Resolving the Conflict between Infectious Disease and Beneficial Urban Nature

Abstract Urban nature offers critical benefits for urban residents and is foundational for city livability. However, biodiversity in cities can also deliver disservices to people, including the potential to increase infectious disease risk. In the present Forum, we explore these tensions through a narrative review and qualitative synthesis, arguing that the possible benefits and risks of biodiverse urban areas need not be in conflict. We compile evidence linking urban nature features to zoonotic and vector-borne disease risk, identifying five interactions of concern and highlighting the importance of proactive management. Building on this, we outline various urban design and planning actions that can reduce potential risks for visitors while maintaining urban greening cobenefits. Discussing the issue alongside a One Health perspective, we emphasize the importance of an integrated, cross-sector approach to create resilient cities that support human, animal, and environmental well-being. We conclude that adaptive management can mitigate disease concerns while maximizing urban nature benefits.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BioScience
Published
2025-12-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biaf207
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Zoonotic diseases and public health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.88
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Resolving the Conflict between Infectious Disease and Beneficial Urban Nature

Holly L. Kirk, Katherine L. Robertson, Jacinta Humphrey, Sarah Bekessy
1 citations
BioScience
Zoonotic diseases and public health
1.88
article

Resolving the Conflict between Infectious Disease and Beneficial Urban Nature

Holly L. Kirk, Katherine L. Robertson, Jacinta Humphrey, Sarah Bekessy
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Urban nature offers critical benefits for urban residents and is foundational for city livability. However, biodiversity in cities can also deliver disservices to people, including the potential to increase infectious disease risk. In the present Forum, we explore these tensions through a narrative review and qualitative synthesis, arguing that the possible benefits and risks of biodiverse urban areas need not be in conflict. We compile evidence linking urban nature features to zoonotic and vector-borne disease risk, identifying five interactions of concern and highlighting the importance of proactive management. Building on this, we outline various urban design and planning actions that can reduce potential risks for visitors while maintaining urban greening cobenefits. Discussing the issue alongside a One Health perspective, we emphasize the importance of an integrated, cross-sector approach to create resilient cities that support human, animal, and environmental well-being. We conclude that adaptive management can mitigate disease concerns while maximizing urban nature benefits.

BioScience
The University of Melbourne (AU), Curtin University (AU), MIT University (MK), RMIT University (AU)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Zoonotic diseases and public health
1.88
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Resolving the Conflict between Infectious Disease and Beneficial Urban Nature — Holly L. Kirk, Katherine L. Robertson, et al. · BioScience (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS