy, through broad public education and evidencebased campaigns targeting known consumer groups.
●● Enforcing robust regulations on live wild and domestic
animal and food hygiene standards.
●● Preventing high-risk trade from shifting into black
markets and improving national enforcement mechanisms
against illegal trade through monitoring and adoption of
enforcement best practices.

Recommendation 1: Stop illegal, unregulated andhigh-risk wildlife trade and consumption
Recommendation 2: Support sustainable food
Immediate action: Stop high-risk wildlife trade.
systems that halt encroachment on nature
Policymakers should take steps to halt the sale and tradeof high-risk wildlife species, which creates dangerous
opportunities for zoonotic disease spillover.
These actions include:●● Shutting down the trade and sale of high-risk wildlife
within markets and enforcing hygienic and safe practices
across markets and restaurants, with a priority focus on
those in high-density urban areas.
●● Scaling up efforts to combat the trade of illegal and highrisk species at national and international levels.

Immediate action: Limit the impacts of COVID-19
on people and nature by ensuring agriculturaldeforestation and conversion does not increase as
immediate food security is pursued. Respond to thenegative effects of the COVID-19 crisis on the environmentand on communities reliant on ecosystem services for theirlivelihoods.
These actions include:●● Increasing coordination between public health,enforcement and environmental agencies at local andnational levels.

●● Reinforcing governments’ efforts to maintainenvironmental protections, to strengthen regulations
during this crisis, and to protect funding for environmental
programmes, including effective and equitable
management of protected and conserved areas.

●● Supporting the development of sustainable and resilientbusinesses to support those who currently rely on highrisk species as a protein or income source and ensuringbiosafety standards are respected if establishing new
animal farming operations.

●● Maintaining and strengthening existing voluntary
environmental measures from private sector actors,
including companies and finance providers, to eliminate
deforestation and ecosystem conversion from their foodsupply chains.

Systemic action: Influence consumer behaviour
to reduce wildlife demand, and support safety
standards. Ensure the long-term viability of trade andsafety regulations by reducing consumer demand for wildlife
and enforcing standards.

●● Supporting local communities to obtain alternative sourcesof livelihoods and working with these communities tostrengthen monitoring and reporting of deforestationand land conversion to prevent illegal encroachment,
particularly in areas that have lost their normal source offinance for forest protection, such as those dependent on
tourism revenue.

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

© Neil Ever Osborne / WWF-US

Systemic action: Work across supply chains toincrease the sustainability of food systems andto ensure the healthy functioning of natural
ecosystems. Strengthen regulations and incentives toshift demand toward commodities that are produced,
processed and traded safely and sustainably, consideringrisks to the environment and human health and avoiding
new deforestation or conversion of natural ecosystems. This
includes demand-side governments and businesses taking
more responsibility to put in place and uphold regulations
and making sustainable choices across the supply chain, as
well as greater collaboration on the supply side to transition
to more sustainable and safer practices.
These actions include:●● Demand-side governments showing global leadership bydeveloping and enforcing policies/legislation to eliminate
deforestation and conversion from supply chains and create
a consistent market for sustainably sourced commodities,(for example, the EU where potential for such legislation
is emerging at the moment) while also partnering with
supply-side governments to support their transition tosustainable production.146,147●● Companies eliminating deforestation and land conversion
from their supply chains, by making timebound andmeasurable commitments with credible plans toachieve them. This includes adopting deforestation- andconversion-free sourcing and trade policies in line withthe guidance of the Accountability Framework initiative(AFi), and reporting transparently on progress.148 Beyond
their own supply chains, companies should advocate for
deforestation- and conversion-free policies and invest in thelandscapes that they source from, collaborating with local
platforms to support the transition to deforestation-andconversion-free landscapes.149,150●● Collaborating with global platforms that promote foodsystem transformation to stimulate pre-competitive action
to eliminate deforestation and conversion from sourcing
practices.
●● Promoting financial and technical support for local action
in deforestation fronts from corporate, bilateral andnational sources. This should include facilitating effective
land-use planning and governance to combat conversion
and fragmentation, developed in conjunction with IPLCs torespect their land and water rights.151●● Developing local solutions to landscape-specific risks,
including expanded networks of effectively and equitably
managed protected and conserved areas, which respectbiosafety standards, have alternative financing mechanismsthat are more resilient to shocks, and recognize IPLC land
and water rights.152●● Shifting the public to more sustainable diets and foodchoices by raising awareness of the impact on natureand climate, incorporating environmental health into
governmental dietary guidelines, and working withbusinesses to support sustainable dietary patterns.

