Abstract
The ecology of zoonotic, including vector-borne, diseases in urban social-ecological systems is influenced by complex interactions among human and environmental factors. Several characteristics contribute to the emergence and spread of infectious diseases in urban places, such as high human population densities, favorable habitat for vectors, and humans’ close proximity to animals and their pathogens. On the other hand, urban living can contribute to the improvement of public health through better access to health services and creation of ecological and technological infrastructure that reduces disease burdens. Therefore, urbanization creates a disease ecology paradox through the interplay of urban health penalties and advantages for individual and community outcomes. To address this contradiction, we advocate a holistic Urban One Health perspective for managing urban systems, especially their green spaces and animal populations, in ways that more effectively control the spread of zoonotic diseases. This view should be coupled with an Ecology with Cities approach which emphasizes actionable science needed for urban planning, management and policymaking; developing disease and vector surveillance programs using citizen and community science methods; and improving education and communication actions that help diverse stakeholders understand the complexities of urban disease ecology. Such measures will enable scholars from many disciplines to collaborate with professionals, government officials, and others to tackle challenges of the urban disease paradox and create more sustainable, health-promoting environments.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The emergence and spread of zoonotic diseases in social-ecological systems are determined by many variables including those of human populations, infrastructure, public health systems, and pathogens (Morse et al. 2012; Johnson et al. 2015a; Plowright et al. 2017; Gibb et al. 2020). Further, because zoonotic diseases are transmitted directly to humans from vertebrate animals (livestock, pets, and wildlife), and through vectors such as ticks, mosquitoes and rats, disease dynamics are strongly determined by many ecological characteristics of animals’ populations (abundance, distribution, behaviors, movement, etc.), communities (species richness, interspecific interactions, etc.), and interactions with people (Karesh et al. 2012; Johnson et al. 2015b; McMahon et al. 2018; Keesing and Ostfeld 2021). Urbanization alters these variables and other environmental conditions (e.g., climate, food and habitat availability; landscape structure; waste accumulation; water flow), all of which interact to affect disease risk for human and non-human residents (Bradley and Altizer 2007; Gottdenker et al. 2014; Lõhmus and Balbus 2015; Hassell et al. 2017; McMahon et al. 2018; Combs et al. 2022). Because urbanization continues to increase around the world, securing urban public health is a growing societal priority, especially in context of preventing future pandemics (Alirol et al. 2011; Neiderud 2015; de Leeuw 2020; Connolly et al. 2021).
Zoonotic disease dynamics in urban systems are particularly complex because of the multivariate host-pathogen-environment-human interactions occurring across spatiotemporal scales in highly heterogeneous landscapes (Douglas 2012; LaDeau et al. 2015; Hassell et al. 2017; Santiago-Alarcon and MacGregor-Fors 2020; Combs et al. 2022). Further, various characteristics of urban systems may have contrasting influences on biodiversity, disease risk, and human health, leading to management tradeoffs and localized, site-specific dynamics that are difficult to generalize and predict (Douglas 2012; Gottdenker et al. 2014; LaDeau et al. 2015; Lõhmus and Balbus 2015; Rothenburger et al. 2017; Marselle et al. 2021; Combs et al. 2022). Cities, in particular, have traditionally been considered as facilitating the spillover and spread of zoonotic pathogens due to higher density of large human populations living closely with zoonotic reservoirs (Alirol et al. 2011; Neiderud 2015; Hassell et al. 2017; Rothenburger et al. 2017). Sanitation problems, social inequalities in health care, and lack of local knowledge can increase the risk of infectious disease transmission (Alirol et al. 2011; Krystosik et al. 2020). At the same time, urban living often provides better access to health services and health-promoting social interactions (Johnson 2006; Hotez 2017). Abundance of disease-causing agents may be reduced in urban areas due to adequate sanitation systems, more effective disease surveillance, and management afforded by urban economies and governments (Alirol et al. 2011). Also, urbanization can reduce human contact with wildlife and their pathogens, limiting the risk of spillover events. On the other hand, unplanned urbanization or de-urbanization (i.e., abandonment of urbanized areas) can favor the proliferation of disease vectors such as mosquitoes and urban-adapted rodents (Bradley and Altizer 2007; Lõhmus and Balbus 2015; Eskew and Olival 2018). Reconciling these contrasting effects of urbanization on disease vectors and human health, i.e., urban health penalties versus urban health advantages (Vlahov et al. 2005; Segurado et al. 2016), exemplifies the challenge of unraveling, much less reducing, the causes of zoonotic disease burdens in diverse urban systems around the globe.
Deeper understanding of this complex urban disease ecology paradox will be facilitated by a holistic view of disease dynamics in urban social-ecological systems. Such a perspective is provided by One Health, which emphasizes that human, animal and environmental factors need to be simultaneously considered in a unified way to effectively understand, prevent, and control the emergence and spread of zoonotic infectious diseases (Cunningham et al. 2017; CDC 2018; Ellwanger et al. 2021). The objective of this article is to discuss urban health penalties and advantages, and develop an Urban One Health approach to examine the paradoxical complexity of urban zoonotic disease ecology (de Leeuw 2020). Further, because actions at local (e.g., city, neighborhood) levels are crucial for managing social-ecological variables affecting animal populations and disease risk, we advocate linking Urban One Health to an Ecology with Cities perspective which promotes collaborative activities with a diverse audience, including decision-makers, teachers, scientists, and other community members, to study, improve and communicate about urban environments (Byrne 2022). By adopting and coupling these two perspectives, we suggest that urban ecologists, scholars from other disciplines, and diverse professionals will be better able to examine the complexities of disease ecology in urban settings and help communities create healthier and more sustainable urban social-ecological systems. This will be particularly relevant to environmental justice programs that seek to address the disproportionate health burdens too often experienced by marginalized residents and developing regions (Bowser and Cid 2020; Lindahl and Magnusson 2020; Schell et al. 2020; Gruetzmacher et al. 2021).
