Is the current surge in political and financial attention to One Health solidifying or splintering the movement?

From theory to practice: Analyzing factors that foster the successful implementation of the one health approach for enhancing health security in Cameroon

Background

Multisectoral collaboration is crucial in effectively managing public health emergencies. The One Health approach, which emphasizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health, has gained recognition as an effective strategy. This study analysis the factors influencing the implementation of the One Health approach in Cameroon and examines its effects on public health emergency management.

Method

A survey was conducted among 44 stakeholders from key sectors involved in implementing the "One Health approach" in Cameroon. Data were collected with a structured questionnaire using a self-administered approach. Statistical analysis using the Ki Square test was conducted to identify associations between variables.

Results

The findings revealed that stakeholders in Cameroon lacked prior training on the One Health approach, primarily due to its absence in their academic programs. However, ad hoc trainings during public health emergencies were effective in involving various sectors. Limited communication and collaboration between different sectors, often operating in silos, posed significant challenges. Stakeholders with previous collaborative experiences and existing relationships demonstrated a greater propensity for multisectoral collaboration. The involvement of environmental health professionals in collaboration activities was limited, highlighting the need for improved engagement. Strong leadership, supported by coordination structures and platforms, played a critical role in facilitating collaboration during public health emergencies. Communication channels, such as regular multisectoral meetings, were essential in fostering relationships and trust among stakeholders. However, financial constraints hindered cross-sector cooperation.

Conclusion

To enhance multisectoral collaboration in public health emergency management, there is a need to prioritize training on the One Health approach and promote cross-sector communication and collaboration. Strengthening coordination structures and platforms, improving resource allocation, and fostering a culture of accountability and trust are crucial for effective implementation. This study provides insights into the challenges and opportunities in implementing the One Health approach in Cameroon and offers valuable lessons for other countries seeking to enhance their multisectoral response to public health emergencies.

The Socioeconomic Impact of Diseases of Working Equids in Low and Middle-Income Countries: A Critical Review

Working equids provide a crucial contribution to the livelihoods and food security of communities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Nevertheless, they are a neglected category within animal health policies and interventions of governmental and non-governmental institutions. This critical review aims to assess the socioeconomic impact of diseases of working equids in LMICs. By highlighting the implications of diseases on working equid welfare, human wellbeing and livelihoods, this review seeks to sensitise policymakers within governments and international organisations to develop policies and interventions aimed at protecting the health of working equids and, consequently, the health and livelihoods of their dependent communities. Twenty relevant publications were identified through the search of five databases (CAB Abstracts, Web of Science Core Collection, BIOSIS, EMBASE and Scopus), backward citation searching and screening of indexes of proceedings and Special Issues retrieved from the database search. The review findings show that diseases of working equids have detrimental socioeconomic effects. However, this subject is under-researched and restricted to few diseases and geographical settings. Considering the complexity of the issue, this review demonstrates that the 'One Health' approach represents an opportunity to clarify the link between equid health, human wellbeing and livelihoods, facilitating the translation of research into policy.

The continuum of care as a unifying framework for intergenerational and interspecies health equity

Introduction

Unlocking the full potential of different people and organizations to address existential health threats requires shared goals and frameworks that allow people to see themselves contributing to a common and shared continuum of care. A new narrative to help people implement collective action for collective problems is needed.

Methods

This paper is draw from the co-authors experience working from the local to international level on planetary health problems.

Results

The proposed conceptual framework expands the socioecological model of health to help formulate multilevel approaches that foster healthier circumstances for all by revealing the mutual benefits that emerge from pooling expertise, funding, and political will to solve multiple problems with coordinated investment of resources and effort. It is intended to support program planning and communication. This framework is a response to the absence of systematic attempts to concurrently counteract the social and environmental conditions leading to disease, dysfunction and deficits which is increasingly seen as being problematic, especially as the root causes of health problems and solutions converge across species, sectors, and generations. The framework is embedded in the idea of interspecies and intergenerational health equity.

