IN A NUTSHELL
Author's Note 
Climate change, biodiversity loss, and health system fragility are increasingly converging into a unified domain of systemic risk. However, global governance frameworks remain structurally fragmented, treating environmental, epidemiological, and economic risks as discrete phenomena. This misalignment limits the capacity of states to anticipate and absorb compound shocks.

This paper argues that biological risk—defined as the interaction between ecological disruption, pathogen dynamics, and human vulnerability—should be incorporated into macroprudential governance frameworks. Drawing on recent evidence linking climate change to increased mortality, disease transmission, and economic loss, we propose a shift from sectoral policy responses to integrated resilience modelling.

We introduce the Integrated Sovereign Resilience Index (ISRI), a composite indicator designed to quantify national capacity to withstand biologically mediated shocks. The ISRI integrates five domains: climate exposure, epidemiological risk, health system surge capacity, biodiversity integrity, and food system stability. We situate this index within a broader One Health Nexus Governance framework, which embeds biological variables into fiscal policy, sovereign risk assessment, and development financing.

We further outline policy mechanisms for operationalization, including climate–health stress testing, prevention-aligned financing, and the integration of One Health principles into treasury-level decision-making.

We conclude that resilience must be reframed as a core economic variable rather than a sectoral outcome. States that internalize biological risk into governance systems will be better positioned to maintain stability under accelerating climate pressures.

This work contributes to ongoing research on climate change, zoonotic disease dynamics, and One Health governance in sub-Saharan Africa, with a focus on policy integration and economic resilience

By Kalolo Chitembo

Crisis Expert/ Emergency Medicine Specialist/ Health Economist/ Global Health Advocate/ Climate and ONE HEALTH Researcher

Zambia

  Governing Biological Risk in an Era of Climate Instability

Integrating One Health into Macroprudential Policy Architecture

 

 

Introduction

The accelerating convergence of climate change, ecological degradation, and population health risks represents a fundamental challenge to contemporary governance systems. While each domain has been extensively studied, their interactions remain insufficiently integrated into policy and economic decision-making frameworks.

Climate change is projected to contribute to millions of additional deaths and substantial economic losses over the coming decades, driven by heat exposure, food insecurity, and the expansion of infectious diseases. Concurrently, biodiversity loss is increasing the probability of zoonotic spillover, while health systems—particularly in low- and middle-income countries—remain under-resourced to manage large-scale shocks.

Despite these trends, institutional responses remain fragmented. Ministries of finance, health, and environment operate within distinct analytical frameworks, limiting the capacity to model and manage compound risks. This fragmentation constitutes a structural vulnerability.

The One Health approach, which recognizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health, offers a conceptual foundation for integration. However, its implementation has largely been confined to technical coordination rather than systemic governance reform.

This paper advances the argument that biological risk must be incorporated into macroprudential policy architecture. We propose a measurable framework—the Integrated Sovereign Resilience Index (ISRI)—and outline institutional pathways for embedding One Health principles into economic governance.

The Convergence of Biological and Economic Risk

The relationship between environmental change and health outcomes is increasingly well established. Rising temperatures are associated with increased mortality, reduced labour productivity, and heightened strain on health systems. Climate variability is altering the geographic distribution of vector-borne diseases such as malaria and dengue, exposing new populations to infection.

At the same time, land-use change and biodiversity loss are intensifying human–animal interactions, increasing the likelihood of zoonotic spillover events. These processes are not independent; they interact to produce cascading risks that affect both population health and economic stability.

Economic analyses suggest that climate-related disruptions could significantly reduce global output over the coming decades. Importantly, these impacts are not limited to physical infrastructure or agricultural productivity. Health-related effects—including increased disease burden and reduced workforce participation—constitute a major component of economic loss.

However, these risks are not systematically incorporated into sovereign risk assessments or macroeconomic models. Financial systems typically evaluate exposure to climate risk through physical and transition pathways but rarely account for epidemiological dynamics or health system capacity. This omission limits the accuracy of risk pricing and investment decision-making.

From One Health to Macroprudential Governance

The One Health framework provides a critical conceptual basis for integration but requires expansion into governance and financial systems. We define macroprudential biological governance as the incorporation of ecological and health variables into national economic policy and risk management structures.

This shift entails three key transformations:

Analytical integration: linking climate, health, and ecological data within unified modelling frameworks

Institutional alignment: embedding One Health principles across ministries, particularly finance and planning

Financial internalization: incorporating biological risk into budgeting, debt management, and investment decisions

Such integration would enable governments to anticipate compound risks and allocate resources more effectively.

The Integrated Sovereign Resilience Index (ISRI)

Conceptual Framework

The ISRI is designed to quantify a country’s resilience to biologically mediated shocks by integrating exposure and capacity variables across five domains:

1. Climate Exposure (CE)

Indicators include temperature extremes, precipitation variability, and frequency of extreme weather events.

2. Epidemiological Risk (ER)

Captures disease burden, vector distribution shifts, zoonotic spillover potential, and surveillance system coverage.

3. Health System Surge Capacity (HSSC)

Includes healthcare workforce density, infrastructure availability (e.g., ICU beds), and emergency response capability.

4. Biodiversity Integrity (BI)

Measures ecosystem stability, habitat loss, and human–wildlife interface intensity.

5. Food System Stability (FSS)

Assesses agricultural resilience, supply chain robustness, and nutritional security.

Functional Form

The ISRI can be expressed as:

ISRI = (CE × ER) / (HSSC + BI + FSS)

Where:

Higher values indicate greater systemic vulnerability

Lower values reflect stronger resilience capacity

Operational Utility

The ISRI enables:

Cross-country comparison of resilience capacity

Integration into sovereign credit risk analysis

Targeting of development financing

Monitoring of policy effectiveness over time

Policy Integration Pathways

1. Climate–Health Stress Testing

Governments should incorporate epidemiological and health system variables into macroeconomic stress-testing frameworks. This includes modelling scenarios involving simultaneous climate shocks and disease outbreaks.

2. Prevention-Oriented Financing

Public finance systems should shift from reactive expenditure to preventive investment. This includes funding for surveillance systems, primary healthcare, and ecosystem protection.

3. Risk Transfer Mechanisms

Parametric insurance and other risk financing tools can provide rapid liquidity in response to climate-related shocks. Expanding these mechanisms to include health triggers would enhance systemic resilience.

4. Institutional Reform

Embedding One Health units within finance ministries would facilitate cross-sectoral coordination and ensure that biological risks are considered in fiscal decision-making.

5. Multilateral Alignment

International financial institutions and development partners should incorporate resilience metrics such as ISRI into lending frameworks and policy conditionalities.

Implications for Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Low- and middle-income countries face disproportionate exposure to climate and biological risks while having limited adaptive capacity. Integrating resilience into economic governance offers an opportunity to align development pathways with long-term stability.

In regions such as sub-Saharan Africa, investments in health systems, climate adaptation, and biodiversity conservation can generate co-benefits across multiple sectors. However, achieving this integration requires access to financing, technical capacity, and institutional reform.

Conclusion

Biological risk is no longer a peripheral concern; it is central to economic stability and governance. The convergence of climate change, ecological disruption, and health system vulnerability necessitates a shift from fragmented policy responses to integrated resilience frameworks.

The Integrated Sovereign Resilience Index provides a practical tool for operationalizing this shift, enabling governments and financial institutions to quantify and manage systemic risk more effectively.

Embedding One Health principles into macroprudential governance represents not only a scientific and policy imperative but also a strategic necessity in an era of accelerating climate instability.