Urban health penalties
A key cause of urban health penalties is increased transmission of zoonotic diseases due to the close coexistence of humans and zoonotic species (Reolon et al. 2004; Sormunen et al. 2020). Many disease-carrying animals thrive in urban settings and transmit diverse pathogens to humans that cause diseases such as cryptococcosis (from pigeons), leptospirosis (from rats), leishmaniasis (from dogs/sandflies), and hydatidosis (from dogs) (Kobayashi et al. 2005; Pimentel et al. 2015; Minter et al. 2019; Ribeiro et al. 2019a; Saldanha-Elias et al. 2019; Cociancic et al. 2020; Desvars-Larrive et al. 2020). Increased pathogen and vector densities are often facilitated by poor infrastructure and deficient sanitation of trash and sewage (Bradley and Altizer 2007; Eskew and Olival 2018; Ellwanger et al. 2021). For example, in Brazil, the proliferation of urban-adapted mosquitoes (e.g., Aedes aegypti) associated with high human density exacerbated the 2015–2016 Zika epidemic, and increased the circulation of chikungunya, West Nile, dengue, and yellow fever viruses (Lima-Camara 2016; Marcondes and Ximenes 2016; Hotez 2017; Kotsakiozi et al. 2017). One study found infection rates of pigeons by the zoonotic fungus Cryptococcus neoformans as high as 100% in many public squares of Porto Alegre (southern Brazil), evidencing a high risk of human infection by this pathogen, especially for immunosuppressed individuals (Reolon et al. 2004).
Another way urban areas can facilitate disease involves alteration of biodiversity patterns (Pongsiri et al. 2009; Everard et al. 2020; Keesing and Ostfeld 2021). Increased species richness has been observed to reduce the pathogen load in reservoirs and vectors, thus protecting human health, a phenomenon known as the dilution effect (Keesing et al. 2006; Lõhmus and Balbus 2015). When biodiverse landscapes are urbanized and species richness and population sizes are reduced, some urban-adapted (synanthropic) animals that more effectively carry zoonotic pathogens may proliferate more easily than non-synanthropic species (McFarlane et al. 2012; Han et al. 2015; Keesing and Ostfeld 2021). In this sense, arthropod vectors, rodents, and other small animals found in urban environments in high number and with reduced biodiversity usually host a higher diversity and load of pathogens, contributing to more transmission of zoonotic infections (Keesing et al. 2006; Ostfeld 2009; Hassell et al. 2017).
In addition to increased spread of common zoonotic diseases, urbanization can facilitate the emergence of new pathogens. The expansion of markets where wild species are easily marketed to the public enables more interactions between wildlife and humans, increasing the probability of new pathogen introduction into humans, such as SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19 (Woo et al. 2006; Lee et al. 2020; Ellwanger and Chies 2021). Further, sprawling urbanization increases urban-wildland interfaces which favors novel interactions among species and can increase spillover risk, including through direct human contact with wildlife (Patz et al. 2004; Bevins et al. 2012; Heylen et al. 2019; Hendy et al. 2020; Sormunen et al. 2020).
Finally, health penalties of urban life, especially in dense cities, include chronic exposure to air, soil, water, thermal, and noise pollutants, crowded living situations, and many other stressors. Stress can increase susceptibility to infections and facilitate the circulation of pathogens in animal populations and between humans and other animals (Bradley and Altizer 2007). As a result, urban residents, especially ones living in poverty and without adequate health care, may be more susceptible to zoonotic diseases (Fig. 1).
Urban health advantages
Despite many urban health penalties, Wood et al. (2017) found that, at a global scale, urbanization has created net positive outcomes for human health, especially through reducing infectious disease burden. Such urban health advantages include more access to education, employment, recreation, medical care, and financial resources, which directly and indirectly enhance health outcomes, including protection from and treatment of zoonotic disease. Cities also facilitate economic and scientific development which benefits public health (Vlahov et al. 2005; Johnson 2006; Segurado et al. 2016; Hotez 2017; Wood et al. 2017). Urbanization can reduce human contact with livestock, wildlife, and their potential pathogens compared to living in rural areas, providing a direct health advantage (Hassell et al. 2017; Eskew and Olival 2018). At the same time, the presence of well-managed biodiversity can benefit human health, including through improvements in immune systems and mental health; access to outdoor recreation; reduction of pollution exposure (e.g., through filtration, retention, and remediation); and biological control of disease vectors by predators (Ostfeld and Holt 2004; Douglas 2012; Mills et al. 2019; Flies et al. 2020; Marselle et al. 2021).
Of course, the health benefits of urban living depend on proper, ongoing maintenance of infrastructure and services, such as clean water provision, sanitation, and, as needed, anthropogenic control of synanthropic disease vectors (Hotez 2017; Ellwanger et al. 2021). Given such advantages, effective urban planning that addresses the tradeoffs of the urban disease ecology paradox can be seen as a form of preventative medicine (sensu Corburn 2015) that should be embraced as essential to public health initiatives and related ecological research (Lõhmus and Balbus 2015). For example, programs that focused on preventing disease vectors from entering homes, and campaigns aimed at reducing mosquito breeding sites in residential areas have significantly improved vector-borne disease prevention, limiting undesirable effects of urbanization on human health (Tusting et al. 2017; WHO 2017).