Discussion

Ensuring interspecies and intergenerational health equity requires each actor to fulfill their roles along the continuum while supporting the needs of others. A socio-ecological continuum of care provides bundled options that combine knowledge from different sectors, disciplines and perspectives to guide interventions over time across a comprehensive array of services and support spanning all levels of needs, species and generations.

Pillars for successful operationalization of one health as an ecosystem approach: experience from a human-animal interface in the Maasai steppe in Tanzania

BACKGROUND

Solving complex public health challenges requires integrated approaches to health, such as One Health. A key element of the One Health approach is the interrelationship between human, animal and environmental health and the associated multistakeholder collaboration across many cultural, disciplinary, institutional and sectoral boundaries. Here we describe a pragmatic approach for One Health operationalisation basing on our long-term engagement with communities faced with health challenges in a human-livestock-wildlife interface in the Maasai steppe in northern Tanzania.

METHODS

Using a qualitative study design we performed an outcome mapping to document insights on results integration from our previous project. Data were collected through participatory community meetings, in-depth interviews and field observations. Field notes were coded and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We found that effective implementation of One Health interventions in complex ecosystems works best by understanding local conditions and their context and by working closely with the local people and relevant disciplinary players as one complex adaptive system. Community engagement, systems analysis, transdisciplinarity as well as political commitment played critical roles in successful operationalization of One Health. We have further emphasized that project ownership is as important to the local community as it is to the researchers. When used in combination, these elements (community engagement, systems analysis, transdisciplinarity) provide essential pillars for co-creation and maintaining collective action to set a common vision across disciplines, serving as inputs for a metrics-based toolbox for One Health operationalisation.

CONCLUSION

Considering the novelty and complexity of One Health operationalisation, there is need also to develop scorecard-based guidance for assessment of One Health programs at local and national level. This paper proposes a framework for the optimization of an ecosystems-based One Health approach for prevention and control of Vector-Borne Diseases implemented at the local, sub-national or national level.

Capacity for One Health research in the Horn of Africa

Introduction

In low-and-middle-income countries, many people live near livestock. Rural livelihoods need improvement, however livestock-sector growth is a 'wicked' problem, needing careful management and One Health approaches which balance positive aspects of livestock ownership against deleterious impacts.

Materials and methods

A Key Informant survey was delivered to higher education and research institute Units in Horn of Africa, to quantify baseline estimates for One Health research, understand characteristics, and risk factors for usage.

Principal results

Four-fifths of Units acknowledged some One Health research; however, this was biased towards human-focused dimensions including at the human/animal/environment-interface and human/animal-interface; One Health approaches were also more often reported when all or the animal/environment dimensions were examined. We detected subject-bias impacting environment-focus in research; only research-focused Units had staff with higher environmental science degrees. Our work suggested good national research buy-in, and Units engaging with national policy-makers most often; local policy-makers were least engaged. Four-fifths of Units had laboratories, with two-thirds processing either human or animal samples and half processing both. Funding for equipment purchase, supplies and maintenance, staff training on technical/safety issues was nearly half that previously identified.

Major conclusions

The necessity for One Health research approaches is acknowledged, however our results suggest persistent and systemic neglect of the environment in approaches and research staff education, and a lack of integration across government hierarchies during policy-development, potentially driven by international organisation domination. Further, Units lack funding for laboratory equipment purchase/supplies/maintenance, and staff training on technical/safety issues.

