Reexamining the issue of wild animals in disaster management

ABSTRACT

This study was conducted to examine the relationship between the biodiversity of wild animals and disaster management. Qualitative content analysis is a key method used to compare the approach of wild animals as subjects of biodiversity with that of major disasters. These approaches are examined in terms of the sub-variables of international organizations, developed nations, and developing nations. A key proposal is that all three sub-variables must change their approach from the former to the latter while enhancing animal rights, education, and local culture. In this study, disaster management was comprehensively applied to wild animals.

GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT

Stakeholders will change wild animals as a subject of biodiversity into wild animals as a subject of major disasters.

KEYWORDS:

• Biodiversity
• education
• local culture
• major disaster
• one health

Introduction

Human lives have been considerably enriched by the diversity of wildlife. However, the number of wildlife species has significantly decreased since the beginning of the 1970s because of various factors, including climate change (Kolinski and Milich 2021; Sirakaya 2023). Several studies have been performed to examine wild animal biodiversity but did not adequately evaluate this issue from the perspective of disaster management despite the health problems, economic effects, environmental impacts, and other issues associated with wildlife.

This study involved three key concepts. Wild animals include animals that have not been tamed and thus are typically not only fierce but also dangerous (World Wildlife Fund 2022). Major disasters include natural events and human-caused events. Disaster management refers to how governments deal with disasters, including around wild animals, with the support of important partners such as businesses, voluntary organizations, and local communities (Cho and Ha 2019; Federal Emergency Management Agency 2021).

Based on empirical data, approximately 75% of human diseases originate from animals and approximately 60% of emerging diseases are attributed to wildlife (Jeffries 2020). However, the potential hazards associated with wild animals remain unclear. Additionally, wild animals are important because they are associated with disasters that also affect human society. This study was performed to clarify the issue of wild animals.

The objective of this study was to determine how to efficiently approach the issue of wild animals with the ultimate goal of decreasing human losses, economic damage, and psychological impacts resulting from disasters, as well as enhancing biodiversity. Two distinct factors were compared: wild animals as a subject of biodiversity and wild animals as a subject of major disasters. Three sub-variables were analysed: international organizations, developed countries, and developing countries. We predicted that all three stakeholders shift from the former approach to the latter while flexibly addressing the issues of health, animal rights, education, and local culture.

Literature review

This section provides background on wild animals in disaster management. A strong bond has historically existed between some wild animals and humans (Zhou et al. 2016). Wild animals function as ecosystem engineers and control pests, improve agricultural production and biodiversity in some areas, as well as provide ecosystem services (Curtin and Kragh 2014). Nevertheless, wildlife trafficking, including the illegal trade of wild animals (Broad 2020), still occurs in some regions, which adversely affects the environment.

Monitoring and surveillance of ecotourism activities, wildlife trade, and dramatic behavioural changes among animals are necessary. Unlike surveillance, monitoring does not require the production of data for a disaster response. Thus, monitoring wild animals does not include a specific response to wild animal diseases (Sleeman et al. 2012). In addition, health and population data on wild animals (for integrated wildlife monitoring) should be continuously and systematically collected, analysed, and interpreted to ensure timely management of diseases (Cardoso et al. 2022; Barroso et al. 2023).

All mammals and many birds host various epidemic diseases (Recht et al. 2020). Wild animals have the potential to transmit pathogens to their peers, livestock, and humans, particularly when kept in small spaces, such as when captured or bred in captivity. During defecation, scratching, coughing, or urination, wild animals can spread pathogens to other animals as well as to humans. Examples include avian influenza, rabies, West Nile virus, Lyme disease, brucellosis, and salmonellosis (Ilić et al. 2017).

Integration of wild animals into the field of disaster management has not been fully addressed (Taylor 2019) or managed compared to other animal categories, such as pets, service animals, and livestock. Despite growing concerns regarding wild animals in disaster management, a national or international consensus on this issue is lacking.

