Justice Is the Missing Link in One Health: Results of a Mixed Methods Study in an Urban City State

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 12; no. 1; p. e0170967
• Main Authors: Lysaght, Tamra, Capps, Benjamin, Bailey, Michele, Bickford, David, Coker, Richard, Lederman, Zohar, Watson, Sangeetha, Tambyah, Paul Anantharajah
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 27.01.2017; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Animal health; Animal human relations; Animal welfare; Animals; Biodiversity; Bioethics; Biology and Life Sciences; Breaking down; Care and treatment; Collaboration; Communicable Diseases, Emerging - epidemiology; Communicable Diseases, Emerging - psychology; Cooperation; Delphi method; Ecology; Ecology and Environmental Sciences; Ecosystems; Emergency preparedness; Environmental health; Environmental Health - ethics; Ethics; Food; Global Health - ethics; Government agencies; Health promotion; Humans; Infectious diseases; Influenza; International cooperation; Leadership; Management; Medicine and Health Sciences; Methods; Mixed methods research; Opinion leaders; Pandemics; People and Places; Planning; Priorities; Public health; Public Health - ethics; Qualitative analysis; Regional planning; Science Policy; Silos; Singapore; Studies; Veterinary medicine; Viruses; Zoonoses; Zoonoses - epidemiology; Zoonoses - psychology; Singapore
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170967

One Health (OH) is an interdisciplinary collaborative approach to human and animal health that aims to break down conventional research and policy 'silos'. OH has been used to develop strategies for zoonotic Emerging Infectious Diseases (EID). However, the ethical case for OH as an alternative to more traditional public health approaches is largely absent from the discourse. To study the ethics of OH, we examined perceptions of the human health and ecological priorities for the management of zoonotic EID in the Southeast Asia country of Singapore. We conducted a mixed methods study using a modified Delphi technique with a panel of 32 opinion leaders and 11 semi-structured interviews with a sub-set of those experts in Singapore. Panellists rated concepts of OH and priorities for zoonotic EID preparedness planning using a series of scenarios developed through the study. Interview data were examined qualitatively using thematic analysis. We found that panellists agreed that OH is a cross-disciplinary collaboration among the veterinary, medical, and ecological sciences, as well as relevant government agencies encompassing animal, human, and environmental health. Although human health was often framed as the most important priority in zoonotic EID planning, our qualitative analysis suggested that consideration of non-human animal health and welfare was also important for an effective and ethical response. The panellists also suggested that effective pandemic planning demands regional leadership and investment from wealthier countries to better enable international cooperation. We argue that EID planning under an OH approach would benefit greatly from an ethical ecological framework that accounts for justice in human, animal, and environmental health.