Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Justice is the missing link in one health: Results of a mixed methods study in an urban city state
Authors: Lysaght T. 
Capps B. 
Bailey M. 
Bickford D. 
Coker R. 
Lederman Z.
Watson S.
Tambyah P.A. 
Keywords: animal health
animal welfare
ecosystem health
interdisciplinary communication
international cooperation
medical ethics
qualitative analysis
semi structured interview
urban area
veterinary medicine
Communicable Diseases, Emerging
environmental health
global health
public health
Communicable Diseases, Emerging
Environmental Health
Global Health
Public Health
Issue Date: 2017
Publisher: Public Library of Science
Citation: Lysaght T., Capps B., Bailey M., Bickford D., Coker R., Lederman Z., Watson S., Tambyah P.A. (2017). Justice is the missing link in one health: Results of a mixed methods study in an urban city state. PLoS ONE 12 (1) : e0170967. ScholarBank@NUS Repository.
Abstract: Background 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. Methods 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. Findings 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. Conclusion 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. © 2017 Lysaght et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Source Title: PLoS ONE
ISSN: 19326203
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170967
Appears in Collections:Elements
Staff Publications

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1371_journal_pone_0170967.pdf607.75 kBAdobe PDF




checked on Sep 21, 2020

Page view(s)

checked on Sep 18, 2020

Google ScholarTM



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.