Urban One Health and Ecology with Cities
Effective urban planning is necessary but insufficient for creating healthier urban places and people. Many other factors affect the emergence and spread of pathogens and their vectors, including vaccines, personal hygiene, literacy levels, and public health programs, alongside many biological and ecological factors determining disease dynamics (Acharya et al. 2021; Ellwanger et al. 2021). Thus, in any given urban system, the net health outcomes of the urban disease ecology paradox are modulated by specific combinations and tradeoffs of anthropogenic and environmental variables interacting at multiple scales, from individually owned parcels through cities and entire urbanized regions (Fig. 1) (Douglas 2012; Lõhmus and Balbus 2015; Santiago-Alarcon and MacGregor-Fors 2020; Combs et al. 2022). Given such spatiotemporal and social-ecological complexity, new approaches to better examine and communicate about the interplay of social, technological, biological and environmental variables of the urban disease ecology paradox are needed to help communities and individuals navigate zoonotic disease risk (Douglas 2012; Corburn 2015; Hassell et al. 2017; Combs et al. 2022). Such an integrated strategy characterizes the One Health approach, in which multidisciplinary teams collaborate to understand, prevent, and solve human and wildlife health problems using a complex systems perspective (Cunningham et al. 2017; CDC 2018; Ellwanger et al. 2020; 2021). This approach can be adapted into an Urban One Health framework (de Leeuw 2020) that specifically considers the multivariate aspects of urban disease ecology introduced above, including unique ecological conditions and diverse socioeconomic factors like equity, governance, and those affecting landscape management behaviors (e.g., Lowe et al. 2019, Evans et al. 2022).
Urban ecologists have a central role to play in advancing basic and applied research for a comprehensive Urban One Health view. For instance, further studies are needed about how abiotic conditions, biodiversity, and landscape patterns affect vector populations and pathogen spread in urban systems, including dilution effect (Keesing and Ostfeld 2021; Johnson et al. 2015b; Combs et al. 2022). Such research is also needed about species not often examined by ecologists such as domesticated livestock and stray dogs (Box 1). Basic ecological investigations can be integrated into epidemiological surveillance, including in urban-wildland interfaces, which is one of the most effective mechanisms for identifying spillover risk and developing response plans such as priorities for vaccination (Halliday et al. 2007; Alirol et al. 2011; Ellwanger and Chies 2018; Ellwanger et al. 2019; Lee et al. 2020).
Urban disease ecology research should be conducted in ways that will allow it to contribute to development of actionable ecological knowledge that informs planning, policymaking, and management (Zhou et al. 2019). For instance, more studies are needed about how well-planned management and restoration of native biodiversity, green spaces, and ecosystem services can contribute to the control of zoonotic species (Lõhmus and Balbus 2015; Box 2). For example, the risk of contracting Lyme disease in urban green spaces can be reduced by removing invasive plant species (e.g., Berberis thunbergii - Japanese barberry) that benefit ticks and their hosts (Reaser et al. 2021).
For such work, we advocate an Ecology with Cities approach in which scientists form partnerships with diverse stakeholders to develop research questions, collect data, and implement evidence-based solutions (Byrne 2022). Collaboration is particularly important to the Urban One Health approach that integrates many complex sociocultural variables that impact disease. For instance, because inadequate sanitation systems and urban wildlife (wet) markets generate significant risks for zoonotic disease spread, understanding their dynamics is as crucial to the study and management of urban disease ecology as basic vector population data (Woo et al. 2006; Prüss-Ustün et al. 2014; Ellwanger et al. 2021). For such variables, both Urban One Health and Ecology with Cities approaches must be cooperatively and democratically linked to people’s daily lives (i.e., through translational ecology) to encourage pro-health actions such as supporting government projects, political candidates, and community health and environmental organizations that are aligned with beneficial environmental health outcomes, and participating in disease prevention mitigation actions such as urban cleaning and landscape improvements (e.g., trash pick up and tree planting) (Ellwanger et al. 2021; Gruetzmacher et al. 2021; Yuan et al. 2021). As emphasized by Yuan et al. (2021), “There is no public health without the support of the community” (p. 14). As such, the only way that urban ecologists will be able to fully translate urban ecological knowledge into practical and effective public health solutions is by seeking partnerships with urban residents, social scientists, policy makers, public health organizations, and many others. Gruetzmacher et al.’s (2021) conclusion about more intentionally linking human health to environmental conditions applies well to pursuing such partnerships: “The time to act is now” (p. 1).
To support community awareness and engagement, the Ecology with Cities view emphasizes stronger education and public outreach programs as crucial for advancing ecologically-based solutions to societal problems (Byrne 2022). Thus, linking this view with Urban One Health points to a role for urban ecologists in educating diverse audiences about urban disease ecology and creating novel teaching and outreach materials and methods. Brewer et al. (2008) provide a compelling argument for the value and content of such education, and Pasari’s (2016) teaching activity about Lyme disease exemplifies an engaging lesson to help students develop knowledge and skills relevant to the complexity of disease dynamics. Further, citizen and community science programs (Cooper et al. 2021) can contribute to both urban health research and education in many ways. Diverse urban and disease-focused initiatives have been effective in increasing people’s involvement in the monitoring of biodiversity and animal behavior (Roger and Motion 2022), wildlife health risks (Chame et al. 2019), and infectious diseases (Lawson et al. 2015; Curtis-Robles et al. 2015; Bartumeus et al. 2018; Hamer et al. 2018; Gardiner and Roy 2022). Investing in such learner- and community-centered education and research programs is crucial to helping people understand the complexity of urban disease ecology, including its paradoxical nature, and enabling them to better consider, appreciate and use relevant Urban One Health solutions for managing vectors and pathogens (Gruetzmacher et al. 2021).