33

Recommendation 3: Build a more sustainable
relationship between people and nature
through sustainable and just economic recovery
approaches with defined and holistic goals© Luis Barreto / WWF-UK

Immediate action: Develop economic recovery
packages that respond to immediate needs whilebuilding long-term resilience. Governments aredeveloping and distributing unprecedented stimulus recovery
packages. These must deliver social and economic benefits
to all, particularly the most vulnerable, as well as ensuresustainable livelihoods. It is essential that these investments
are linked to positive action for climate, nature and theSustainable Development Goals, and do not support or
subsidize sectors that are highly polluting or that pose a threat
to natural ecosystems. For example, the EU has announced
a stimulus plan of €750 billion, equivalent to 4 per cent of
its members’ total GDP, to be driven by the European Green
Deal.153 Similarly, Japan has announced a US$1.1 trillion
stimulus package to support a sustainable recovery,154 and
New Zealand has announced NZ$1.1 billion for “nature-basedjobs”155.
These actions include:●● Linking stimulus packages and public investments topositive action for climate and nature in line with the
Sustainable Development Goals, with incentives andsupport for climate-smart, nature-based solutions, acircular economy, green jobs and sustainable livelihoods.
●● Using stimulus packages to help local communities develop
alternative livelihood opportunities, especially in the
tourism sector, that build sustainability and resilience
while protecting their rights.
●● Tightening regulation on sectors receiving support toensure subsidies and bailouts are not used to boost
polluting industries such as oil, gas, aviation and othersectors that harm the environment. Support should bemade conditional on companies committing to preventing
deforestation and land conversion, ensuring a low-carbon
transition in line with the Paris Agreement, and protecting
the rights of IPLCs.156●● Providing debt relief in a way that supports economic
resilience through investment in a sustainable, low-carbon
development trajectory.
●● Measuring the impact of different recovery plans on natureand the climate through existing impact tools.157●● Increasing efforts to implement the CBD Aichi Biodiversity
Targets.

WWF INTERNATIONAL 202035

Systemic action: Governments, businesses andfinancial institutions need to commit to ambitious
targets to halt and reverse the loss of nature.
COVID-19 has demonstrated the value of nature to humanhealth, economies and societies. Following the pandemic, itwill be essential for governments, businesses and the financial
sector to better integrate the Sustainable Development Goals
into their planning and activities. Governments and otherstakeholders should support ambitious and measurable
environmental targets, mobilizing adequate and consistent
resources for global action to halt and reverse the loss ofnature by 2030 and achieve the 1.5°C target of the UNFCCC’s
Paris Agreement. The UN Summit on Biodiversity in
September 2020 and key global environmental decisions
in 2021, including the post-2020 Global Biodiversity
Framework under the CBD and enhanced NDCs before the
UNFCCC COP26, are unmissable opportunities.
These actions include:●● Sending a strong political signal to heads of state andgovernment at the UN Summit on Biodiversity in
September 2020, ahead of major global environmental
decisions in 2021 for the health of people and planet.
●● Committing to a New Deal for Nature and People that
promotes a nature-positive world by 2030 and includes
three goals:

158• Protect and restore natural habitats: Secure theworld’s remaining natural spaces, by protecting 30 per
cent of land and ocean, and sustainably managing therest, with emphasis on community- and indigenousled conservation and sustainable management• Safeguard the diversity of life: Halt theunprecedented rate of extinction and the sharp declineof wildlife populations by protecting and restoring
habitats and curbing unsustainable fishing, hunting
and wildlife trade.
• Halve the footprint of production andconsumption: Reduce humanity’s negative
ecological impacts by greening the main economic
drivers of nature loss: agriculture, fishing,infrastructure, extractive industries, forestry andenergy production.

●● Ensuring strong accountability and transparency
mechanisms for the implementation and achievementsof global goals through the post-2020 Global Biodiversity
Framework under the CBD.
●● Aligning public and private financial flows with theimplementation of an ambitious post-2020 Global
Biodiversity Framework and enhancing governments’
NDCs with nature-based solutions by:• Eliminating or repurposing all incentives andsubsidies harmful to biodiversity, and urgentlyaligning public and private financial flows with thepathway towards a nature-positive, carbon-neutral
and equitable society.159• Increasing public and private investments in nature,
and accounting for and improving transparency
around impacts on nature and associated risks in all
financial flows,160 including in emergency economic
recovery and stimulus packages.
• Focusing on a transformational shift that would allow
for nature-positive, carbon-neutral and wellbeingcentred economic models, including the need foralternative macro-economic indicators.
●● Mobilizing the corporate sector to make commitments
and ramp up credible action to reduce the negativeenvironmental footprint of key sectors and to translate
corporate targets into positive environmental impact.
●● Working with financial institutions to incorporate bothclimate and nature risks, such as the multiple impactsof deforestation and fragmentation, in their investment
decisions. Initial actions include implementing better data
and traceability systems to track the impacts of their funds
on supply chains and developing new channels for green
finance.

Endnotes
1

2
3
4
5
6

7
8
9
10
11
12

13
14
15
16
17

18

19
20
21
22
23
24
25

26
27
28
29
30

31

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

Case and death totals as of 31/05/2020. John
Hopkins University. “COVID-19 Dashboard.”(https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/
opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6)
Our World in Data. “Causes of Death.” (2019)
Mackenzie et al. “COVID-19: a novel zoonotic
disease caused by a coronavirus from China:
what we know and what we don’t.” (2020)
Jones et al. “Global trends in emerging infectious diseases.” (2008)
Cui et al. “Effect of Intermediate Hosts on
Emerging Zoonoses.” (2017)
United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a TypicalPassenger Vehicle.” (n.d.) (https://www.epa.
gov/greenvehicles/greenhouse-gas-emissions-typical-passenger-vehicle)
Nowak et al. “Tree and forest effects on air
quality and human health in the UnitedStates.” (2014)
Muehlenbein. “Human-Wildlife Contact andEmerging Infectious Diseases.” (2012)
Johnson et al. “Global shifts in mammalian
population trends reveal key predictors of virus
spillover risk.” (2020)
Civitello et al. “Biodiversity inhibits parasites:
broad evidence for the dilution effect.” (2015)
Wood et al. “Does biodiversity protect humans
against infectious disease?” (2014)
Civitello, David J., Jeremy Cohen, Hiba Fatima,
Neal T. Halstead, Josue Liriano, Taegan A. McMahon, C. Nicole Ortega et al. “Biodiversity inhibits parasites: broad evidence for the dilution
effect.” Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences 112, no. 28 (2015): 8667-8671.
Jones et al. “Global trends in emerging infectious diseases.” (2008)
Jones et al. “Global trends in emerging infectious diseases.” (2008)
Morse et al. “Prediction and prevention of thenext pandemic zoonosis.” (2012)
Woo et al. “Infectious diseases emerging from
Chinese wet-markets: zoonotic origins of severe
respiratory viral infections.” (2006)
Frutos et al. “COVID-19: The Conjunction of
Events Leading to the Coronavirus Pandemic
and Lessons to Learn for Future Threats.”(2020)
WHO, Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)
Situation report-94 https://www.who.int/
docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200423-sitrep-94-covid-19.
pdf?sfvrsn=b8304bf0_4
Chomel et al. “Wildlife, Exotic Pets, andEmerging Zoonoses.” (2007)
Woo et al. “Infectious diseases emerging from
Chinese wet-markets: zoonotic origins of severe
respiratory viral infections.” (2006)
Han et al. “Global patterns of zoonotic diseasein mammals.” (2016)
Challander et al. “International trade andtrafficking in pangolins, 1900–2019.” (2020)
Zhang et al. “Wildlife trade, consumption andconservation awareness in southwest China.”(2008)
Ying et al. “Rethinking game consumption intourism: a case of the 2019 novel coronavirus
pneumonia outbreak in China.” (2020)
FAO. “Sustainable wildlife management
and wild meat.” (n.d.) (http://www.fao.org/
forestry/42038-01680c75fdb9aaee8da6f45c1c38696a5.pdf)
Müller et al. “MERS coronavirus neutralizing
antibodies in camels, Eastern Africa, 19831997.” (2014)
Coad et al. “Towards a sustainable, participatory and inclusive wild meat sector. CIFOR,
Bogor, Indonesia.” (2019)
Van Vliet et al. “Bushmeat and human health:
Assessing the Evidence in tropical and subtropical forests.” (2017)
Kumpel et al. “Ebola and bushmeat: myth andreality.” (2015)
Note: Ebola outbreaks are also closely linked
to passive contacts with wildlife due to greater
penetration of virgin habitats through deforestation. See case study 2 for more information.
WHO. “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome.”