The interfaces between One Health and Global Health: A scoping review

One Health (OH) and Global Health (GH) are interconnected perspectives that may contribute to subsidizing GH policies. This scoping review aims to map the volume, nature, and characteristics of studies focused on the interface of OH and GH concepts. We used PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Scopus, and The Virtual Health Library (BVS) as the literature data sources for the review. The search strategy used the descriptors "one health", "one health concept", "one medicine", "global health", "international health", and "planetary health" in title and abstracts. We included original research presented as articles in scientific journals, book chapters or conference papers written in English, Spanish, or Portuguese, exploring the intersections between OH and GH concepts, not necessarily as their primary objectives, and published up to December 31, 2021. A total of 1.060 references were identified in the databases after removing duplicates, 139 publications selected for full-text evaluation and 45 publications were included for analysis. All included publications were published between 2011 and 2021, with the highest concentration in 2014 (22.2%). First authors were most frequently from the United States (35.6%), followed by the United Kingdom (15.6%). Overall, seven key themes were identified zoonosis, emerging infectious diseases, antimicrobial resistance, food safety, policy, human resources, and Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The majority of the included publications employed OH concepts based on the United States Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, and the American Veterinary Medical Association definitions. We observed a common understanding of OH as an area of knowledge involving multiple disciplines and professionals and recognizing that both humans' and animals' health and the environment are interdependent. Although most authors demonstrated that health issues transcend national boundaries, a formal definition for GH was frequently not clearly identified. OH and GH interfaces are essential for accomplishing the 2030 Agenda and its SDG.

A global analysis of One Health Networks and the proliferation of One Health collaborations

There has been a renewed focus on threats to the human-animal-environment interface as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and investments in One Health collaborations are expected to increase. Efforts to monitor the development of One Health Networks (OHNs) are essential to avoid duplication or misalignment of investments. This Series paper shows the global distribution of existing OHNs and assesses their collective characteristics to identify potential deficits in the ways OHNs have formed and to help increase the effectiveness of investments. We searched PubMed, Google, Google Scholar, and relevant conference websites for potential OHNs and identified 184 worldwide for further analysis. We developed four case studies to show important findings from our research and exemplify best practices in One Health operationalisation. Our findings show that, although more OHNs were formed in the past 10 years than in the preceding decade, investment in OHNs has not been equitably distributed; more OHNs are formed and headquartered in Europe than in any other region, and emerging infections and novel pathogens were the priority focus area for most OHNs, with fewer OHNs focusing on other important hazards and pressing threats to health security. We found substantial deficits in the OHNs collaboration model regarding the diversity of stakeholder and sector representation, which we argue impedes effective and equitable OHN formation and contributes to other imbalances in OHN distribution and priorities. These findings are supported by previous evidence that shows the skewed investment in One Health thus far. The increased attention to One Health after the COVID-19 pandemic is an opportunity to focus efforts and resources to areas that need them most. Analyses, such as this Series paper, should be used to establish databases and repositories of OHNs worldwide. Increased attention should then be given to understanding existing resource allocation and distribution patterns, establish more egalitarian networks that encompass the breadth of One Health issues, and serve communities most affected by emerging, re-emerging, or endemic threats at the human-animal-environment interface.

Towards an integrated surveillance of zoonotic diseases in Burkina Faso: the case of anthrax

Background

Anthrax is a zoonotic disease that causes frequent outbreaks in livestock and fatal human cases in Burkina Faso. Effective surveillance of this disease calls for the establishment of an integrated surveillance system, in line with the One Health concept. However, despite a strong technical and financial support from international partners, surveillance is still poorly conducted within an integrated approach. Based on stakeholder perspectives, the study has for objective to deepen our understanding of the anthrax surveillance system and to identify the obstacles and levers towards a more integrated approach to anthrax surveillance in Burkina Faso.

Methods

The data was collected from a literature review and interviews with surveillance stakeholders. We first conducted a qualitative descriptive analysis of the data to characterize the surveillance system (programmes, actors, collaboration). In a second step, we conducted a thematic analysis of the informants' discourse in order to identify what represents an obstacle or, conversely, a lever for a more integrated approach to anthrax surveillance.

Results

The surveillance system of anthrax in Burkina Faso includes three programmes (in the livestock, wildlife and human sectors), which involves 30 actors. These sectoral programmes operate almost independently from one another, although some collaborations are existing for the governance and implementation of surveillance activities. Analysis of the discourse of key stakeholders led to the identification of four categories of factors that may influence the implementation of an integrated surveillance system in the country: knowledge; technical, organizational and social capacities; motivation; intersectoral governance.