Conclusions
Urbanization aggregates diverse social and environmental characteristics that facilitate the emergence and spread of zoonotic diseases. At the same time, aspects of urban living offer advantages to human health. The contradictory outcomes create what we have called the urban disease ecology paradox (Fig. 1). Understanding and responding to this paradox can be facilitated by an Urban One Health approach, which should be considered foundational for urban planning and public health research and programs. The paradoxical advantages and disadvantages of urban living are generally not distributed evenly across urban systems and even within distinct regions of the same city, especially in developing countries (Bowser and Cid 2020). Less wealthy people, especially the homeless and those living in slums, can mostly experience urban health disadvantages while people living in wealthier areas can predominantly experience the advantages (Stephens 1996). Through research, urban ecologists and other scholars can advance environmental justice outcomes by examining how ecological aspects of urban planning can help reduce urban health inequalities and promote more equitable access to the health advantages provided by urban environments (Corburn 2015; Bowser and Cid 2020).
In particular, urban ecologists have an important role in advancing the study, management, communication and education about urban zoonotic disease ecology, all of which are needed to achieve sustainable public health outcomes for all people (LaDeau et al. 2015; Hassell et al. 2017; Eskew and Olival 2018; Lowe et al. 2019; Combs et al. 2022), especially those in understudied tropical and developing regions (Lindahl and Magnusson 2020). We propose that Urban One Health and Ecology with Cities provide helpful terms and frameworks for such holistic and collaborative work, especially as needed for robust educational and citizen science programs. In this short essay, we can only introduce and roughly sketch the outlines of these perspectives. Future work is needed to enlarge their scope and deepen their synthesis, including through integrating issues not considered here, addressing challenges and limitations (Box 3), and distilling insights from case studies to guide future work. We encourage urban scholars and practitioners from all disciplines, careers, and organizational affiliations to investigate the urban disease ecology paradox through actionable science and apply ecological knowledge to more effectively manage the tradeoffs of its health advantages and penalties. It is only through multi-disciplinary partnerships and practical solutions that the Urban One Health and Ecology with Cities approaches will enable urban societies to tackle challenges of the urban health paradox and create more sustainable, health-promoting social-ecological systems.
Data Availability
Not applicable.
Code Availability
Not applicable.
Change history
10 August 2022
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-022-01274-z
References
Acharya KP, Subedi D, Wilson RT (2021) Rabies control in South Asia requires a One Health approach. One Health 12:100215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2021.100215
Alirol E, Getaz L, Stoll B, Chappuis F, Loutan L (2011) Urbanisation and infectious diseases in a globalised world. Lancet Infect Dis 11:131–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(10)70223-1
Amaku M, Dias RA, Ferreira F (2010) Dynamics and control of stray dog populations. Math Popul Stud 17:69–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/08898481003689452
Augusto LGS, Gurgel AM, Costa AM, Diderichsen F, Lacaz FA, Parra-Henao G, Rigotto RM, Nodari R, Santos SL (2016) Aedes aegypti control in Brazil. Lancet 387:1052–1053. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00626-7
Bartumeus F, Oltra A, Palmer JRB (2018) Citizen Science: A gateway for innovation in disease-carrying mosquito management? Trends Parasitol 34:727–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pt.2018.04.010
Benelli G, Jeffries CL, Walker T (2016) Biological control of mosquito vectors: past, present, and future. Insects 7:52. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects7040052
Bevins SN, Carver S, Boydston EE, Lyren LM, Alldredge M, Logan KA, Riley SPD, Fisher RN, Vickers TW, Boyce W, Salman M, Lappin MR, Crooks KR, VandeWoude S (2012) Three pathogens in sympatric populations of pumas, bobcats, and domestic cats: implications for infectious disease transmission. PLoS ONE 7:e31403. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0031403
Biehler D, Leisnham PT, LaDeau SL, Bodner D (2019) Knowing nature and community through mosquitoes: reframing pest management through lay vector ecologies. Local Env 24:1119–1135. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2019.1681387
Blake C, Rhanor A, Pajic C (2020) The demographics of citizen science participation and its implications for data quality and environmental justice. Citiz Sci 5:21. https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.320
Bowser G, Cid CR (2020) Integrating environmental justice into applied ecology research: Somebody else’s problem? Ecol Appl 30:e02250. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2250
Bradley CA, Altizer S (2007) Urbanization and the ecology of wildlife diseases. Trends Ecol Evol 22:95–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.11.001
Brewer CA, Berkowitz AR, Conrad PA, Porter J, Waterman M (2008) Educating about infectious disease ecology. In: Ostfeld R et al (eds) Infectious Disease Ecology: Effects of Ecosystems on Disease and of Disease on Ecosystems. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp 448–466.
