IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/develp/v66y2023i3d10.1057_s41301-023-00398-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

One Health: What’s the Problem?

Author

Listed:
  • Remco Pas

    (German Alliance Climate and Health
    Institute of Tropical Medicine)

Abstract

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the ‘One Health approach’ has ambivalently become a key policy instrument for dealing with global health risks, which raises some key questions. What problems does the One Health approach really address? And what is problematic about One Health? This article traces the development of the One health concept and deconstructs its implementation in policy and practice. While the original One Health approach has gradually embraced a broader outlook, it has ended up being implemented through the narrow focus on global health security gaining increased traction. Capitalism, according to Marx, creates a ‘Metabolic Rift’ between human and natural systems, undermining the conditions for human and nonhuman flourishing. For over 25 years, this rift concept has been extensively discussed in environmental sociology and political ecology, but it has sadly not found its way into interdisciplinary One Health scholarship and practice. Practically, and at its core, the One Health approach remains mainly hooked to biomedical, risk adaptation and risk mitigation strategies when it comes to existing and future pathogens emerging in the interactions between human, animals and the ecological environment. As such, One Health risks to maintain and confirm a status quo, hence deprived of any transformative potential.

Suggested Citation

  • Remco Pas, 2023. "One Health: What’s the Problem?," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 66(3), pages 191-198, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:develp:v:66:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1057_s41301-023-00398-9
    DOI: 10.1057/s41301-023-00398-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41301-023-00398-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41301-023-00398-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benatar, D., 2007. "The chickens come home to roost," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 97(9), pages 1545-1546.
    2. Simon Rushton, 2011. "Global Health Security: Security for Whom? Security from What?," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 59(4), pages 779-796, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Theodore P. Lianos & Anastasia Pseiridis, 2021. "Adjusting GDP for ecological deficit: the Index of Debt to the Future (IDF)," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Ruckert, Arne & Labonté, Ronald & Lencucha, Raphael & Runnels, Vivien & Gagnon, Michelle, 2016. "Global health diplomacy: A critical review of the literature," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 61-72.
    3. Parker, Melissa & Baluku, Moses & Ozunga, Bono E. & Okello, Bob & Kermundu, Peter & Akello, Grace & MacGregor, Hayley & Leach, Melissa & Allen, Tim, 2022. "Epidemics and the Military: Responding to COVID-19 in Uganda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    4. Hanrieder, Tine, 2020. "Das globale Unten: Die Konstruktion eines globalen medizinischen Südens in den USA [Stratified Global Governance: The Construction of a Global Medical South inthe United States]," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 27(1), pages 110-120.
    5. Caroline Clarke & David Knights, 2022. "Milking It for All It’s Worth: Unpalatable Practices, Dairy Cows and Veterinary Work?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 176(4), pages 673-688, April.
    6. Hanrieder, Tine, 2019. "How Do Professions Globalize? Lessons from the Global South in US Medical Education," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(3), pages 296-314.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:develp:v:66:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1057_s41301-023-00398-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.