Conclusions

This study highlights the difficulty of translating One Health governance to the national level and the need to better articulate the visions of all categories of stakeholders. This study also reveals the need to develop specific evaluation systems for integrated policies in order to provide credible evidence of their added value for a better management of zoonotic diseases. Finally, our study underlines the need to act upstream the emergence of zoonoses and allocate more resources to the prevention of zoonoses than to their control.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-13878-3.

Search term “One Health” remains of limited use to identify relevant scientific publications: Denmark as a case study

One Health has become a popular approach, and scientific advancements in the field should be easily findable and accessible to a wide range of relevant audiences, from researchers to policymakers, and across sectors. We conducted a systematic narrative review of available scientific publications concerning One Health in the setting of Denmark that were retrievable using “One Health” as the key search term. Three searches in two databases yielded 30 retrieved publications, 13 of which were included in the review. The included publications had been published between 2015 and 2021. Twelve of the included publications were co-authored in collaboration across institutes from different sectors. Three of the included publications had focus on antimicrobial resistance, three on disease surveillance and/or control, and five were assessments or evaluations. The overall number of publications identified by a search using “One Health” as the key search term was small, and the search identified some publications that were not relevant to One Health. Our work thus highlights a missed scientific and communication opportunity of signposting articles as relevant to One Health. Using the expression “One Health” as keyword could help making One Health research more easily findable and thereby obtaining an overview of research in the field.

When One Health Meets the United Nations Ocean Decade: Global Agendas as a Pathway to Promote Collaborative Interdisciplinary Research on Human-Nature Relationships

Strong evidence shows that exposure and engagement with the natural world not only improve human wellbeing but can also help promote environmentally friendly behaviors. Human-nature relationships are at the heart of global agendas promoted by international organizations including the World Health Organization’s (WHO) “One Health” and the United Nations (UN) “Ocean Decade.” These agendas demand collaborative multisector interdisciplinary efforts at local, national, and global levels. However, while global agendas highlight global goals for a sustainable world, developing science that directly addresses these agendas from design through to delivery and outputs does not come without its challenges. In this article, we present the outcomes of international meetings between researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers from the United Kingdom and Brazil. We propose a model for interdisciplinary work under such global agendas, particularly the interface between One Health and the UN Ocean Decade and identify three priority research areas closely linked to each other: human-nature connection, conservation-human behavior, and implementation strategies (bringing stakeholders together). We also discuss a number of recommendations for moving forward.

Prioritizing zoonotic diseases using a multisectoral, One Health approach for The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)

BACKGROUND

Zoonotic diseases pose a significant threat to human, animal, and environmental health. The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has endured a significant burden of zoonotic disease impacts. To address zoonotic disease threats in ECOWAS, a One Health Zoonotic Disease Prioritization (OHZDP) was conducted over five days in December 2018 to prioritize zoonotic diseases of greatest regional concern and develop next steps for addressing these priority zoonoses through a regional, multisectoral, One Health approach.

METHODS

The OHZDP Process uses a mixed methods prioritization process developed by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. During the OHZDP workshop, representatives from human, animal, and environmental health ministries from all 15 ECOWAS Member States used a transparent and equal process to prioritize endemic and emerging zoonotic diseases of greatest regional concern that should be jointly addressed by One Health ministries and other partners. After the priority zoonotic diseases were identified, participants discussed recommendations and further regional actions to address the priority zoonoses and advance One Health in the region.

RESULTS

ECOWAS Member States agreed upon a list of seven priority zoonotic diseases for the region - Anthrax, Rabies, Ebola and other viral hemorrhagic fevers (for example, Marburg fever, Lassa fever, Rift Valley fever, Crimean-Congo Hemorrhagic fever), zoonotic influenzas, zoonotic tuberculosis, Trypanosomiasis, and Yellow fever. Participants developed recommendations and further regional actions that could be taken, using a One Health approach to address the priority zoonotic diseases in thematic areas including One Health collaboration and coordination, surveillance and laboratory, response and preparedness, prevention and control, workforce development, and research.

