Module 1 | Part 3: Animal Welfare and Communities | Beyond Animal Welfare - Linking Animal, Human and Environmental Wellbeing

QUICK LINKS
3.1. One Health and one welfare framework
3.2 Relevance of One Health and One Welfare to Working with Communities to Improve Animal Welfare
3.3 Key Considerations for Using a One Health or One Welfare Approach

3.1 One Health and One Welfare Framework

WHAT IS ONE HEALTH?

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines One Health as an approach to designing and implementing programmes, polices and legislation and research in which multiple sectors (human health, animal health and the environment) communicate and work together to achieve better public health outcomes.

The aim of the One Health approach according to the One Health Global Network is “to improve health and wellbeing through the prevention of risks and the mitigation of effects of crises that originate at the interface between humans, animals, and their various environments [13].”

Originating to better tackle zoonotic diseases (diseases that transfer between animals and humans), One Health has since evolved its focus beyond communicable disease to include any issue that affect health outcomes (e.g. urbanization, climate change, land use, demographic changes). Taking a One Health approach will therefore seek to understand and consider the inextricable links between human, animal, and environmental health and to achieve sustainable change and optimal health in any of these areas [12].

One Health Case Study

Building veterinary paraprofessional competencies through Animal Health Mentoring Framework

Across Africa and Asia large proportion of primary animal healthcare is delivered by veterinary paraprofessionals (VPPs). However, VPPs receive varying level of training and their profession is unregulated. Their training can range from 2 weeks to 2 years and is often lecture-based (which does not teach practical skills).

As a result, we see Paravets with low confidence and competence. This leads to poor handling, low clinical skills, inappropriate treatment choice (the inappropriate use of antimicrobials), spread of disease and incorrect diagnosis. This in turn contributes to Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) and poses a risk to the health of humans and animals alike, as well as a threat to the environment (contamination of water or soil).

Brooke has developed the Animal Health Mentoring Framework (AHMF) whereby trained mentors (usually an experienced vet or Paravets) accompany VPPs while they are attending to real life cases, providing support, and coaching as the work is carried out. This allows VPPs to develop practical skills and allows for assessment on gaps and to identify priority areas for improvement.

Improvements in VPP training and regulation are critical to OH. Well trained paraprofessional improves food safety, help reduce AMR and prevent diseases transferring from animals to humans (zoonosis). It is important to note that the AHMF applies to all species of livestock, not just equines, and as such can be easily adopted by other organizations.

Since 2013, the AHMF has been successfully used to mentor over 4,000 animal health professionals in India, Pakistan, Kenya, Senegal, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, and Nepal. As a result of the mentoring, 37% of practitioners moved from an unsatisfactory competency level to satisfactory within one year.

WHAT IS ONE WELFARE?

One Welfare is a complementary approach akin to One Health, with One Welfare similarly recognizing the interconnections between animal welfare, human wellbeing and the environment and seeks to promote multi (cross sectoral) collaborations to better optimize desired welfare/well-being benefits for animals, people, and the environment [12].

The difference in the two concepts is primarily related to their origins and fields of application, with historically One Health focused more on disease prevention and treatment within the human health sector. One welfare simply promotes a slightly broader, more all-encompassing understanding of welfare inclusive of the welfare of animals as well as people and the environment. However, as the World Health Organizations defines health as “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity” One Health and One Welfare are in fact mutually inclusive given the inclusion of physical, mental, and social well-being in the definition of health. However, whereas One Health is a more established and evidenced approach in practice that is championed by leading international organizations, One Welfare is a newer concept whose practical applications for tackling the common threats to human, animal and environmental welfare are still being explored and evidenced.

3.2 Relevance of One Health and One Welfare to Working with Communities to Improve Animal Welfare

The advantage of using a One Health/One Welfare approach when working with communities to improve animal welfare, especially in communities where animal welfare may not be a priority issue considering human and environmental issues they may be facing, is that these approaches are more likely to result in solutions that create benefits that are of interest to all, which can generate greater buy-in and motivation to change amongst communities.

