At 4 a.m. CET on April 16, 2025, in Geneva, after years of negotiation and a final day of intense deliberation, the World Health Organization’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Body reached consensus on a Draft Pandemic Agreement.
This historic agreement lays the groundwork for how the world will prevent, prepare for, and respond to future pandemics. More than just a document, the agreement represents a global commitment to multilateralism and collaboration across borders and disciplines. It acknowledges a long-standing elemental truth: that human health is interdependent and deeply intertwined with the health of animals and our shared environment.
Building on decades of global health engagement — from the pioneering 2004 Manhattan Principles to the 2019 Berlin Principles on One Health, and our influential international policy work through the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) — we have had the privilege, over the past three years, to represent the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) in the pandemic agreement negotiations.
From the earliest drafts, when One Health was unfamiliar to many delegates and prevention was little more than an afterthought, we have consistently championed a transformative vision that commits to actions to prevent pandemics at the source — those interfaces in nature where viral pathogens first make outside contact. We’ve championed a holistic One Health approach rather than merely responding once it’s too late. Today, that vision is embedded in a legally binding agreement.
Critically, the Pandemic Agreement recognizes the need for prevention through upstream interventions, such as safeguarding intact ecosystems and tackling the commercial live wildlife trade. These are not optional components but are core to the new global health architecture.
Early in the negotiations, one of the governments we met with asked, “What does wildlife have to do with it?” Through unceasing efforts to share scientific and technical knowledge and expertise, the WHO member states have now endorsed an agreement that recognizes the reality that human contact with live wildlife must be regulated or curbed, as part of prevention of pathogen spillovers — the essence of prevention at source.
The agreement’s commitment to One Health goes beyond rhetoric. It mandates cross-sectoral surveillance systems, a major step toward dismantling siloed approaches that have plagued coordinated pandemic prevention. It calls for early-warning systems that bridge veterinary, public health, and environmental data streams. And it establishes initial guidelines for equitable benefit sharing.
The Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing (PABS) mechanism is especially crucial as it ensures the timely sharing of pathogen samples and genetic sequence data while protecting the rights and interests of countries and communities contributing to this global public good.
Countries around the world have already begun adopting One Health principles, which this agreement embraces. Integrated surveillance networks and interagency coordination will yield results from Uganda to the Netherlands and Bangladesh to Brazil. But national efforts alone are not enough.
A coordinated global response rooted in science, equity, and mutual accountability is essential. Still, challenges remain. One Health efforts continue to be underfunded and inconsistently implemented. Data sharing is too often slow, fragmented, or politically fraught. Some global actors have been reluctant to share their expertise, leaving gaps that others, often less equipped or less aligned with the spirit of multilateralism, are quick to fill.
But with the agreement on the Pandemic Agreement text, we have an unprecedented opportunity to change course. The framework is in place. Now come some critical steps: adoption by the World Health Assembly in May, subsequent ratification by governments, and the most challenging part: building on the agreed text and turning ambition into action.
Moving forward, we must invest in the systems that will prevent future pandemics and not just respond to them. This means funding integrated surveillance networks, fostering global interagency collaboration, and protecting the world’s remaining wild places. It means enshrining One Health in national legislation and policy while ensuring its implementation is equitable, science-based, and inclusive of traditional knowledge and community voices.
It also means taking action at the national level to limit the interface between wildlife, domestic animals, and people, including in live animal markets, as part of prevention at source.
This moment can be a win not just for global health but for multilateralism itself — a strong reminder that collective action is possible even in a divided world when the stakes are high enough. With sufficient good will and political commitment, governments can find common ground and consensus rather than dissent and division.
It is also a moment that future generations can look back on, feel appreciation, and be inspired to take their own action. We’ve already experienced the cost of inaction: millions of lives lost, livelihoods shattered. The question was never whether another pandemic would strike, but when. With this agreement, the world has taken a decisive step forward for our collective survival. Let’s not waste it.
Chris Walzer is executive director for health at the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), where Susan Lieberman is vice president for international policy, and Christine Franklin is intergovernmental policy officer.
Banner image: Blackwater oxbow lake in the Amazon. Image by Rhett Butler for Mongabay.
Related audio from Mongabay’s podcast: The best way to prevent pandemics is by investing in nature, says Neil Vora MD, listen here:
See related commentaries:
Nepal’s climate change adaptation strategy needs One Health approach (commentary)
One Health: A necessary blend of biodiversity and human health goals (commentary)