32

33

34
35
36
37
38
39
40

41
42
43

44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54

55
56
57
58
59

60

(n.d.) (https://www.who.int/ith/diseases/sars/en/)“Summary of probable SARS cases with onsetof illness from 1 November 2002 to 31 July
2003.” (2003) (https://www.who.int/csr/sars/
country/table2004_04_21/en/)
World Bank. “People, pathogens and ourplanet.” (2012) (http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/612341468147856529/
pdf/691450ESW0whit0D0ESW120PPPvol120web.pdf)
WHO. “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome.”(n.d.) (https://www.who.int/ith/diseases/sars/
en/)
Bell et al. “Animal origins of SARS coronavirus:
possible links with the international trade insmall carnivores.” (2004)
Bell et al. “Animal origins of SARS coronavirus:
possible links with the international trade insmall carnivores.” (2004)
Wang et al. “SARS-CoV infection in a restaurant from palm civet.” (2004)
Bell et al. “Animal origins of SARS coronavirus:
possible links with the international trade insmall carnivores.” (2004)
Brook & Dobson. “Bats as ‘special’ reservoirs
for emerging zoonotic pathogens.” (2015)
World Bank. “People, pathogens and ourplanet.” (2012) (http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/612341468147856529/
pdf/691450ESW0whit0D0ESW120PPPvol120web.pdf)“World Health Report: SARS” (n.d.) (https://www.who.int/whr/2003/chapter5/en/index4.
html)
Curtis et al. “Classifying drivers of global forest
loss.” (2019)
NYDF Assessment Partners. “Protecting and
Restoring Forests: A Story of Large Commitments yet Limited Progress. New York Declaration on Forests Five-Year Assessment Report.”(2019)
Chatham House. “Agricultural Commodity
Supply Chains Trade, Consumption and Deforestation.” (2016)
Edwards et al. “Maintaining ecosystem function and services in logged tropical forests.”(2014)
IPCC. “IPCC 2019 Climate Change and Land.”(2019)
Curtis et al. “Classifying drivers of global forest
loss.” (2019)
Rogan et al. “Impacts of habitat loss and fragmentation on terrestrial biodiversity.” (2018)
Keesing et al. “Impacts of biodiversity on theemergence and transmission of infectious
diseases.” (2010)
Rulli et al. “The nexus between forest fragmentation in Africa and Ebola virus diseases
outbreaks.” (2017)
Rulli et al. “The nexus between forest fragmentation in Africa and Ebola virus diseases
outbreaks.” (2017)
CDC. “2014-2016 Ebola Outbreak in West Africa.” (2019) (https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/
history/2014-2016-outbreak/index.html)
WHO. “Ebola in the Democratic Republic of theCongo.” (2020) (https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/ebola/drc-2019)
World Bank. “2014-2015 West Africa Ebola
Crisis: Impact Update.” (2016) (https://www.
worldbank.org/en/topic/macroeconomics/
publication/2014-2015-west-africa-ebola-crisis-impact-update)
Office of the United Nations Special Envoy on
Ebola. “Resources for results V.” (2015)
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/
detail/ebola-virus-disease
CDC. “2014-2016 Ebola Outbreak in West Africa.” (2019) (https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/
history/2014-2016-outbreak/index.html)
CDC. “Cost of the Ebola Epidemic.” (n.d.)(https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/pdf/impact-ebola-economy.pdf)
Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. “Guinean
Forests of West Africa Biodiversity Hotspot.”(2015) (https://www.cepf.net/sites/default/
files/en_guinean_forests_ecosystem_profile.
pdf)
Tyukavina et al. “Congo Basin forest loss
dominated by increasing smallholder clearing.”(2018) (https://advances.sciencemag.org/

