key: cord-0986983-clxs49uh authors: Borzée, Amaël; McNeely, Jeffrey; Magellan, Kit; Miller, Jennifer R.B.; Porter, Lindsay; Dutta, Trishna; Kadinjappalli, Krishnakumar P.; Sharma, Sandeep; Shahabuddin, Ghazala; Aprilinayati, Fikty; Ryan, Gerard E.; Hughes, Alice; Mutalib, Aini Hasanah Abd; Wahab, Ahmad Zafir Abdul; Bista, Damber; Chavanich, Suchana Apple; Chong, Ju Lian; Gale, George A.; Ghaffari, Hanyeh; Ghimirey, Yadav; Jayaraj, Vijaya Kumaran; Khatiwada, Ambika Prasad; Khatiwada, Monsoon; Krishna, Murali; Lwin, Ngwe; Paudel, Prakash Kumar; Sadykova, Chinara; Savini, Tommaso; Shrestha, Bharat Babu; Strine, Colin T.; Sutthacheep, Makamas; Wong, Ee Phin; Yeemin, Thamasak; Zahirudin, Natasha Zulaika; Zhang, Li title: COVID-19 highlights the need for more effective wildlife trade legislation date: 2020-10-07 journal: Trends Ecol Evol DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2020.10.001 sha: ef292db1f73d279387890814161fc4b47b290819 doc_id: 986983 cord_uid: clxs49uh Zoonosis-based epidemics are inevitable unless we revisit our relationship with the natural world, protect habitats and regulate wildlife trade, including live animals and non-sustenance products. To prevent future zoonoses, governments must establish effective legislation addressing wildlife trade, protection of habitats and reduction of the wildlife-livestock-human interface. the trade of wildlife, expand protection for native ecosystems and reduce consumer demand for wildlife parts and products to lower the risk and severity of future zoonotic diseases (Fig. 1 ). Recognizing that COVID-19 may have emerged from the wildlife trade [5] , several governments have enacted new or more effective regulations to control its trade. In the People's Republic of China, the National People's Congress adopted legislation banning the consumption of any field-harvested or captive-bred wildlife, thereby closing the market for the domestic wildlife trade [6] . In the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development ordered a reinforcement of wildlife trade regulations (instruction No. 29/CT-TTg) and lawmakers in the Republic of Korea capitalized on the general public agreement that COVID-19 is linked to animal trade by banning imports of several invasive alien species (notice 2020-61 in Biodiversity Conservation and Use Act 21-2). These recent actions ultimately support wildlife conservation by reducing pressure on wildlife populations. They also provide examples that other countries can consider when evaluating how best to protect against future zoonotic episodes. We call for the regulation of, and encourage the consideration of bans on, the wildlife trade, specifically live animals and non-sustenance wildlife products. A crucial initial step towards reducing the wildlife trade and the harvesting of animals from the wild is the widespread development and enactment of regulations that control human use of wildlife [7] . Governments must clearly articulate, implement and enforce these regulations so that they do indeed deter the demand for wildlife and wildlife products. To be effective, regulations must also be sufficiently iucnredlist.org). The wildlife-human interface is becoming increasingly intricate, resulting into ever greater contact between humans and wildlife. The wildlife trade in Asia is supported by live markets in most population centres that include sales of both native and exotic species. These animals are often housed in overcrowded and unsanitary conditions that place both sellers and buyers under high risk of pathogens and zoonotic diseases and create the perfect conditions for pathogens to jump the species barrier [8] . Wildlife markets threaten the survival of a wide range of species, contributing to the extinction crisis looming over most of the Asia wild fauna [9] . In addition, biodiversity-rich forests, wetlands and aquatic resources throughout Asia are being cleared and converted to meet the growing demands of increasing human populations. The J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f Journal Pre-proof resulting fragmentation of natural habitats is bringing domestic animals into closer contact with wild animals that may be reservoirs of zoonotic pathogens that can be easily transmitted to rural people and then more broadly throughout the global human population ( [7] ; Fig. 1 ). Thus, regulations and their proper implementation are also required to manage interactions between domestic animals and wild species, reducing the risk of transmission from animals to humans [3] . Conservation policies that should protect threatened species from extinction and humans from zoonotic diseases are slow to be implemented despite urgent calls [10] and ecosystem degradation further reduces their potential for disease regulation [3] . Therefore, the wildlife trade needs to be better regulated, the list of species protected from trade needs to be extended to taxonomic groups beyond mammals and terrestrial habitats, and forest and aquatic