Most previous studies focused on wild animals in terms of biodiversity (or biological diversity), that is, the variety of species in a particular habitat. Researchers have attempted to protect endangered wild animals under the banner of biodiversity conservation because of the rapid extinction of wildlife caused by several factors, including climate change (Guney et al. 2017).

Biodiversity has also been considered in disaster management but its inclusion is limited to only a few natural hazards (Nordic Council of Ministers 2017), such as wildfires, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions, which have contributed to decreases in biodiversity (United States Geological Survey 2023). High biodiversity plays a role in protecting humans from natural hazards. Nevertheless, biodiversity has not been discussed at the same level as the occurrence of man-made emergencies such as zoonoses.

This study was conducted to examine how to flexibly decrease the impact of disasters on wild animals as well as humans. Two approaches were compared: wild animals as a subject of biodiversity and wild animals as a subject of major disasters. Related barriers and appropriate alternatives were identified.

Methods

Qualitative content analysis involves subjectively categorizing, interpreting, and recording qualitative text data for research purposes (Bengtsson 2016). Qualitative content analysis typically consists of three stages: preparation, organization, and reporting (Taiwo and Ogunsanmi 2000; Elo et al. 2014). In this study, the preparation stage included data collection (i.e. data gathering data using search engines such as Google, ScienceDirect, and PubMed.gov, descriptive analysis, and other methods), sampling (i.e. based on the relationship among wild animals, biodiversity, disaster management, and other factors), and determining the unit of analysis (e.g. Earth).

In the organization stage, categorization (e.g. issues of biodiversity and major disasters) and interpretation (i.e. flexible interpretation of qualitative data) were performed. In the reporting stage, the results were systematically recorded (e.g. transition from wild animals as a subject of biodiversity to wild animals as a subject of major disasters).

As shown in Figure 1, the method is used to examine how the issue of wild animals as subjects of biodiversity can shift to that of wild animals as subjects of major disasters. Three major subvariables, such as international organizations, developed nations, and developing nations, were used to compare the two approaches.

Figure 1. Analytical framework.

An important criterion in selecting appropriate comparative sub-variables is that they reflect the Earth’s community in terms of wild animals. Hence, we considered the entire world as the scope of this research. International organizations established through international laws, treaties, or other agreements support the importance of wild animals between and among countries. Developed countries are more industrialized, whereas developing countries have a lower per capita gross national product. All major nations belong to one of these two types.

Wild animals as a subject of biodiversity

International organizations

The United Nations (UN) has addressed biodiversity and disaster management (United Nations 2022), including through the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030) and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity. Others that have contributed to addressing multiple disasters include the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction and Sustainable Development Agenda.

International non-governmental organizations (INGOs), such as Defenders of Wildlife, the Jane Goodall Foundation, FOUR PAWS International, and Wildlife Trust of India, have also played a role in dealing with the issue of wild animals to maximize biodiversity (Menghistu et al. 2018). These INGOs rely on donations to pursue their respective missions and implement projects and strategies for wildlife preservation while acquiring land, conducting research, and expanding their networks.

Developed countries

Among developed countries, the two nations have greatly contributed to improving the biodiversity of their respective wildlife. Australia has worked toward preserving its fish and reptile species, and the United States has emphasized the protection of marine and freshwater ecosystems (Johan et al. 2022). The U.S. Agency for International Development encourages other nations to preserve their biodiversity by alleviating extreme poverty.

According to research performed by researchers from Oxford University, developed countries have contributed less to wildlife protection than have developing countries (University of Oxford 2017). This study considered three factors: the percentage of gross domestic product allocated for large mammal conservation, percentage of land inhabited by large mammals, and percentage of protected large mammals. The results showed that many developed countries do not prioritize the maintenance of biodiversity.

Developing countries

Although biodiversity on Earth has dramatically decreased, a few developing countries have maintained biodiversity in their respective regions (Whitehorn et al. 2019). Some African nations have incorporated biodiversity into their economic plans, policies, and other strategies through National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans. These plans have been supported by specific economic sectors such as forestry, fisheries, and agriculture.

