European wildlife health surveillance is fragmented, poorly harmonised, and lacks long-term sustainability, limiting the EU's ability to detect and respond to emerging infectious diseases, according to a foresight study published by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 20 July 2026. The external scientific report, produced by the Enetwild Consortium, identifies climate change, biodiversity loss, weak governance, misinformation, and underfunded surveillance as key drivers of future risk, and calls for a systemic shift from reactive outbreak response to preventive approaches that address structural drivers of disease emergence.
The study applied structured expert elicitation, combining online workshops, questionnaires, interviews, and scenario-based activities to identify future drivers, emerging risks, and preparedness needs for wildlife health in Europe. Experts highlighted three interconnected categories of future risk: environmental pressures (climate change and biodiversity loss), socio-political challenges (weak governance, misinformation, underfunded surveillance), and pathogen-related threats such as spillover and antimicrobial resistance. Preparedness was deemed dependent on integrated One Health approaches, stronger governance and coordination, improved surveillance and data systems, societal trust, and broader environmental transitions in food and energy systems.
A major finding is the limitation of current European wildlife surveillance. Experts noted fragmented monitoring systems, poor data harmonisation, and limited long-term sustainability. Hunting bag data, while useful as indicators of population trends, were considered insufficient as direct density estimates due to biases from hunting effort, policy changes, and disease management. African Swine Fever was cited as a current example of a widespread factor affecting hunting bags, both directly through its impact on wild boar populations and management, and indirectly through changes in hunting activities and regulations affecting other species.
Emerging technologies—including camera trapping, drones, acoustic monitoring, multitargeted environmental surveillance, telemetry, AI-assisted analysis, and citizen science—were identified as promising complementary tools for surveillance and early warning systems, though no single method was considered sufficient alone. The report frames preparedness as a fundamentally interdisciplinary and cross-sector governance challenge requiring systemic transformation across science, policy, society, and environmental management. Participants emphasised the need to move toward preventive approaches addressing structural drivers such as climate change, biodiversity loss, land-use change, and livestock intensification.
The report's findings carry implications for multiple stakeholders. EU regulatory bodies and national authorities face pressure to invest in harmonised, sustainable surveillance systems and cross-sector coordination. Wildlife and livestock sectors may see new compliance costs related to monitoring and data sharing. The agricultural industry, particularly pig farming, could be affected by improved early warning for diseases like African Swine Fever, potentially reducing outbreak-related losses. Environmental and public health NGOs may welcome the emphasis on One Health and preventive approaches, but could push for stronger action on biodiversity and climate drivers. The report does not propose specific legislative measures but provides evidence to inform future EU policy on wildlife health surveillance and preparedness.