The OH/OW frameworks can help explore the inter-relationships between humans, animals, and the environment realms in the following three ways:

1. Understanding Causal Relationships between Realms: OH/OW frameworks can help to understand how the situation or issues affecting the health and well-being of any one realm may be causing the health and well-being issues in another realm (e.g. lack of regulation of glyphosate-based herbicide use in the agricultural sector negatively impacts the health of humans and animals) [14].
2. Understanding/Identifying Root Causes of Issues within and Between Realms: help to understand the relationships between human, animal and/or environmental health and wellbeing in terms of shared or interlinked root causes. This may be in terms of how root causes of issues impacting health and well-being within any one realm originate from one of the other realms, as well as how issues in human, animal and environmental health and wellbeing may share root causes e.g. lack of knowledge of antibiotics and understanding of antimicrobial resistance causes their misuse and overuse which make infections harder to treat and increases the spread of disease in humans and animals [15, 16].
3. Shared External Threats or Risks: they can help to understand potential threats or risks to health and welfare shared by humans, animals, and the environment e.g. climate change.

Prior to developing solutions to animal welfare issues, it is helpful to first consider potential linkages between the health and well-being of animals, people, and the environment in terms of the above, and seek multidisciplinary collaborations that can better inform this understanding and support implementation of solutions which can better optimize benefits for all whenever feasible.

One Welfare | Case Study 1
Brick Kilns

In South Asia building material for the growing megacities is produced in around 152,700 active brick kilns. These kilns employ over 16 million people and 500,000 animals, mainly horses, donkeys, and mules, and produce 86% of the world’s bricks.

Workers in the kilns must endure extreme heat, dusty and polluted air, tough terrains, long hours, and hard physical labour. Many of them are women and children. In the brick kilns we have surveyed, 60% of workers lived below the poverty line, 80% had no running water and 60% had no latrine facilities. Restricted access to healthcare results in high rates of self-medication or use of unqualified doctors. Mental health is affected with 80% workers in one kiln reporting lack of pride in their work and 60% feeling no control over their lives.

Equines carry heavy loads in extreme heat, with limited access to water, food, shade, and rest. Common health issues in animals working in the kilns are hoof problems (50%), wounds (30%), abnormal gait (52%) and fear of human interaction (30%). Brick kilns are a huge contributor to pollution across the continent. According to the World Bank, the brickmaking sector is responsible for up to 91% of total particulate matter emissions (solid airborne particles) in some South Asian cities.

It was with a One Health solution in mind that Brooke has formed a coalition of organisations dedicated to improving labour conditions, animal health and welfare, child labour, and quality of the natural environment in brick kilns across South Asia: the International Labour Organisation (ILO), the South Asia Initiative to End Violence Against Children (SAIEVAC), the Donkey Sanctuary, the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), World Wildlife Fund (WWF), ActionAid Nepal, International Union For Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and Global Fairness Initiative.

One of the interventions led by a coalition partner is the ‘Green Bricks’ initiative, which is tackling harmful kiln emissions through the implementation of new ‘clean air’ technology. ICIMOD is working with the Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC) in South Asia to train brick entrepreneurs and raise awareness of new, increasingly cost effective and scalable, kiln technologies and improvements in the brick production process. One of these technologies, called zigzag, reduces coal consumption by 20% and produces up to 70% lower levels of pollution than the existing technology. Other interventions have included the introduction of human and animal first aid kits into kilns, health, and safety training, linking workers to social care and health care schemes.

One Welfare | Case Study 2
Equine welfare in the production
of organic cocoa in Nicaragua

In the north side of Nicaragua, the grass-root organization ADDAC (Association for Diversification and Development of Agricultural Communities) leader in agro-ecological activities and located in Waslala, is implementing a local project to increase the access of 1,000 organic cocoa producers to fair trade markets.

