A new review calls for prevention strategies tailored to specific human–animal interfaces, supported by behavior-centered risk communication under a One Health framework.
Zoonotic diseases in China arise not only from unusual contact with wildlife, but from routine activities including farming, food handling, animal trade, and recreation, according to a new review published in Science in One Health. The study synthesizes evidence on 93 zoonotic diseases currently monitored by China's public health, agricultural, and forestry sectors, and argues that meaningful risk reduction will require shifting from reactive outbreak response toward earlier prevention at the human–animal–environment interface.
The review, led by researchers at Columbia University, EcoHealth Alliance, and the Future Earth Health Knowledge-Action Network, drew on peer-reviewed and gray literature in both English and Chinese. It mapped contact pathways across a broad range of animal groups—including bats, rodents, livestock, companion animals, non-human primates, and disease vectors—and identified the populations and settings where exposure risk is highest.
High-risk populations and interfaces
The review identifies smallholder farmers, herders, rural residents, market vendors, and workers in informal or low-biosecurity settings as groups facing particularly frequent exposure. Risk varies substantially across animal groups and socio-ecological settings: bat-related risk often emerges not through direct consumption but through habitat overlap with human settlements, cave visitation, and indirect contact via domestic animals; rodent-associated exposure occurs commonly through excreta, contaminated soil and water, and ectoparasites in homes and workplaces; and the rapid growth of the companion animal sector and exotic pet keeping creates additional pathways for contact with wildlife-associated pathogens.
Based on these patterns, the authors focused their risk communication analysis on four priority interfaces: domestic animals in households and markets; wildlife management in rural settings; rodents and bats in residential environments; and nature-based tourism and cave recreation.
Gaps in surveillance and communication
The review highlights several blind spots in current systems. Surveillance remains concentrated on recognized diseases and formal sectors, while informal wildlife trade, exotic pet ownership, and traditional medicine practices are poorly characterized. Behavioral data are limited, making it harder to identify high-risk practices early or to target prevention precisely.
On risk communication, the authors find that many existing efforts are emergency-driven and one-directional, focused on short-term compliance rather than sustained behavior change. Messages that are not adapted to local economic conditions, cultural practices, or access to services are less likely to produce durable results—and may, in some cases, produce unintended consequences, such as stigmatizing wildlife in ways that overlook the importance of biodiversity to ecosystem and human health.
What the evidence suggests works better
Across the four interfaces examined, the review identifies several recurring features of more effective communication: delivery through trusted local messengers such as community leaders, veterinarians, and health workers; participatory and dialogue-based formats that build local ownership; practical relevance to livelihoods and service access; and messages that connect health and conservation goals rather than framing them in opposition.
China's experience with major outbreaks, including SARS, H7N9 avian influenza, and COVID-19, demonstrates the country's capacity for rapid communication and community engagement. The authors argue that these strengths, combined with recent legislative updates reinforcing risk communication in China's Law on the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases (effective April 2025), present a timely opportunity to build more proactive and prevention-oriented systems.
Toward upstream prevention
The review concludes that closing the gap between current reactive approaches and earlier prevention will require stronger One Health coordination across health, agricultural, and environmental sectors; better cross-sector data sharing; integration of behavioral and ecological insights into surveillance; and communication strategies adapted to specific interfaces, local practices, and population needs.
The review calls for a tiered communication approach that combines broad preventive guidance with targeted, interface-specific strategies where evidence allows, in alignment with One Health principles.