ecosystems need to be protected against fragmentation and degradation from agriculture, urbanisation and domestic animals. In the absence of such regulatory measures, the emergence and spread of novel zoonotic pathogens and future epidemics are not only likely but inevitable: the open trade of animals in wildlife markets creates ideal conditions for further spillover events and could result in zoonotic pathogens that are even more economically and socially damaging than COVID-19. The legal and regulatory basis of the wildlife trade must now be strengthened and complemented by the development, enaction and implementation of necessary supporting measures. We recommend both proactive and reactive measures, including budgetary support, staff training, monitoring technologies and leveraging social media to build public support for wildlife protection; in addition to ensuring an informed, independent and transparent judiciary, supported by appropriate penalties. A general policy of ecosystem restoration is needed at a J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f Journal Pre-proof broad scale for most countries [3] . In Asia in particular, some of the specific issues that need to be addressed immediately to decrease the risk of novel zoonotic pathogens include the consumption of wildlife and the trade of species for farming and the pet trade, which facilitate the human-wildlife interface [11] . A total ban of the wildlife trade would impact millions of people, in Asia and globally, who depend on the wildlife trade for subsistence [12] . Therefore, the wildlife trade should not to be placed under an immediate blanket ban [13] . The global pandemic has already had a disproportionately high negative impact on economically disadvantaged, migrant and rural populations. Furthermore, an ill-considered blanket ban would mean that some of the world's most vulnerable human populations might not be able to provide for their families. This might possibly result in further unregulated harvesting of wild plants and animals that could change pressure on species, and potentially result in a higher transmission rate of zoonotic pathogens [14] . Examples of such transmissions include HIV-AIDS and Ebola, in which the viruses jumped to humans from chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and (likely) blue-duiker (Philantomba monticola), respectively, probably as a result of wildmeat consumption [7] . Therefore, in parallel with enforcing appropriate wildlife trade bans and strengthening wildlife protection, governments should work with local communities to create and stabilize alternative means of subsistence, as well as compensatory mechanisms, at local and regional scales. Broader bans may also be necessary and appropriate once these alternatives are in place. [15] . Enforcement of all wildlife laws and regulations must be reviewed and strengthened, and the illegal and legal wildlife trade must be effectively monitored. However, such controls and regulations of wildlife trade must be implemented, keeping in mind the globally accepted principles of social equity and sustainability to which governments have committed. We encourage the governments in countries where wild meat may be a key part of the staple diet and primary source of protein to make efforts to ensure that species are hunted only when such trade can be sustainably monitored and controlled (including mandates to prove legal origin) to provide a safer future for humans and wild species. We also invite the governments of regions beyond Asia where wild meat is consumed for subsistence, wild animal populations are harvested and live markets are present to examine their existing legislation and consider revisions in accordance with these recommendations. All wildlife trade must be regulated to ensure that what is sold for consumption minimizes the risk of passing zoonotic diseases to humans. Emerging viral zoonoses from wildlife associated with animalbased food systems: risks and opportunities Global trends in emerging infectious diseases The role of ecosystems in mitigation and management of Covid-19 and other zoonoses Ecology and economics for pandemic prevention A novel bat coronavirus closely related to SARS-CoV-2 contains natural insertions at the S1/S2 cleavage site of the spike protein Permanently ban wildlife consumption The nexus between forest fragmentation in Africa and Ebola virus disease outbreaks A review of zoonotic infection risks associated with the wild meat trade in Malaysia Understanding the drivers of Southeast Asian biodiversity loss Time for Korean wildlife conservation Giant salamanders: farmed yet endangered Inadequacies in establishing CITES trade bans The international wild bird trade: what's wrong with blanket bans? The relationship between physiological stress and wildlife disease: consequences for health and conservation Marine mammal zoonoses: a review of disease manifestations We are grateful to Benjamin Michael Marshall for help with the figure.