61
62

63

64

65
66

67
68

69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81

82

83
84
85
86

87
88
89

content/4/11/eaat2993)
World Bank. “Deforestation Trends in theCongo Basin Reconciling Economic Growthand Forest Protection.” (2013)
Rulli et al. “The nexus between forest fragmentation in Africa and Ebola virus disease
outbreaks.” (2017) (https://www.nature.com/
articles/srep41613)
Olivero et al. “Recent loss of closed forests is
associated with Ebola virus disease outbreaks.”(2017) (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-14727-9)
Rulli et al. “The nexus between forest fragmentation in Africa and Ebola virus disease
outbreaks.” (2017) (https://www.nature.com/
articles/srep41613)
Bloomfield et al. “Habitat fragmentation, livelihood behaviors, and contact between people
and nonhuman primates in Africa.” (2020)
Huber et al. “The Economic and Social Burdenof the 2014 Ebola Outbreak in West Africa.”(2018) (https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/infdis/
jiy213/5129071)
CDC. “Cost of the Ebola Epidemic.” (n.d.)(https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/pdf/impact-ebola-economy.pdf)
Food and Agricultural Organization of theUnited Nations. “Impact of the Ebola virus
disease outbreak on market chains and trade of
agricultural products in West Africa.” (2016)
WHO. “Ebolavirus disease fact sheet.” https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ebola-virus-disease
Wang, et al. “From Hendra to Wuhan: what
has been learned in responding to emerging
zoonotic viruses.” (2020)
Brook et al. “Bats as ‘special’ reservoirs for
emerging zoonotic pathogens.” (2015)
Allocati et al. “Bat–man disease transmission:
zoonotic pathogens from wildlife reservoirs tohuman populations.” (2016)
Streicker et al. “Ecological and anthropogenic
drivers of rabies exposure in vampire bats: implications for transmission and control.” (2012)
Amman et al. “Marburgvirus resurgence inKitaka Mine bat population after extermination
attempts, Uganda.” (2014)
Olival. “To Cull, Or Not To Cull, Bat is theQuestion.” (2016)
Plowright et al. “Ecological dynamics of emerging bat virus spillover.” (2015)
Hollenbeck. “Interaction of the role of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations in Emerging
Infectious Diseases.” (2015)
Wiethoelter et al. “Global trends in infectious
diseases at the wildlife-livestock interface.”(2015)
WHO. “Nipah virus” (2018) (https://www.who.
int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/nipah-virus)
Looi & Chua. “Lessons From the Nipah Virus
Outbreak in Malaysia.” (2007)
WHO. “Morbidity and mortality due to Nipahor Nipah-like virus in WHO South-East
Asia Region, 2001-2018.” (n.d.) (https://web.archive.org/web/20180613144643/
http://www.searo.who.int/entity/emerging_diseases/links/morbidity-and-mortality-nipah-sear-2001-2018.pdf?ua=1)
World Bank. “People, pathogens and ourplanet.” (2012) (http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/612341468147856529/
pdf/691450ESW0whit0D0ESW120PPPvol120web.pdf)
WHO. “List of Blueprint priority diseases.”(2018) (http://origin.who.int/blueprint/priority-diseases/en/)
Looi & Chua. “Lessons From the Nipah Virus
Outbreak in Malaysia.” (2007)
Epstein et al. “Nipah virus: Impact, origins, andcauses of emergence.” (2006)
Pulliam et al. “Agricultural intensification,priming for persistence and the emergenceof Nipah virus: a lethal bat-borne zoonosis.”(2011)
Epstein et al. “Nipah virus: Impact, origins, andcauses of emergence.” (2006)
Epstein et al. “Nipah virus: Impact, origins, andcauses of emergence.” (2006)“People, pathogens and our planet.”(2012) (http://documents.worldbank.
org/curated/en/612341468147856529/