Byrne LB (2022) Ecology with cities. Urban Ecosyst 25:835-837. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-021-01185-5
CDC - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2018) One Health basics. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/onehealth/basics/index.html. Accessed on 24 February 2021
Chame M, Barbosa HJC, Gadelha LMR Jr, Augusto DA, Krempser E, Abdalla L (2019) SISS-Geo: Leveraging citizen science to monitor wildlife health risks in Brazil. J Healthc Inform Res 3:414–440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41666-019-00055-2
Cociancic P, Deferrari G, Zonta ML, Navone GT (2020) Intestinal parasites in canine feces contaminating urban and recreational areas in Ushuaia (Argentina). Vet Parasitol Reg Stud Reports 21:100424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vprsr.2020.100424
Cooper CB, Hawn CL, Larson LR, Parrish JK, Bowser G, Cavalier D, Dunn RR, Haklay M, Kar Gupta K, Jelks NO, Johnson VA, Katti M, Leggett Z, Wilson OR, Wilson S (2021) Inclusion in citizen science: The conundrum of rebranding. Science 372:1386–1388. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abi6487
Combs MA, Kache PA, VanAcker MC, Gregory N, Plimpton LD, Tufts DM, Fernandez MP, Diuk-Wasser MA (2022) Socio-ecological drivers of multiple zoonotic hazards in highly urbanized cities. Glob Chang Biol 28:1705–1724. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16033
Connolly C, Keil R, Ali SH (2021) Extended urbanisation and the spatialities of infectious disease: Demographic change, infrastructure and governance. Urban Stud 58:245–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098020910873
Corburn J (2015) City planning as preventive medicine. Prev Med 77:48–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.04.022
Cunningham AA, Daszak P, Wood JLN (2017) One Health, emerging infectious diseases and wildlife: two decades of progress? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 372:20160167. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2016.0167
Curtis-Robles R, Wozniak EJ, Auckland LD, Hamer GL, Hamer SA (2015) Combining Public Health Education and Disease Ecology Research: Using Citizen Science to Assess Chagas Disease Entomological Risk in Texas. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 9:e0004235. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0004235
de Leeuw E (2020) One Health(y) cities. Cities & Health. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2020.1801114
Deplazes P, van Knapen F, Schweiger A, Overgaauw PAM (2011) Role of pet dogs and cats in the transmission of helminthic zoonoses in Europe, with a focus on echinococcosis and toxocarosis. Vet Parasitol 182:41–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2011.07.014
Destoumieux-Garzón D, Mavingui P, Boetsch G, Boissier J, Darriet F, Duboz P, Fritsch C, Giraudoux P, Le Roux F, Morand S, Paillard C, Pontier D, Sueur C, Voituron Y (2018) The One Health concept: 10 years old and a long road ahead. Front Vet Sci 5:14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2018.00014
Desvars-Larrive A, Smith S, Munimanda G, Bourhy P, Waigner T, Odom M, Gliga DS, Walzer C (2020) Prevalence and risk factors of Leptospira infection in urban brown rats (Rattus norvegicus), Vienna, Austria. Urban Ecosyst 23:775–784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-020-00957-9
Douglas I (2012) Urban ecology and urban ecosystems: understanding the links to human health and well-being. Curr Opin Environ Sustai 4:385–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.07.005
Ellwanger JH, Chies JAB (2018) Zoonotic spillover and emerging viral diseases - time to intensify zoonoses surveillance in Brazil. Braz J Infect Dis 22:76–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjid.2017.11.003
Ellwanger JH, Chies JAB (2019) The triad “dogs, conservation and zoonotic diseases” - An old and still neglected problem in Brazil. Perspect Ecol Conserv 17:157–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2019.06.003
Ellwanger JH, Chies JAB (2021) Zoonotic spillover: Understanding basic aspects for better prevention. Genet Mol Biol 44:e20200355. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4685-GMB-2020-0355
Ellwanger JH, da Veiga ABG, Kaminski VL, Valverde-Villegas JM, Freitas AWQ, Chies JAB (2021) Control and prevention of infectious diseases from a One Health perspective. Genet Mol Biol 44:e20200256. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4685-GMB-2020-0256
Ellwanger JH, Kaminski VL, Chies JAB (2019) Emerging infectious disease prevention: Where should we invest our resources and efforts? J Infect Public Health 12:313–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2019.03.010
Ellwanger JH, Kulmann-Leal B, Kaminski VL, Valverde-Villegas JM, da Veiga ABG, Spilki FR, Fearnside PM, Caesar L, Giatti LL, Wallau GL, Almeida SEM, Borba MR, da Hora VP, Chies JAB (2020) Beyond diversity loss and climate change: Impacts of Amazon deforestation on infectious diseases and public health. An Acad Bras Cienc 92:e20191375. https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765202020191375
Eskew EA, Olival KJ (2018) De-urbanization and zoonotic disease risk. EcoHealth 15:707–712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-018-1359-9
Evans MV, Bhatnagar S, Drake JM, Murdock CC, Mukherjee S (2022) Socio-ecological dynamics in urban systems: An integrative approach to mosquito‐borne disease in Bengaluru, India. People and Nature: https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10311
Everard M, Johnston P, Santillo D, Staddon C (2020) The role of ecosystems in mitigation and management of Covid-19 and other zoonoses. Environ Sci Policy 111:7–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.05.017
Flies EJ, Jones P, Buettel JC, Brook BW (2020) Compromised ecosystem services from urban aerial microbiomes: A review of impacts on human immune function. Front Ecol Evol 8:568902. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2020.568902
Gardiner MM, Roy HE (2022) The role of community science in entomology. Annu Rev Entomol. 2022. 67:437–456. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-072121-075258
