NOW, I encourage you to think about the stakeholders that should be involved in each phase of the One Health approach. But what exactly is One Health? According to the WHO, One Health is an approach to designing and implementing programs, policies, legislation, and research in which multiple sectors collaborate to achieve better public health outcomes. The World Organization for Animal Health defines it as a collaborative global approach to understanding risks to human and animal health, including domestic animals, wildlife, and ecosystem health. While various stakeholders may have slightly different definitions, the core idea remains the same.
Why should we adopt a One Health approach? First, it ensures inclusive engagement, participation, and contribution from all sectors by providing equitable platforms where representatives from multiple sectors share ownership of the process and its outcomes. Second, it offers economic benefits. For example, One Health interventions during the Rift Valley fever outbreak in South Africa resulted in a 35% cost savings, and integrated human-animal laboratory diagnostics in Winnipeg, Canada, led to a 26% cost savings. At the country level, One Health approaches can yield a $30 billion annual return on investment for disease prevention and control.
Additionally, One Health serves as an equitable platform for community participation, which is crucial for identifying the most appropriate interventions and incorporating social and cultural norms into these efforts. Community engagement facilitates risk communication, helps identify knowledge gaps, and addresses rumours and misinformation that may circulate within the community. Building trust-based relationships with community influencers is also essential for reaching affected populations.
Having discussed One Health extensively, let’s examine field experiences from experts applying this approach. Prof. Dr. Jakob Zinsstag of the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, University of Basel, shared his work with mobile pastoralists—livestock farmers moving with cattle, sheep, goats, and camels for food and water, with limited healthcare access. A critical question was how to provide healthcare to them. Together with Chadian partners, a team of doctors, veterinarians, microbiologists, and geographers studied the health of both people and animals. Surprisingly, more cattle were vaccinated than children and women, and no child had received the usual childhood vaccinations.
In collaboration with Chadian health and veterinary authorities, joint teams of veterinarians and doctors were created to address healthcare challenges for mobile pastoralists. Veterinarians vaccinating livestock were accompanied by public health nurses, who provided vaccinations, essential medicines, and health education to women and children. This cooperative approach extended preventive health services to otherwise underserved populations, showcasing the One Health principle of integrated solutions. By combining resources and transportation, significant cost savings were achieved, and the initiative led to improved health outcomes for humans and animals, financial efficiency, enhanced environmental services, and quicker disease detection.
The question remains: why isn’t the One Health approach widely adopted? A key challenge is sectors often working in isolation. Dr. Stephane de la Rocque from WHO highlighted this issue during a zoonotic outbreak, where the rapid pace and lack of preparation led to conflicting messages from the Ministers of Health and Agriculture, causing public panic. This miscommunication not only impacted livestock prices but also attracted external traders, leading to the disease’s spread beyond borders. The incident emphasizes the need for well-coordinated communication and preparedness across sectors to effectively manage outbreaks.
—The writer is Associate Professor (Health Economics), Health Service Academy (Degree Awarding Institute), Islamabad.
(tariqali@hsa.edu.pk)
