Connecting Global Priorities Biodiversity and Human Health

assessments – including wildlife disease risk
analyses – can provide a more full understanding
of potential disease risks to people, animals and
the environment (Karesh et al. 2012).
3.3 Economic impacts
The high economic burden of disease – which
has the potential to grow as anthropogenic
activities increase risks of disease emergence and
globalization enables rapid spread – may hinder
development progress. Reactive disease control
efforts have proven vastly expensive, as seen with
SARS in 2003 (US$ 30–50 billion), Nipah virus
in 1998 (over US$ 500 million) and many other
recent disease outbreaks, and pandemics have
been identified as having potentially catastrophic
impacts that are global in scale (World Bank
2012). Over the past two decades, the cost of
emerging diseases alone (in humans) has reached
the hundreds of billions of dollars, and regionally
endemic diseases have persistent financial
implications, often to low- or middle-income
populations (Karesh et al. 2012). While emerging
diseases may have acute costs from short-term
outbreaks, they also have the potential to become
established in human populations and yield longterm
costs. While pathogens causing disease
in humans are primarily the focus of human
infectious disease efforts, even non-zoonotic
diseases in livestock can severely threaten health
and livelihoods of smallholder farmers through
loss of income and food security, and/or control
costs.
Costs of disease may be borne by both the
international community and local communities
affected by disease-related disruptions. For
example, based on UN estimates over US$ 600
million are needed to end the Ebola outbreak in
West Africa, which began in December of 2013
but was not detected by health authorities until
March of 2014 (Baize et al. 2014). In addition
to the direct costs of response and control, the
outbreak has the potential to yield extremely
high indirect costs, with travel, trade, and other
productivity also gravely affected and resources
directed to fighting Ebola, potentially at the cost
of treating other health threats. As the Ebola crisis
highlights, public health infrastructure globally is
largely reactive, with preventive efforts frequently
hampered by limited knowledge about the source
of disease (as also exemplified by the unknown
animal–human transmission pathway for the
Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS-CoV)
and the pathogens harboured in our environment
that could be detrimental to humans. However,
recent studies suggest that approximately three
quarters of recently emerging diseases in humans
have come from wildlife, with most of them caused
by viruses, and thus provides a starting point
for predicting and preventing future emergence
efforts (Jones et al. 2008; Taylor et al. 2001). The
cost of detecting 85% of viral diversity in mammals
has been estimated at US$ 1.4 billion, or US$140
million per year over ten years (Anthony et al.
2013). While this represents a significant sum, it
is only a small fraction of the cost of an emerging
diseases event and its early detection may enable
actions to prevent spill-over of some pathogens
from animals to humans. Furthermore, routine
disease surveillance of animals may provide
sentinel benefits for humans for early detection
of both infectious and non-infectious (e.g. heavy
metals in ecosystems) health risks.
The efficiency gains of a One Health approach
to zoonotic disease were recently highlighted in
a report by the World Bank (2012) which also
highlighted the limited investments in One Health
at present. Specifically, it noted very low actual
investments for wildlife health surveillance are
being made, and estimated that between US$ 1.9
and 3.4 billion per year were needed (over ten
years) to bring low- and middle-income countries
up to WHO and OIE standards to support more
integrated and prepared national human and
animal health systems. Many low-income nations
are also biodiversity-rich although public health
infrastructure is poor, creating “hotspots” for
disease emergence (see infectious disease chapter
in this volume and Jones et al. 2008). As we move
toward the SDGs, these should be considered
necessary investments for the reduction of the
health burden. In addition to human health
benefits, biodiversity conservation efforts can also
benefit from a more integrated disease surveillance
approach. For example, rabies is a neglected
Connecting Global Priorities: Biodiversity and Human Health
147