37

pdf/691450ESW0whit0D0ESW120PPPvol120web.pdf)
90 Valin H, et al. “The future of food demand:
understanding differences in global economic
models.” (2013)
91 Secretariat of the United Nations Convention to
Combat Desertification. “Global Land Outlook.”(2017)
92 Fraser D., FAO. “Animal welfare and the intensification of animal production.” (2005)
93 Case and death totals as of 31/05/2020. John
Hopkins University. COVID-19 Dashboard.
https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/
opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6
94 WHO. “New WHO estimates: Up to 190 000
people could die of COVID-19 in Africa if notcontrolled.” (2020) (https://www.afro.who.
int/news/new-who-estimates-190-000-peoplecould-die-covid-19-africa-if-not-controlled)
95 CDC. “2009 H1N1 Pandemic.” (2009)(https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/2009-h1n1-pandemic.html)
96 Note: the exact number of deaths attributed toswine flu is not known, with only 18,449 deaths
confirmed by the WHO, but CDC modelling
estimates up to 575,400.
97 Asian Development Bank. “An Updated Assessment of the Economic Impact of COVID-19.”(2020)
98 Bloomberg. “Coronavirus Could Cost the
Global Economy $2.7 Trillion. Here’s How.”(2020) (https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2020-coronavirus-pandemic-global-economic-risk/)
99 IMF. “World Economic outlook: April 2020:
the great lockdown” (2020)
100 IMF. “World Economic outlook: April 2020:
the great lockdown” (2020)
101 ILO. “ILO Monitor: COVID-19 and the world ofwork.” (2020) (https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/
groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/documents/briefingnote/wcms_743146.pdf)
102 Food Security Information Network Secretariat. “Food Security Information Network
Secretariat.” (2020)
103 United Nations. “Policy Brief 70: The Impact of
COVID-19 on Indigenous Peoples.” (2020)
104 Brazilian Indigenous Peoples’ Association. “# 1
Indigenous lives and Covid-19.” (2020)
105 United Nations. “Policy Brief 70: The Impact of
COVID-19 on Indigenous Peoples.” (2020)
106 Forest Peoples. “Increased hunger and poverty
among the Batwa amidst COVID-19 in Uganda.” (2020) (https://www.forestpeoples.org/
en/increased-hunger-and-poverty-for-Batwain-Uganda-amid-covid-19)
107 UNFPA. “Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic
on Family Planning and Ending Gender-based
Violence, Female Genital Mutilation and Child
Marriage Pandemic threatens achievement of
the Transformative Results committed to by
UNFPA” (2020) (https://www.unfpa.org/sites/
default/files/resource-pdf/COVID-19_impact_
brief_for_UNFPA_24_April_2020_1.pdf)
108 UNFPA. “COVID-19: a gender lens protecting
sexual and reproductive health and rights andpromoting gender equality.” (2020)
109 Plan International. “How will COVID-19 affectgirls and young women?” (2020) (https://plan-international.org/emergencies/covid-19faqs-girls-women#Girls)
110 Center for Strategic and International Studies.
“Extremist Groups Stepping up Operations
during the Covid-19 Outbreak in Sub-SaharanAfrica.” (2020)
111 United Nations Secretary General. “Secretary-General’s remarks to the Security Council
on the COVID-19 Pandemic.” (2020)
112 IMF. “COVID-19 Poses Formidable Threat for
Fragile States in the Middle East and North
Africa.” (2020)
113 World Economic Forum. “We urgently needmajor cooperation on global security in the
COVID-19 era” (2020) (https://www.weforum.
org/agenda/2020/04/we-need-major-cooperation-on-global-security-in-the-covid-19-era/)
114 Reuters. “Exclusive: Brazil scales back environmental enforcement amid coronavirus.”(2020) (https://www.reuters.com/article/
us-health-coronavirus-brazil-environment/
exclusive-brazil-scales-back-environmen-

