One Health. Группа авторов

7 The Role of Social Sciences in One Health – Reciprocal Benefits

MAXINE WHITTAKER^1* BRIGIT OBRIST^2,3 AND MÓNICA BERGER-GONZÁLEZ^2,4,5

¹ James Cook University, Townsville, Australia; ² Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland; ³ Institute of Social Anthropology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland; ⁴ University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland; ⁵ Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala City, Guatemala

^* [email protected]

      Introduction

      This chapter discusses the role of social sciences in developing a deeper understanding of diverse perspectives of health and illness in animals and humans, as well as in contributing to improve services and programmes using a One Health approach. Drawing on evaluated and ongoing examples from various countries, the authors demonstrate the added value of social sciences to address common local or global health problems using a One Health approach. The presentation and discussion of these examples allows for an exploration of various key aspects, ranging from diverse understandings of health risks, protection, responses, implementing interventions and health communications as well as questions of equity of access and benefit. Theories and approaches in anthropology and other social sciences frame the discussion. This analysis adds further value to social sciences’ contribution to One Health and One Health’s contribution to social sciences in research and in programme implementation.

      Background

      Rüegg et al. (2018) note that:

      Many current health challenges, such as spread of zoonotic infectious diseases, environmental pollutants, antimicrobial resistance, climate or market-driven food system changes with consequences on food and feed supplies, malnutrition including obesity and many more arise from the intertwined spheres of humans, animals, and the ecosystems constituting their environment.

      (Rüegg et al., 2018, p. 2)

      They argue that such wicked problems require transdisciplinary and integrated approaches that take a systems approach, and that One Health provides such a framework.

      A call for social science contributions to One Health is not new. As Dentinger (2017) has shown, Calvin W. Schwabe’s pioneering work built on, and was reflected in, his efforts to understand the tapeworm Echinococcus granulosus as a biological and a cultural phenomenon, shaped by social relationships. In his studies in Beirut, among the Turkana in Kenya and later in California between 1956 and 1975, Schwabe expanded on the parasitological research tradition of examining biological host–parasite interactions in his explicit inclusion of social behaviour and cultural practice.

      Since then, many natural scientists have emphasized the importance of human behaviour and cultural practices, for example for understanding risk exposure, transmission routes and the development of behaviour change interventions. Robertson and Thompson (2002) pointed to the need of educating dog and cat owners for managing enteric parasitic zoonoses in humans and their animals. The parasitologist Macpherson (2005) drew attention to the pivotal role human behaviour plays in the macro and microepidemiology of emerging or re-emerging parasitic diseases. The entomologist Gillett (1985) discussed the forgotten factor – human behaviour – and the complex relationships that exist between human behaviours and public works, urbanization, packaging, agricultural practices – and the transmission of vector-borne diseases. Dung et al. (2007) investigated the epidemiology of fish-borne zoonotic trematodes in Vietnam and suggested that behavioural factors warrant greater collaboration between epidemiologists and anthropologists in designing approaches for mitigating risk in a population with great resistance to change in eating habits. In discussing integrated rabies control, Lechenne et al. (2015) highlighted the importance of understanding the ecology of rabies, animal behaviour and human beliefs and behaviours in order to have effective programmes. Wildlife scientists Alexander and McNutt (2010) used data from a comparative study conducted in Kenya and Botswana to investigate the relationship between divergent cultural practices of pastoralists and contact between domestic dogs and African wild dogs. Based on this study and other examples, they developed a conceptual model of the potential influence of human behaviour on pathogen emergence at the human–domestic animal–wildlife interface and call for greater inclusion of the social sciences in emerging infectious disease research.

      The outbreaks of SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome), MERS-CoV (Middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus), Ebola and Zika have further highlighted the need for social science approaches and actions. However, in 2017, the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Health Emergency Programme and the Wellcome Trust noted that:

      Medical anthropologists and social scientists have been used to investigate and manage disease outbreaks, but social science interventions are not