CONCLUSIONS

ECOWAS was the first region to use the OHZDP Process to prioritize zoonotic disease of greatest concern. With identified priority zoonotic diseases for the region, ECOWAS Member States can collaborate more effectively to address zoonotic diseases threats across the region using a One Health approach. Strengthening national and regional level multisectoral, One Health Coordination Mechanisms will allow ECOWAS Member States to advance One Health and have the biggest impact on improving health outcomes for both people and animals living in a shared environment.

What are the barriers to implementing national antimicrobial resistance action plans? A novel mixed-methods policy analysis in Pakistan

Despite political commitment to address antimicrobial resistance (AMR), countries are facing challenges to implementing policies to reduce inappropriate use of antibiotics. Critical factors to the success of policy implementation in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), such as capacity for enforcement, contestation by influential stakeholders and financial interests, have been insufficiently considered. Using Pakistan as a case study representing a populous country with extremely high antibiotic usage, we identified 195 actors who affect policies on antibiotic use in humans and animals through a snowballing process and interviewed 48 of these who were nominated as most influential. We used a novel card game-based methodology to investigate policy actors' support for implementation of different regulatory approaches addressing actions of frontline healthcare providers and antibiotic producers across the One Health spectrum. We found that there was only widespread support for implementing hard regulations (prohibiting certain actions) against antibiotic suppliers with little power-such as unqualified/informal healthcare providers and animal feed producers-but not to target more powerful groups such as doctors, farmers and pharmaceutical companies. Policy actors had limited knowledge to develop implementation plans to address inappropriate use of antibiotics in animals, even though this was recognized as a critical driver of AMR. Our results indicate that local political and economic dynamics may be more salient to policy actors influencing implementation of AMR national action plans than solutions presented in global guidelines that rely on implementation of hard regulations. This highlights a disconnect between AMR action plans and the local contexts where implementation takes place. Thus if the global strategies to tackle AMR are to become implementable policies in LMIC, they will need greater appreciation of the power dynamics and systemic constraints that relate to many of the strategies proposed.

Operationalisation of consensual One Health roadmaps in countries for improved IHR capacities and health security

The COVID-19 pandemic is a devastating reminder that mitigating the threat of emerging zoonotic outbreaks relies on our collective capacity to work across human health, animal health and environment sectors. Despite the critical need for shared approaches, collaborative benchmarks in the International Health Regulations (IHR) Monitoring and Evaluation Framework and more specifically the Joint External Evaluation (JEE) often reveal low levels of performance in collaborative technical areas (TAs), thus identifying a real need to work on the human-animal-environment interface to improve health security. The National Bridging Workshops (NBWs) proposed jointly by the World Organisation of Animal Health and World Health Organization (WHO) provide opportunity for national human health, animal health, environment and other relevant sectors in countries to explore the efficiency and gaps in their coordination for the management of zoonotic diseases. The results, gathered in a prioritised roadmap, support the operationalisation of the recommendations made during JEE for TAs where a multisectoral One Health approach is beneficial. For those collaborative TAs (12 out of 19 in the JEE), more than two-thirds of the recommendations can be implemented through one or multiple activities jointly agreed during NBW. Interestingly, when associated with the WHO Benchmark Tool for IHR, it appears that NBW activities are often associated with lower level of performance than anticipated during the JEE missions, revealing that countries often overestimate their capacities at the human-animal-environment interface. Deeper, more focused and more widely shared discussions between professionals highlight the need for concrete foundations of multisectoral coordination to meet goals for One Health and improved global health security through IHR.

Cross-Sectoral Zoonotic Disease Surveillance in Western Kenya: Identifying Drivers and Barriers Within a Resource Constrained Setting

Background: Collaboration between the human and animal health sectors, including the sharing of disease surveillance data, has the potential to improve public health outcomes through the rapid detection of zoonotic disease events prior to widespread transmission in humans. Kenya has been at the forefront of embracing a collaborative approach in Africa with the inception of the Zoonotic Disease Unit in 2011. Joint outbreak responses have been coordinated at the national level, yet little is currently documented on cross-sectoral collaboration at the sub-national level.