Gibb R, Franklinos LH, Redding DW, Jones KE (2020) Ecosystem perspectives are needed to manage zoonotic risks in a changing climate. BMJ 371:m3389. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3389
Gottdenker NL, Streicker DG, Faust CL, Carroll CR (2014) Anthropogenic land use change and infectious diseases: a review of the evidence. EcoHealth 11:619–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-014-0941-z
Gruetzmacher K, Karesh WB, Amuasi JH, Arshad A, Farlow A, Gabrysch S, Jetzkowitz J, Lieberman S, Palmer C, Winkler AS, Walzer C (2021) The Berlin principles on one health - Bridging global health and conservation. Sci Total Environ 764:142919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142919
Halliday JEB, Meredith AL, Knobel DL, Shaw DJ, Bronsvoort BMC, Cleaveland S (2007) A framework for evaluating animals as sentinels for infectious disease surveillance. J R Soc Interface 4:973–984. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2007.0237
Han BA, Schmidt JP, Bowden SE, Drake JM (2015) Rodent reservoirs of future zoonotic diseases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112(22):7039–7044. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1501598112
Hamer SA, Curtis-Robles R, Hamer GL (2018) Contributions of citizen scientists to arthropod vector data in the age of digital epidemiology. Curr Opin Insect Sci 28:98–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2018.05.005
Hassell JM, Begon M, Ward MJ, Fèvre EM (2017) Urbanization and disease emergence: dynamics at the wildlife-livestock-human interface. Trends Ecol Evol 32:55–67. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2016.09.012
Hendy A, Hernandez-Acosta E, Valério D, Mendonça C, Costa ER, Júnior JTA, Assunção FP, Scarpassa VM, Gordo M, Fé NF, Buenemann M, de Lacerda MVG, Hanley KA, Vasilakis N (2020) The vertical stratification of potential bridge vectors of mosquito-borne viruses in a central Amazonian forest bordering Manaus, Brazil. Sci Rep 10:18254. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75178-3
Hernández FA, Manqui J, Mejías C, Acosta-Jamett G (2021) Domestic dogs and wild foxes interactions in a wildlife-domestic interface of north-central Chile: implications for multi-host pathogen transmission. Front Vet Sci 8:631788. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.631788
Heylen D, Lasters R, Adriaensen F, Fonville M, Sprong H, Matthysen E (2019) Ticks and tick-borne diseases in the city: Role of landscape connectivity and green space characteristics in a metropolitan area. Sci Total Environ 670:941–949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.03.235
Hotez PJ (2017) Global urbanization and the neglected tropical diseases. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 11:e0005308. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005308
Johnson S (2006) The ghost map: the story of London’s most terrifying epidemic - and how it changed science, cities, and the modern world. Riverhead Books, New York
Johnson CK, Hitchens PL, Smiley Evans T, Goldstein T, Thomas K, Clements A, Joly DO, Wolfe ND, Daszak P, Karesh WB, Mazet JK (2015a) Spillover and pandemic properties of zoonotic viruses with high host plasticity. Sci Rep 5:14830. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep14830
Johnson PT, De Roode JC, Fenton A (2015b) Why infectious disease research needs community ecology. Science 349:1069. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259504
Karesh WB, Dobson A, Lloyd-Smith JO, Lubroth J, Dixon MA, Bennett M, Aldrich S, Harrington T, Formenty P, Loh EH, Machalaba CC, Thomas MJ, Heymann DL (2012) Ecology of zoonoses: natural and unnatural histories. Lancet 380:1936–1945. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61678-X
Keesing F, Ostfeld RS (2021) Impacts of biodiversity and biodiversity loss on zoonotic diseases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 118:e2023540118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2023540118
Keesing F, Holt RD, Ostfeld RS (2006) Effects of species diversity on disease risk. Ecol Lett 9:485–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00885.x
Kobayashi CCBA, Souza LKH, Fernandes OFL, Brito SCA, Silva AC, Sousa ED, Silva MRR (2005) Characterization of Cryptococcus neoformans isolated from urban environmental sources in Goiânia, Goiás State, Brazil. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo 47:203–207. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0036-46652005000400005
Kotsakiozi P, Gloria-Soria A, Caccone A, Evans B, Schama R, Martins AJ, Powell JR (2017) Tracking the return of Aedes aegypti to Brazil, the major vector of the dengue, chikungunya and Zika viruses. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 11:e0005653. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005653
Krystosik A, Njoroge G, Odhiambo L, Forsyth JE, Mutuku F, LaBeaud AD (2020) Solid wastes provide breeding sites, burrows, and food for biological disease vectors, and urban zoonotic reservoirs: a call to action for solutions-based research. Front Public Health 7:405. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2019.00405
LaDeau SL, Allan BF, Leisnham PT, Levy MZ (2015) The ecological foundations of transmission potential and vector-borne disease in urban landscapes. Funct Ecol 29:889–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12487
Lawson B, Petrovan SO, Cunningham AA (2015) Citizen science and wildlife disease surveillance. EcoHealth 12:693–702. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-015-1054-z
Lee K, Brumme ZL (2013) Operationalizing the One Health approach: the global governance challenges. Health Policy Plan 28:778–785. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czs127
Lee VJ, Ho M, Kai CW, Aguilera X, Heymann D, Wilder-Smith A (2020) Epidemic preparedness in urban settings: new challenges and opportunities. Lancet Infect Dis 20:527–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30249-8
Lima-Camara TN (2016) Emerging arboviruses and public health challenges in Brazil. Rev Saude Publica 50:36. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1518-8787.2016050006791
Lindahl J, Magnusson U (2020) Zoonotic pathogens in urban animals: Enough research to protect the health of the urban population? Anim Health Res Rev 21:50–60. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1466252319000100
Lõhmus M, Balbus J (2015) Making green infrastructure healthier infrastructure. Infect Eco Epid 5:30082. https://doi.org/10.3402/iee.v5.30082
Lowe EC, Latty T, Webb CE, Whitehouse ME, Saunders ME (2019) Engaging urban stakeholders in the sustainable management of arthropod pests. J Pest Science 92:987–1002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-019-01087-8
Manlove KR, Walker JG, Craft ME, Huyvaert KP, Joseph MB, Miller RS, Nol P, Patyk KA, O’Brien D, Walsh DP, Cross PC (2016) “One Health” or three? Publication silos among the One Health disciplines. PLoS Biol 14:e1002448. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002448
Marcondes CB, Ximenes MFFM (2016) Zika virus in Brazil and the danger of infestation by Aedes (Stegomyia) mosquitoes. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop 49:4–10. https://doi.org/10.1590/0037-8682-0220-2015
Marselle MR, Lindley SJ, Cook PA, Bonn A (2021) Biodiversity and Health in the Urban Environment. Curr Environ Health Rep 8:146–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40572-021-00313-9
McFarlane R, Sleigh A, McMichael T (2012) Synanthropy of wild mammals as a determinant of emerging infectious diseases in the Asian-Australasian region. EcoHealth 9(1):24–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-012-0763-9
McMahon BJ, Morand S, Gray JS (2018) Ecosystem change and zoonoses in the Anthropocene. Zoonoses Public Health 65:755–765. https://doi.org/10.1111/zph.12489
Medeiros-Sousa AR, Ceretti-Júnior W, de Carvalho GC, Nardi MS, Araujo AB, Vendrami DP, Marrelli MT (2015) Diversity and abundance of mosquitoes (Diptera:Culicidae) in an urban park: larval habitats and temporal variation. Acta Trop 150:200–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actatropica.2015.08.002
Mills JG, Brookes JD, Gellie NJC, Liddicoat C, Lowe AJ, Sydnor HR, Thomas T, Weinstein P, Weyrich LS, Breed MF (2019) Relating urban biodiversity to human health with the ‘holobiont’ concept. Front Microbiol 10:550. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.00550
Minter A, Himsworth CG, Byers KA, Childs JE, Ko AI, Costa F (2019) Tails of two cities: age and wounding are associated with carriage of Leptospira interrogans by Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus) in ecologically distinct urban environments. Front Ecol Evol 7:14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2019.0001
Morse SS, Mazet JA, Woolhouse M, Parrish CR, Carroll D, Karesh WB, Zambrana-Torrelio C, Lipkin WI, Daszak P (2012) Prediction and prevention of the next pandemic zoonosis. Lancet 380:1956–1965. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61684-5
Neiderud CJ (2015) How urbanization affects the epidemiology of emerging infectious diseases. Infect Ecol Epidemiol 5:27060. https://doi.org/10.3402/iee.v5.27060
Ostfeld RS (2009) Biodiversity loss and the rise of zoonotic pathogens. Clin Microbiol Infect 15:40–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-0691.2008.02691.x
Ostfeld RS, Holt RD (2004) Are predators good for your health? Evaluating evidence for top-down regulation of zoonotic disease reservoirs. Front Ecol Env 2:13–20. https://doi.org/10.1890/1540-9295(2004)002[0013:APGFYH]2.0.CO;2
Otranto D, Cantacessi C, Dantas-Torres F, Brianti E, Pfeffer M, Genchi C, Guberti V, Capelli G, Deplazes P (2015) The role of wild canids and felids in spreading parasites to dogs and cats in Europe. Part II: Helminths and arthropods. Vet Parasitol 213:24–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2015.04.020
Otranto D, Dantas-Torres F, Mihalca AD, Traub RJ, Lappin M, Baneth G (2017) Zoonotic parasites of sheltered and stray dogs in the era of the global economic and political crisis. Trends Parasitol 33:813–825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pt.2017.05.013
Pasari JR (2016) Teaching Lyme Disease Ecology Through a Primary Literature Jigsaw Activity. In: Byrne L (ed) Learner-Centered Teaching Activities for Environmental and Sustainability Studies. Springer, New York, pp 123–127.
Patz JA, Daszak P, Tabor GM, Aguirre AA, Pearl M, Epstein J, Wolfe ND, Kilpatrick AM, Foufopoulos J, Molyneux D, Bradley DJ, Working Group on Land Use Change and Disease Emergence (2004) Unhealthy landscapes: Policy recommendations on land use change and infectious disease emergence. Environ Health Perspect 112:1092–1098. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.6877
Pimentel DS, Ramos RAN, Santana MA, Maia CS, de Carvalho GA, da Silva HP, Alves LC (2015) Prevalence of zoonotic visceral leishmaniasis in dogs in an endemic area of Brazil. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop 48:491–493. https://doi.org/10.1590/0037-8682-0224-2014
Plowright RK, Parrish CR, McCallum H, Hudson PJ, Ko AI, Graham AL, Lloyd-Smith JO (2017) Pathways to zoonotic spillover. Nat Rev Microbiol 15:502–510. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2017.45
Pongsiri MJ, Roman J, Ezenwa VO, Goldberg TL, Koren HS, Newbold SC, Ostfeld RS, Pattanayak SK, Salker DJ (2009) Biodiversity loss affects global disease ecology. Bioscience 59:945–954. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.6
Prüss-Ustün A, Bartram J, Clasen T, Colford JM Jr, Cumming O, Curtis V, Bonjour S, Dangour AD, De France J, Fewtrell L, Freeman MC, Gordon B, Hunter PR, Johnston RB, Mathers C, Mäusezahl D, Medlicott K, Neira M, Stocks M, Wolf J, Cairncross S (2014) Burden of disease from inadequate water, sanitation and hygiene in low- and middle-income settings: a retrospective analysis of data from 145 countries. Trop Med Int Health 19:894–905. https://doi.org/10.1111/tmi.12329
Reaser JK, Witt A, Tabor GM, Hudson PJ, Plowright RK (2021) Ecological countermeasures for preventing zoonotic disease outbreaks: when ecological restoration is a human health imperative. Restor Ecol 18:e13357. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13357
Reolon A, Perez LRR, Mezzari A (2004) Prevalência de Cryptococcus neoformans nos pombos urbanos da cidade de Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul. J Bras Patol Med Lab 40:293–298. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1676-24442004000500003
