Illegal urban wild meat supply chain characterization: A case study on zoonosis in Lusaka, Zambia

INTRODUCTION: The illegal wild meat trade poses significant threats to biodiversity and public health. In Zambia, data regarding trade remain limited. This study aimed to analyze its supply chain, perform a broad risk assessment of multiple zoonotic pathogens, and develop a sustainable wild meat trade framework. METHODS: A grounded theory-based qualitative study was conducted in Lusaka district between October 2023 and February 2024. Thirty-eight in-depth interviews were carried out with key informants from the government, conservation organizations, academia, butchers, and research sectors. The participants were selected using purposive sampling followed by snowballing. The inclusion criterion was individuals with professional or operational knowledge of the wild meat trade; the exclusion criterion included a lack of relevant expertise or refusal to provide informed consent. The interviews were conducted in English or Nyanja; Nyanja interviews were then translated to English. Interviews were transcribed using Whisper AI, and thematically analyzed using grounded theory by means of NVivo 12. RESULTS: The illicit supply chain includes poachers in protected areas, urban-based financiers, middlemen, and urban consumers. The species most commonly traded include buffalo, kudu, impala, warthog, and hippopotamus. The key zoonotic risk factors identified were unhygienic field processing, transport without refrigeration over distances >300 km, species misrepresentation (e.g., anthrax-infected hippopotamus sold as buffalo), and meat consumption from dead or snared animals. Poor enforcement and high demand in Lusaka sustain the trade. A sustainable wild meat trade framework was developed, focusing on community engagement, alternative livelihoods, game farming, and public health education. CONCLUSION: Zambia's illegal wild meat trade poses serious zoonotic risks due to unhygienic practices, poor oversight, and species misrepresentation. Reducing these risks requires multisectoral collaboration, stronger enforcement, behavior change strategies, and investment in sustainable livelihood alternatives for communities near protected areas.