Methods: Key informant interviews were conducted with 28 disease surveillance officers from the human and animal health sectors in three counties in western Kenya. An inductive process of thematic analysis was used to identify themes relating to barriers and drivers for cross-sectoral collaboration.

Results: The study identified four interlinking themes related to drivers and barriers for cross-sectoral collaboration. To drive collaboration at the sub-national level there needs to be a clear identification of “common objectives,” as currently exemplified by the response to suspected rabies and anthrax cases and routine meat hygiene activities. The action of collaboration, be it integrated responses to outbreaks or communication and data sharing, require “operational structures” to facilitate them, including the formalisation of reporting lines, supporting legislation and the physical infrastructure, from lab equipment to mobile phones, to facilitate the activities. These structures in turn require “appropriate resources” to support them, which will be allocated based on the “political will” of those who control the resources.

Conclusions: Ongoing collaborations between human and animal disease surveillance officers at the sub-national level were identified, driven by common objectives such as routine meat hygiene and response to suspected rabies and anthrax cases. In these areas a suitable operational structure is present, including a supportive legislative framework and clearly designated roles for officers within both sectors. There was support from disease surveillance officers to increase their collaboration, communication and data sharing across sectors, yet this is currently hindered by the lack of these formal operational structures and poor allocation of resources to disease surveillance. It was acknowledged that improving this resource allocation will require political will at the sub-national, national and international levels.

Intersectoral collaboration shaping One Health in the policy agenda: A comparative analysis of Ghana and India

Intersectoral collaborations are an integral component of the prevention and control of diseases in a complex health system. On the one hand, One Health (OH) is promoting the establishment of intersectoral collaborations for prevention at the human-animal-environment interface. On the other hand, operationalising OH can only be realized through intersectoral collaborations.

This work contributes to broadening the knowledge of the process for operationalising OH by analysing the governance structures behind different initiatives that tackle health problems at the human-animal-environment interface. The cases taken as examples for the analysis are the control and response to rabies and avian influenza under “classical OH”, and the management of floods and droughts for insights into “extended OH”. Data from Ghana and India were collected and compared to identify the key elements that enable ISC for OH.

Despite the case studies being heterogeneous in terms of their geographic, economic, social, cultural, and historical contexts, strong similarities were identified on how intersectoral collaborations in OH were initiated, managed, and taken to scale.

The actions documented for rabies prevention and control were historically based on one sector being the leader and implementer of activities, while avian influenza management relied more on intersectoral collaborations with clearly defined sectoral responsibilities. The management of the impact of flood and droughts on health provided a good example of intersectoral collaborations achieved by sectoral integration; however, the human health component was only involved in the response stage in the case of Ghana, while for India, there were broader schemes of intersectoral collaborations for prevention, adaptation, and response concerning climate change and disaster.

"Health in" and "Health of" Social-Ecological Systems: A Practical Framework for the Management of Healthy and Resilient Agricultural and Natural Ecosystems

The past two decades have seen an accumulation of theoretical and empirical evidence for the interlinkages between human health and well-being, biodiversity and ecosystem services, and agriculture. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the devastating impacts that an emerging pathogen, of animal origin, can have on human societies and economies. A number of scholars have called for the wider adoption of “One Health integrated approaches” to better prevent, and respond to, the threats of emerging zoonotic diseases. However, there are theoretical and practical challenges that have precluded the full development and practical implementation of this approach. Whilst integrated approaches to health are increasingly adopting a social-ecological system framework (SES), the lack of clarity in framing the key concept of resilience in health contexts remains a major barrier to its implementation by scientists and practitioners. We propose an operational framework, based on a transdisciplinary definition of Socio-Ecological System Health (SESH) that explicitly links health and ecosystem management with the resilience of SES, and the adaptive capacity of the actors and agents within SES, to prevent and cope with emerging health and environmental risks. We focus on agricultural transitions that play a critical role in disease emergence and biodiversity conservation, to illustrate the proposed participatory framework to frame and co-design SESH interventions. Finally, we highlight critical changes that are needed from researchers, policy makers and donors, in order to engage communities and other stakeholders involved in the management of their own health and that of the underpinning ecosystems.