WWF INTERNATIONAL 2020

tal-enforcement-amid-coronavirus-idUSKBN21E15H)
115 Yale School of Forestry and Environmental
Studies. “Amid Coronavirus Lockdown, a Spikein Illegal Logging in Tunisia.” (2020) (https://
e360.yale.edu/digest/amid-coronavirus-lockdown-a-spike-in-illegal-logging-in-tunisia)
116 Wildlife Conservation Society. “COVID-19
fueling an uptick in poaching.” (2020)(https://newsroom.wcs.org/News-Releases/
articleType/ArticleView/articleId/14039/
COVID-19-FUELING-AN-UPTICK-IN-POACHING-Three-Critically-Endangered-Giant-IbisCambodias-National-Bird-Killed-in-ProtectedArea.aspx)
117 Ghana Gurung, Pers. comm. Based on apreliminary review of unpublished case datafrom 11 protected areas in Nepal conducted by
the Department of National Parks and Wildlife
Conservation (DNPWC) and WWF-Nepal.
118 “EPA Announces Enforcement Discretion Policy for COVID-19 Pandemic” (2020) (https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-announces-enforcement-discretion-policy-covid-19-pandemic)
119 Wilkinson, D. & Chavez, L. “How Covid-19
Could Impact the Climate Crisis.” (2020)(https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/04/16/
how-covid-19-could-impact-climate-crisis)
120 Caillaud, D., Levréro, F., Cristescu, R., Gatti,
S., Dewas, M., Douadi, M., Gautier-Hion, A.,
Raymond, M. & Ménard, N. (2006). Gorillasusceptibility to Ebola virus: the cost of sociality. Current Biology, 16, R489–R491
121 WHO, “H5N1 avian influenza: Timeline ofmajor events” (2012)
122 Buck, J.C. & Ripple, W.J. “Infectious Agents
Trigger Trophic Cascades” (2017)
123 IPCC. “IPCC 2019 Climate Change and Land.”(2019)
124 Note that other sources estimate even higher
levels of emissions
125 IPCC. “IPCC 2019 Climate Change and Land.”(2019)
126 IPCC. “IPCC Special Report on Global Warmingof 1.5˚C Chapter 5.” (2018)
127 IPCC. “IPCC Special Report on Global Warmingof 1.5˚C Chapter 5.” (2018)
128 Report of the Secretary-General. “Special
edition: progress towards the Sustainable
Development Goals.” (2019)
129 New York Declaration on Forests. “Progressassessment.” (2019)
130 “Aichi Biodiversity Targets.” (2020) (https://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/)
131 Protected Planet Aichi Target 11 Dashboard.
(https://www.protectedplanet.net/target-11-dashboard)
132 IUCN. “The World Now Protects 15% of Its
Land, but Crucial Biodiversity Zones Left Out.”(2016) (https://www.iucn.org/news/secretariat/201609/world-now-protects-15-its-landcrucial-biodiversity-zones-left-out)
133 Rights and Resources Initiative. “Who owns theworld’s land?” (2015)
134 Zhang et al. “Wildlife trade, consumption andconversation awareness in southwest China.”(2008)
135 Horm et al. “Influenza A (H5N1) virus surveillance at live poultry markets, Cambodia, 2011.”(2013)
136 Rogerson. “Forest 500 annual report 2018 - thecountdown to 2020.” (2019)
137 New York Declaration on Forests Progress
Assessment. “Goal 2.” (2019) (https://forestdeclaration.org/goals/goal-2)
138 New York Declaration on Forests. “Progressassessment.” (2019)
139 Reducing emissions from deforestation andforest degradation and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests andenhancement of forest carbon stocks.
140 Green Climate Fund. “Accelerating REDD+
implementation.” (2019)
141 New York Declaration on Forests. “Progressassessment.” (2019)
142 “How do Great Britain and the world viewclimate change and Covid-19?” (2020)(https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/
two-thirds-britons-believe-climate-change-serious-coronavirus-and-majority-want-climate-prioritised)