Developing countries are willing to improve their poor economies in limited environments. Particularly, they have made efforts to preserve and maximize biodiversity, which may, in turn, promote the well-being of their people by ensuring soil fertility, protecting food and water supplies, and providing recreational activities (Kargbo et al. 2023). Various groups, including governments, industries, and civil society, have participated in efforts to address biodiversity.

Wild animals as a subject of major disasters

International organizations

Two types of UN sub-institutions must integrate considerations of biodiversity into disaster management to achieve their goals (UNDRR 2020) and support animal rights. UN sub-institutions dealing with biodiversity should incorporate disaster management into their efforts to protect wildlife. Additionally, UN sub-institutions tasked with disaster management should include the biodiversity of wildlife in their operations.

Several INGOs are dedicated to conserving wild animals in Africa, Asia, Europe, and other regions. Without conservation activities, the remaining populations of endangered wild animals would be much lower (Rusu et al. 2021). In implementing their missions, projects, research, networks, and other activities, INGOs should reflect on the importance of disaster management for wild animals and promotion of animal rights across regions.

Developed countries

Australia and the United States have not fully integrated the concept of disaster management in efforts to preserve biodiversity. These two nations should improve public awareness of wild animals through various channels. For example, zoos provide entertainment for children and the public (Spooner et al. 2021) but must also educate the public on the relationship between biodiversity and disaster management.

Developed countries should prioritize disaster management policies, including the issue of biodiversity beyond economic development, particularly by allocating personnel, funds, and other resources in a timely manner (Bogale and Erena 2022). Developed countries should reintroduce landscapes for large animals via disaster management after providing sufficient land for strictly protected animals. Additionally, it is necessary to invest in international disaster management to preserve biodiversity.

Developing countries

Many developing countries have attempted to regulate pests and diseases in wild animals to draw attention to the issue of biodiversity (Aguree et al. 2023). These nations recognize that the loss of biodiversity increases pests and diseases, which threaten their survival. Although awareness is very high in these nations, many have not fully embraced disaster management from a wildlife biodiversity perspective.

Many areas in developing countries remain remote because of mountain barriers, a lack of transportation, and other factors. In addition, each area has a unique culture in how they consider wild animals based on religious practices, rituals, traditional beliefs, indigenous knowledge, and conservation ethics (Monty et al. 2016). While attempting to restore wild animals or improve genetic diversity, these nations may embed disaster management concerns in their local cultures.

Discussion

The term ‘one health’ indicates that the issue of human health is interconnected with not only politics, economy, society, and culture, but also wild animals or related environments (World Health Organization 2017). In addition, many microbes affect both wild animals and humans (Ma et al. 2023). Therefore, the concept of one health should be applied in an integrated approach to communicate or exchange information between and among all life.

A change in the approach is recommended from that of considering wild animals as a subject of biodiversity to that of considering wild animals as a subject of major disasters. The former approach is not sufficiently flexible to accommodate the issue of disaster management. Human society has become more globalized and complex in the twenty-first century (Farzanegan et al. 2021) and has thus come to embody the latter, regardless of national boundaries.

Disaster management efforts protect not only wild animals, but also humans (International Fund for Animal Welfare 2021; World Animal Protection 2023). When wild animals are killed or die before, during, or after a disaster, the people who depend directly or indirectly on these animals are adversely affected, particularly people who rely heavily on wild animals for economic activities and companionship. Therefore, protecting wild animals ultimately promotes the well-being of humans (Brando and Norman 2023).

In the transition to considering wild animals as the subject of major disasters, the field of disaster management should further integrate this issue into the disaster management cycle, which typically consists of four or five phases: disaster prevention, disaster preparedness, disaster response, and disaster recovery (Baird 2010; Gaillard et al. 2019). If the issue is not included in all phases, the transition to considering wild animals as a subject of major disasters will not be fully implemented.

