Mounting evidence supports the connections between exposure to environment types––such as green spaces and biodiversity––and human health. However, the mechanistic links that connect biodiversity (the variety of life) and human health, plus the level of supporting evidence, are less clear. Here, we undertook a scoping review to map the links between biodiversity and human health and summarise the levels of associated evidence using an established weight of evidence framework. Distinct from other reviews, we provide additional context regarding the environment-microbiome-health axis, evaluate the environmental buffering pathway (e.g., biodiversity impacts on air pollution), and draw upon expert opinion to provide case studies on three underrepresented linkages. The case studies include (1) biodiversity and Indigenous Peoples’ health, (2) biodiversity and urban social equity, and (3) biodiversity and COVID-19. We observed a moderate level of evidence to support the environmental microbiota-human health pathway and a moderate-high level of evidence to support broader nature pathways (e.g., green space) to various health outcomes, from stress reduction to enhanced wellbeing and improved social cohesion. However, studies of broader nature pathways did not typically include specific biodiversity metrics, indicating clear research gaps. Further research is required to understand the connections and causative pathways between biodiversity (e.g., using metrics such as taxonomy, diversity/richness, structure, and function) and health outcomes. There are well-established frameworks to assess the effects of broad classifications of nature on human health. These can assist future research in linking biodiversity metrics to human health outcomes. Our case studies on underrepresented linkages highlight the roles of biodiversity and its loss on urban lived experiences, infectious diseases, and Indigenous Peoples’ sovereignty and livelihoods. More research and awareness of these socioecological interconnections are needed.

The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 likely emerged from a wildlife source with transmission to humans followed by rapid geographic spread throughout the globe and severe impacts on both human health and the global economy. Since the onset of the pandemic, there have been many instances of human-to-animal transmission involving companion, farmed and zoo animals, and limited evidence for spread into free-living wildlife. The establishment of reservoirs of infection in wild animals would create significant challenges to infection control in humans and could pose a threat to the welfare and conservation status of wildlife. We discuss the potential for exposure, onward transmission and persistence of SARS-CoV-2 in an initial selection of wild mammals (bats, canids, felids, mustelids, great apes, rodents and cervids). Dynamic risk assessment and targeted surveillance are important tools for the early detection of infection in wildlife, and here we describe a framework for collating and synthesising emerging information to inform targeted surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 in wildlife. Surveillance efforts should be integrated with information from public and veterinary health initiatives to provide insights into the potential role of wild mammals in the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2.