Ribeiro CS, van de Burgwal LHM, Regeer BJ (2019b) Overcoming challenges for designing and implementing the One Health approach: A systematic review of the literature. One Health 7:100085. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2019.100085
Ribeiro EA, Tomich GM, Alves JAG, Santos KS (2019a) Occurrence of Cryptococcus neoformans in the excreta of urban pigeons in the municipality of Redenção in Amazônia, Brazil. Acta Biomed Bras 10:1–5. https://doi.org/10.18571/acbm.197
Roger E, Motion A (2022) Citizen science in cities: an overview of projects focused on urban Australia. Urban Ecosyst 25:741-752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-021-01187-3
Rothenburger JL, Himsworth CH, Nemeth NM, Pearl DL, Jardine CM (2017) Environmental Factors and Zoonotic Pathogen Ecology in Urban Exploiter Species. EcoHealth 14:630–641. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-017-1258-5
Saldanha-Elias AM, Silva MA, Silva VO, Amorim SLA, Coutinho AR, Santos HA, Giunchetti RC, Vitor RWA, Geiger SM (2019) Prevalence of endoparasites in urban stray dogs from Brazil diagnosed with Leishmania, with potential for human zoonoses. Acta Parasitol 64:352–359. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11686-019-00043-x
Santiago-Alarcon D, MacGregor-Fors I (2020) Cities and pandemics: urban areas are ground zero for the transmission of emerging human infectious diseases. J Urb Ecol 6:juaa012. https://doi.org/10.1093/jue/juaa012
Schell CJ, Dyson K, Fuentes TL, Des Roches S, Harris NC, Miller DS, Woelfle-Erskine CA, Lambert MR (2020) The ecological and evolutionary consequences of systemic racism in urban environments. Science 369:eaay4497. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay4497
Segurado AC, Cassenote AJ, Luna EA (2016) Saúde nas metrópoles – Doenças infecciosas. Estud Av 30:29–49. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-40142016.00100003
Sormunen JJ, Kulha N, Klemola T, Mäkelä S, Vesilahti EM, Vesterinen EJ (2020) Enhanced threat of tick-borne infections within cities? Assessing public health risks due to ticks in urban green spaces in Helsinki, Finland. Zoonoses Public Health 67:823–839. https://doi.org/10.1111/zph.12767
Stephens C (1996) Healthy cities or unhealthy islands? The health and social implications of urban inequality. Environ Urban 8:9–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/095624789600800211
Tusting LS, Bottomley C, Gibson H, Kleinschmidt I, Tatem AJ, Lindsay SW, Gething PW (2017) Housing Improvements and Malaria Risk in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Multi-Country Analysis of Survey Data. PLoS Med 14:e1002234. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002234
Valle D (2016) No magic bullet: citizenship and social participation in the control of Aedes aegypti. Epidemiol Serv Saude 25:629–632. https://doi.org/10.5123/S1679-49742016000300018
Valle D, Pimenta DN, Aguiar R (2016) Zika, dengue e chikungunya: desafios e questões. Epidemiol Serv Saude 25:419–422. https://doi.org/10.5123/s1679-49742016000200020
Vlahov D, Galea S, Freudenberg N (2005) Toward an urban health advantage. J Public Health Manag Pract 11:256–258. https://doi.org/10.1097/00124784-200505000-00012
WHO - World Health Organization (2017) Keeping the vector out. Housing improvements for vector control and sustainable development. WHO, Geneva
Woo PC, Lau SK, Yuen KY (2006) Infectious diseases emerging from Chinese wet-markets: zoonotic origins of severe respiratory viral infections. Curr Opin Infect Dis 19:401–407. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.qco.0000244043.08264.fc
Wood CL, McInturff A, Young HS, Kim D, Lafferty KD (2017) Human infectious disease burdens decrease with urbanization but not with biodiversity. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 372:20160122. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2016.0122
Yang L, Turo KJ, Riley CB, Inocente EA, Tian J, Hoekstra NC, Piermarini PM, Gardiner MM (2019) Can urban greening increase vector abundance in cities? The impact of mowing, local vegetation, and landscape composition on adult mosquito populations. Urban Ecosyst 22:827–839. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-019-00857-7
Yuan M, Lin H, Wu H, Yu M, Tu J, Lü Y (2021) Community engagement in public health: a bibliometric mapping of global research. Arch Pub Health 79:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-021-00525-3
Zhou W, Fisher B, Pickett STA (2019) Cities are hungry for actionable ecological knowledge. Front Ecol Environ 17:135. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2021
Zhao J, Tang T, Wang X (2020) Effects of landscape composition on mosquito population in urban green spaces. Urban For Urban Green 49:126626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126626
Funding
Joel Henrique Ellwanger receives a postdoctoral fellowship from Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (Programa Nacional de Pós-Doutorado – PNPD/CAPES, Brazil). José Artur Bogo Chies receives a research fellowship from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (Bolsa de Produtividade em Pesquisa - Nível 1 A, CNPq, Brasil) and has research projects funded by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (FAPERGS) and CAPES (Brazil).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Joel Henrique Ellwanger wrote the first version of the article. Loren B. Byrne and José Artur Bogo Chies reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors approved the final version of the article.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Loren B. Byrne is on the editorial board of Urban Ecosystems, but did not participate in the review of this article. No other conflicts of interest to declare.
Ethics approval:
Not applicable.
Consent to participate:
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ellwanger, J.H., Byrne, L.B. & Chies, J.A.B. Examining the paradox of urban disease ecology by linking the perspectives of Urban One Health and Ecology with Cities. Urban Ecosyst 25, 1735–1744 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-022-01260-5
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-022-01260-5