Stamping Out Animal Culling: From Anthropocentrism to One Health Ethics

Culling is used in traditional public health policies to control animal populations. These policies aim primarily to protect human interests but often fail to provide scientific evidence of effectiveness. In this article, we defend the need to move from a strictly anthropocentric approach to disease control towards a One Health ethics, using culling practices as an example. We focus on the recent badger culls in the UK, claiming that, based on data provided by the English Government, these culls may be unjustified, all thing considered. We highlight the relevance of ethical reasoning rooted in One Health for this discussion, and make several suggestions including a moratorium on culling until data are provided to support the effectiveness of culling; to conduct a randomized trial to compare proactive culling with alternative methods; to apply deliberative democratic methods to assess public opinion towards the culls, and to find in Brexit an opportunity for aiming for more effective control measures.

'One Health' Actors in Multifaceted Health Systems: An Operational Case for India

The surging trend of (re)emerging diseases urges for the early detection, prevention, and control of zoonotic infections through the One Health (OH) approach. The operationalization of the OH approach depends on the contextual setting, the presence of the actors across the domains of OH, and the extent of their involvement. In the absence of national operational guidelines for OH in India, this study aims to identify potential actors with an attempt to understand the current health system network strength (during an outbreak and non-outbreak situations) at the local health system of Ahmedabad, India. This case study adopted a sequential mixed methods design conducted in two phases. First, potential actors who have been involved directly or indirectly in zoonoses prevention and control were identified through in-depth interviews. A network study was conducted as part of the second phase through a structured network questionnaire. Interest and influence matrix, average degree, network density, and degree of centralization were calculated through Atlas.Ti (ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH, Berlin, Germany), UCINET (Analytic Technologies, Lexington, KY, USA) software. The identified actors were categorized based on power, administrative level (either at the city or district level), and their level of action: administrative (policy planners, managers), providers (physicians, veterinarians), and community (health workers, community leaders). The matrix indicated that administrative actors from the district level were ‘context setters’ and the actors from the city level were either ‘players’ or ‘subjects’. The network density showed a strength of 0.328 during the last outbreak of H5N1, which decreased to 0.163 during the non-outbreak situation. Overall, there was low collaboration observed in this study, which ranged from communication (during non-outbreaks) to coordination (during outbreaks). The private and non-governmental actors were not integrated into collaborative activities. This study concludes that not only collaboration is needed for OH among the sectors pertaining to the human and the animal health system but also better structured (‘inter-level’) collaboration across the governance levels for effective implementation.

Moving health to the heart of agri-food policies; mitigating risk from our food systems

Our food systems are progressively more industrialized and consolidated with many modern food value chains involving multiple countries and continents, and as such being associated with changes in risk profile and impacts of emerging and re-emerging diseases. Disease outbreaks that sweep through a single region can have massive impacts on food supply, while severe outbreaks of human pathogens can disrupt agricultural labor supply or demand for products perceived as 'unsafe'. Market pressures have generally rewarded production of cash crops for fuel and energy dense, low nutrient processed foods over production of fruits and vegetables for local consumption. Climbing rates of food-related NCDs and pre-existing conditions leave the population increasingly susceptible to infectious diseases that are often driven by or arise from the food system. Therefore disease and diet from our food systems cause impacts on human health, and human health issues can impact on the functioning of the food system. The COVID-19 outbreak is the most recent example of food system driven disease emergence and of massive supply and demand shocks in the food system, experienced as a direct and indirect result of this disease. The effects of the food system on disease spread (and vice versa) must be addressed in future plans to prevent and mitigate large scale outbreaks. Health policies must acknowledge the food system as the base of our health system, as must agri-food policy recognize the pre-eminence of human health (directly and indirectly) in decision making.