Study Reveals Disconnect in Wild Meat Perceptions During COVID-19

A recent study conducted by researchers from the University of Oxford, the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), CIFOR-ICRAF, and various institutional partners highlights a significant disconnect between media narratives and public perceptions regarding the consumption of wild meat in Central Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings, published in the journal People and Nature, offer critical insights into the interplay between media reporting, community beliefs, and behavioral changes related to wildlife consumption.

Yuhan Li, a DPhil student at the University of Oxford’s Department of Biology and lead author of the study, noted that media coverage predominantly emphasized the risks associated with zoonotic diseases linked to wild meat. “Media articles tended to emphasize the risks of a virus spill-over from wild meat to humans,” Li stated. Despite these media narratives, the research revealed that personal experiences and economic factors significantly influenced public attitudes toward wild meat consumption.

In Central Africa, wild meat serves as a vital source of food and income. The study examined over 260 media articles from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Gabon, and the Republic of Congo, along with phone surveys conducted with more than 3,600 respondents in Cameroon and the DRC. The analysis showed that while 61% of media articles discussed the health risks associated with wild meat, many respondents considered domesticated red meat to be the more dangerous protein source.

The study also revealed that nearly half of the respondents in Cameroon reported a decrease in wild meat consumption due to health concerns. In contrast, one-third of DRC respondents indicated they had increased their wild meat consumption due to the scarcity and rising prices of alternative protein sources.

Implications for Policy and Wildlife Management

The research underscores the importance of understanding social perceptions around wild meat to inform effective interventions. While discussions about imposing bans on wild meat trade gained traction in the media as a potential response to COVID-19, there was no consensus among study participants regarding the appropriateness of such measures. Views were divided in Cameroon, but support for bans was stronger in the DRC.

Lude Kinzonzi from the Wildlife Conservation Society emphasized the need for a more nuanced approach to behavior change. “If we want to shift behaviors around wild meat consumption in Central Africa, we need to start by listening,” Kinzonzi explained. “Top-down bans or generic health warnings rarely work. What makes the difference are approaches grounded in real community needs and motivations.”

The authors advocate for evidence-based communication campaigns that engage trusted local influencers. They emphasize the necessity of context-specific policy measures, which should include expanding access to safe and affordable alternatives to wild meat. Strengthening local institutions, law enforcement, and monitoring systems is also crucial for effective wildlife management and public health strategies.

The study concludes that a multifaceted approach can achieve both biodiversity conservation and improved human health outcomes, particularly in regions where wild meat is integral to food security and livelihoods. The findings serve as a call to action for policymakers and conservationists to rethink their strategies in light of the complex realities faced by communities in Central Africa.

For further details, refer to the study titled “The impact of COVID-19 on public perceptions of wild meat in Central Africa,” available in People and Nature. DOI: 10.1002/pan3.70094.