Search for: All records

We are facing interwoven global threats to public health and ecosystem function that reveal the intrinsic connections between human and wildlife health. These challenges are especially pressing in cities, where social-ecological interactions are pronounced. The One Health concept provides an organizing framework that promotes the health and well-being of urban communities and ecosystems. However, for One Health to be successful, it must incorporate societal inequities in environmental disamenities, exposures, and policy. Such inequities affect all One Health interfaces, including the distribution of ecosystem services and disservices, the nature and frequency ofhuman–wildlife interactions, and legacies of land use. Here, we review the current literature on One Health perspectives, pinpoint areas in which to incorporate an environmental justice lens, and close with recommendations for future work. Intensifying social, political, and environmental unrest underscores a dire need for One Health solutions informed by environmental justice principles to help build healthier, more resilient cities. 

Reduced human activity to mitigate the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic was accompanied by reports of unusual wildlife sightings in highly developed areas. Such experiences with urban nature may have helped residents cope with the stress of the pandemic and increased public interest in urban wildlife; however, this may depend on the species residents encountered. In this study, we surveyed Chicago, Illinois, USA residents during a stay-at-home order to understand if residents in more affluent or greener neighborhoods saw more wildlife species. We also evaluated whether encounters with pest and non-pest species were associated with residents’ values about wildlife. Of 593 responses included in our analyses, respondents in higher-income and greener neighborhoods were more likely to perceive increased wildlife sightings and respondents in higher-income areas reported observing a higher number common birds and mammals. Support for seeing wildlife in residential areas was associated with seeing passerine birds and not seeing rats during the stay-at-home order. Our results suggest that perceived increases in wildlife sightings were common during a stay-at-home order, especially for affluent residents, and that residents’ perceptions depended on the species encountered. Understanding how changes in human behavior modifies human-wildlife interactions can help mitigate human-wildlife conflict and foster positive engagement with local wildlife. 

Abstract Background Encounters with rats in urban areas increase risk of human exposure to rat-associated zoonotic pathogens and act as a stressor associated with psychological distress. The frequency and nature of human-rat encounters may be altered by social distancing policies to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, restaurant closures may reduce food availability for rats and promote rat activity in nearby residential areas, thus increasing public health risks during a period of public health crisis. In this study, we aimed to identify factors associated with increased perceived exposure to rats during a stay-at-home order, describe residents’ encounters with rats relevant to their health and well-being, and identify factors associated with increased use of rodent control. Methods Urban residents in Chicago, a large city with growing concerns about rats and health disparities, completed an online questionnaire including fixed response and open-ended questions during the spring 2020 stay-at-home order. Analyses included ordinal multivariate regression, spatial analysis, and thematic analysis for open-ended responses. Results Overall, 21% of respondents ( n  = 835) reported an increase in rat sightings around their homes during the stay-at-home order and increased rat sightings was positively associated with proximity to restaurants, low-rise apartment buildings, and rat feces in the home ( p  ≤ 0.01). Many respondents described feeling unsafe using their patio or yard, and afraid of rats entering their home or spreading disease. Greater engagement with rodent control was associated with property ownership, information about rat control, and areas with lower incomes ( p  ≤ 0.01). Conclusions More frequent rat encounters may be an unanticipated public health concern during periods of social distancing, especially in restaurant-dense areas or in low-rise apartment buildings. Rat presence may also limit residents’ ability to enjoy nearby outdoor spaces, which otherwise might buffer stress experienced during a stay-at-home order. Proactive rat control may be needed to mitigate rat-associated health risks during future stay-at-home orders.