PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 42745009

What health are we talking about? Biodiversity as the missing link between One Health and Planetary Health.

Abstract

Health has become a central term in global sustainability policy, yet it is often used without sufficient conceptual precision. Public health, global health, One Health, EcoHealth, GeoHealth, and Planetary Health each emphasize different dimensions of the relationship between humans, animals, and the environment. In policy contexts, however, these distinctions are frequently blurred. We argue that biodiversity is often treated as an environmental co-benefit rather than as a foundational determinant of health. This weakens the implementation of One Health approaches because biodiversity underpins disease regulation, immune system development, food and water security, ecosystem functioning, resilience, and climate adaptation. At the same time, biodiversity provides a critical link between One Health and broader Planetary Health challenges, including global environmental change and the transgression of planetary boundaries. Future health and sustainability policies should move beyond generic references to health and explicitly recognize biodiversity as part of preventive health systems.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jonas Geschke, Simone Sommer, Michael Schloter. 2026-09-15. What health are we talking about? Biodiversity as the missing link between One Health and Planetary Health.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-026-02487-8

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Protecting tropical forests is more cost-effective for biodiversity and climate than restoration.

Halting deforestation and promoting restoration are at the core of strategies to confront the biodiversity and climate crises in tropical forests. Avoiding forest disturbances is also critically important but has received far less attention, and there is a lack of clarity about the relative cost-effectiveness of these three interventions. We compare the biodiversity and carbon benefits and costs associated with each intervention, comparing observed and counterfactual outcomes based on in-depth field assessments and high-resolution remote sensing in the Brazilian Amazon deforestation frontier. Avoidance interventions delivered the greatest benefits and were more cost-effective than restoration, with results being robust to a range of benefit and cost assumptions. However, combined interventions delivered the greatest gains and were essential to reverse biodiversity and carbon losses.

Biodiversity

Operationalizing Local Ecological Knowledge for Aquatic Biodiversity Conservation: A Systematic Review and Management Framework.

Effective conservation and management of aquatic biodiversity is severely constrained by the absence of long-term ecological data in small-scale, tropical, and data-poor fisheries, where roughly one-quarter to one-third of freshwater fish species and 37.5% of elasmobranchs are threatened with extinction once Data Deficient species are accounted for. Conventional monitoring and stock-assessment tools are often financially and technically inaccessible in these systems, leaving managers without the evidence needed to prioritize conservation action or implement precautionary governance. Local Ecological Knowledge (LEK) is a largely underutilized resource for natural resource management that can provide temporal depth, spatial resolution, and species-specific ecological insights unavailable from scientific records. We conducted a systematic review and bibliometric synthesis of 60 peer-reviewed studies (1997-2025) applying LEK to assess fish conservation status, examining how, where, and through what methods this knowledge has been used. Our analysis identifies four complementary pathways through which LEK informs conservation management: reconstructing multi-decadal population changes, documenting spatial contraction and habitat loss, detecting extreme rarity and local extirpation, and characterizing intrinsic sensitivity to exploitation based on life-history traits. Despite growing methodological rigor, freshwater systems and African fisheries remain critically underrepresented, and formal integration of LEK into fisheries governance and biodiversity assessment remains the exception rather than the rule. We propose a practical three-stage framework to operationalize LEK within existing management and conservation systems. Recognizing fishing communities as legitimate co-producers of ecological knowledge is both scientifically necessary and an equity imperative for achieving global biodiversity commitments under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

Biodiversity

Orchard netting impacts on biodiversity leading to cascading effects at the ecosystem level.

Agriculture must ensure food production without further compromising the ecosystem functions upon which it depends. Agricultural practices should therefore avoid harming farmland biodiversity, especially of taxa that supply the key ecosystem services (e.g. pollination, pest control and nutrient uptake) that ultimately support crop production. Orchards are among the largest permanent plantations worldwide and are increasingly characterised by the spread of plastic nets used to protect fruits/nuts from either abiotic (anti-hail, anti-rain, shade nets) or biotic (exclusion nets) hazards. Despite having received little attention to date, these nets may impact natural communities, acting both as physical barriers and as drivers of habitat changes to which biota must respond. Species-level responses to netting depend on the organism's ability to enter the netted environment and successfully exploit available resources. Net-mediated ecological filtering and plastic behavioural responses may alter species interactions, leading to cascading ecological impacts that may create species-poorer 'netted communities' with simplified ecological networks. Such changes may erode biological control potential, other ecosystem functions, and overall system stability. We conducted a systematic review on the effects of protection nets on biota, and reported novel empirical evidence on anti-hail nets' impacts on communities of orchard-dwelling birds, flower-visiting insects, and rodents. In total, we identified 48 studies from the literature, however this literature was strongly biased towards apple orchards, western countries, and pest taxa. Net deployment was highly effective in deterring target pest species, in some cases regardless of their original function, as even weather-protection nets limited pest populations. Side effects on non-target taxa were also often reported, such as decreases in pollinators and natural enemies, and/or increases in secondary pests or microbial diseases. However, most assessments largely disregarded non-pest taxa and the broader ecological consequences of netting. The few studies that addressed the effects of nets at the guild/community level, including our empirical study, confirmed that orchard netting resulted in species-poor assemblages, with possible ecosystem-level consequences. We propose that future assessments should pay more attention to the indirect effects of netting on non-target taxa, and on the supply of crop-supporting ecosystem services mediated by wild species occurring in agroecosystems. Due to the trade-offs between these services and net-mediated crop protection, integrated alternatives should be tested to improve the environmental sustainability of food production and biodiversity conservation in farmed landscapes.

Biodiversity