143 Visconti & Young. “Do natural disasters change
risk perceptions and policy preferences aboutclimate change?” (2019)
144 Note: these figures represent the total size ofthe country’s recovery and stimulus plans,
including both rescue funds and stimulus packages, and therefore not all could be applicable
to a “green and just recovery” process.
145 NHS. “NHS army of volunteers to start protecting vulnerable from coronavirus in England.”(2020) https://www.england.nhs.uk/2020/04/
nhs-volunteer-army-now-ready-to-supporteven-more-people/
146 WWF, “The critical role of policies for deforestation- and conversion-free supply chains.”(n.d.)
147 “Companies alone cannot tackle deforestation.”(2019) (https://www.ft.com/content/f9f03ea6b850-11e9-8a88-aa6628ac896c)
148 Note: CDP Forests is recommended as athird-party reporting platform that is fullyaligned with AFi principles and guidance on
deforestation and conversion.
149 “New framework offers clear guidance for turning deforestation & conversion-free commitments into action.” (2019) (https://wwf.panda.
org/our_work/forests/?348210/New-framework-offers-clear-guidance-for-turning-deforestation--conversion-free-commitments-into-action)
150 WWF, “Landscapes: collaborating for sustainability at scale.” (2016) (https://www.wwf.org.
uk/sites/default/files/2017-02/Landscapes%20-%20collaborating%20for%20sustainability%20at%20scale%20-%20M&S%20and%20
WWF%202017.pdf)
151 UNDP, “Value beyond value chains.” (n.d.)(https://www.greencommodities.org/content/
gcp/en/home/global-initiatives/v2b.html)
152 “WWF Forest Solution” (n.d.)“http://forestsolutions.panda.org/approach/sustainable-landscapes
153 Keating. Forbes. “EU will fight COVID
recession with green investment.” (2020)(https://www.forbes.com/sites/davekeating/2020/05/27/eu-will-fight-covid-recessionwith-green-investment/#766cf8923bbd)
154 Takeo & Hirokawa. Bloomberg. “Japan Doubles
Down to Deliver World’s ‘Biggest’ Stimulus
Package.” (2020) (https://www.bloomberg.
com/news/articles/2020-05-27/japan-to-unveil-another-1-trillion-in-stimulus-document-shows)
155 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/
may/14/new-zealand-budget-robertson-laysout-50bn-plan-to-return-jobs-to-pre-covid-19levels
156 For example, large Canadian companies will
be required to “publish annual climate-related
disclosure reports consistent with the Financial
Stability Board’s Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, including how their
future operations will support environmental
sustainability and national climate goals”
157 For example, the Science Based Targets initiative and the European Green Taxonomy measure the “climate impact” of recovery money.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/
researchers-will-track-whether-coronavirus-recovery-spending-benefits-climate/
158 See the New Deal for Nature and People
https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/newdeal_infographicnew2020_v8.pdf
159 Subsidies to agriculture, water, fossil fuels andfisheries, and to production inputs (e.g. energy
and fertilizers) which currently encourageover-exploitation of natural resources, amountto US$4-6 trillion globally per year (OECD,
2017; Andres et al., 2019; Coady et al., 2019).
This is massively larger than the financial flows
currently directed toward conservation and restoration of the biosphere, which are US$67.8
billion globally per year (OECD, 2020).
160 INTO THE WILD: Integrating nature into
investment strategies: https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/report_wwf_
france___axa_into_the_wild_may_2019__
dv_1.pdf

© Karine Aigner/WWF-US© 2020Paper 100% recycled© 1986 Panda symbol WWF – World Wide Fund for Nature (Formerly World Wildlife Fund)® “WWF” is a WWF Registered Trademark. WWF, Rue Mauverney 28, 1196 Gland,
Switzerland
For contact details and further information, please visit our international
website at www.panda.org