Additionally, the field of disaster management should improve coordination to consider wild animals at the local, regional, and international levels (Margherita et al. 2021). Such coordination involves the organization of various individuals, institutions, resources, activities, and wild animals to achieve disaster management goals. Considering that an inadequate response to wild animals frequently causes chaos in various regions, coordination mechanisms should be properly addressed.

In terms of coordination efforts, the field of disaster management will continue to reduce coexistence inequalities between wild animals and humans (Jordan et al. 2020). Overall, rural communities in the global south have borne the costs of coexistence with wild animals much more than have urban communities in the global north. Cost sharing should be coordinated and fairly distributed by prioritizing regional economies, implementing compensation plans, and others.

This study contributes to the literature on biodiversity by focusing on the importance of disaster management for wild animals, thus addressing the gap in research on biodiversity (including wild animals) and disaster management (Bailey 2019). Particularly, this information can be used to improve the consideration of wild animals and biodiversity in disaster management.

Three supplementary factors–animal rights, education, and local culture–were considered in this study. Regarding animal rights, wild animals face several challenges in their survival, including diseases, injuries, food shortages, predators, and disasters. Many animals are killed or die young because of human activities such as hunting and habitat encroachment (Yang 2023).

The field of disaster management should minimize the suffering or cruelty experienced by wild animals and ensure the protection of animal rights (Tomasik 2015). Humans should determine how to manage animal rights, given that animals are entitled to existence. Thus, all stakeholders must implement rapid interventions and long-term alternatives without resorting to wild animal abuse.

The quality of education must be improved (Jiménez et al. 2015). Many educational programmes on wild animals have been developed, such as those on animal conservation, animal welfare, and animal farms, which require well-trained locals to facilitate the teaching process. These individuals must study the importance of disaster management and integrate this concept into their programmes.

In contrast to theoretical fields, disaster management education on wild animals requires the regular and systematic application of training (Gary et al. 2021). Given the relatively short disaster response period for wild animals, disaster training and exercises should be developed in advance, particularly through action-oriented programmes to enable individuals or organizations to respond in a timely manner to disasters that affect wild animals.

Adapting/changing/modifying local culture may serve as a catalyst to facilitate the transition toward wild animals as the subject of major disasters (Adom 2019). Local culture encompasses multiple factors such as traditions, beliefs, and historical heritage. Because of modernization, the effect of local culture has decreased considerably. However, because individuals and institutions justify their behaviour toward wild animals by referring to local culture, adapting, changing, or modifying such a culture is necessary to address this issue.

To adapt, change, or modify the local culture, individuals and institutions should form a clearer connection between biodiversity and disaster management (Najib 1996). Indeed, multiple local residents exhibit unique behaviours or attitudes toward coexistence with wild animals. For example, the tolerance or intolerance to 150 elephants in Gudalur, India has been influenced by local residents’ ethnicity and culture more than by geographic or socioeconomic factors (Thekaekara et al. 2021). This culture recognizes the importance of biodiversity for survival. Considering that biodiversity cannot be completely separated from disaster management, stakeholders may assign greater value to disaster management if biodiversity is considered as empathetic advocacy.

Qualitative content analysis has inherent advantages such as flexible interpretation of multiple verbal data and a detailed explanation of complicated issues. Thus, quantitative content analysis should be applied to study wild animals from a disaster management perspective to compensate for the limitations of our study and strengthen the connection between wild animals and disaster management practices.

Conclusion

Three key stakeholders, namely international organizations, developed countries, and developing countries, should transform their approach from considering wild animals as a subject of biodiversity to considering wild animals as a subject of major disasters. This transition requires each stakeholder to implement strategies such as promoting animal rights, improving education, and increasing the value of disaster management in the local culture.

In this study, we comprehensively approached the issue of wild animals from the perspective of disaster management. A limitation of this study is the lack of empirical data resulting from the use of qualitative content analysis as a key methodology.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

Data sharing is not applicable, as no new data were generated or analysed during this study.

Additional information

Funding

Not applicable.