This region is recognized since 1961 for its contribution of 50% of the national cocoa bean production, and almost 70% of organic cocoa production is concentrated in areas with deficient road access. The families that depend on this crop to meet their basic needs, traditionally rest on equines for key tasks of the stages of production, harvesting, primary transformation (fermented and dried) and commercialization of cocoa beans. Horses and mules participate in the preparation of the soil for sowing and fertilization, the transfer and transplantation of genetic varieties, irrigation, surveillance activities for the maintenance, health and rehabilitation of cocoa plantations, and forest regeneration. They also represent the unique means of transportation of the cocoa fruits to be transformed and placed for domestic consumption and export markets. Moreover, working equids provide raw material to produce organic fertilizer to contribute to good soil conditions for cocoa growth, and the use of animal traction, lessens the pressure on carbon emissions, which add to environmental sustainability.

Through the experience of ADDAC, in collaboration with Brooke, this organization was introduced for the first time to the Equine Welfare, and has reflected on the link between the three realms of welfare: from the perspective of cocoa producers´ wellbeing, by improving the welfare of their equids, they perceived benefits to household’s incomes since the transportation of the cocoa grains on time to crops collection centre, encourage engagement through negotiations among merchants, and families are able to cope their prioritized needs. Additionally, the dynamics of cocoa-producing families are influenced by their equines as they converge in negotiation or trade centres, fairs, and traditional events, where the bonds between people and community roots and attachment is strengthened.

These has also benefited equines since cocoa producer are more aware of equines needs and have adopted positive animal welfare practices such as: the use of proportionate loads, appropriate hooves’ care, better feeding, preventive veterinary care; the appropriate use of the equid´s services in the post-harvest activities, and the reduction of the loss of production caused by accidents suffered by working equids in poor condition. These practices have helped families to report savings of approximately $1,645 per household per year that can be invested in improvements of the quality of the cocoa production, equid welfare. In addition, cocoa qualifies for commercial certifications to acquire a better market price, which represents USD 0.45 more per sold kilogram.

In their accumulated experience, ADDAC express that they have reached a more comprehensive understanding of the agro-ecological approach under the One Welfare Umbrella, which extends beyond the use of agricultural technology for the restoration of the productive capacity of the soils, but refers to the demand of the farmer production model, involving aspects of community organization and participation, capacity for commercialization and rescue of values for the management of the environmental and animal welfare, since there is a relationship of coexistence and co-dependency.

“Animal welfare leads communities to explore the One Welfare and One Health approach, strengthening the conceptual and practical framework of work, and ADDAC to better understands the relationship between animal welfare, productivity, the environment and human development.”

Luis Rosales, Animal Welfare Technician, ADDAC

3.3 Key Considerations for Using a One Health or One Welfare Approach

Potential Benefits of Using OH/OW Approaches:

• Promotes more holistic systems thinking which leads to more strategic and sustainable solutions. This can improve understanding and solutions for addressing root causes, exploring cause and effect relationships, or interdependencies that can have a spill over effect from one realm to another.
• Can be a useful framework for tailoring communications in terms which speak to what stakeholders’ value and find relevant e.g. framing outreach messages to communities, donors, collaborators, or policy makers to ensure it speaks to their human or environment oriented interests rather being focused on animal welfare.
• It can promote greater collaboration and interest in strategic partnerships by harnessing interest, expertise, and resources across sectors to address cross cutting issues resulting in greater efficiency in resource use and more sustainable solutions and benefits for all e.g. helps identify potential collaborators experienced in addressing human and environmental issues identified as root causes of animal welfare issues.
• The One Health approach encourages a greater focus on prevention, which is justifiable due to being more cost effective, and can therefore be particularly appealing and make generating support amongst policy makers and leaders easier e.g. Using a OH approach can helps prevent pandemics like COVID 19 (Delia Grace, The business case of One Health – printed material.

Potential Limitations of Using OH/OW Approaches:

• Designing every project as OH/OW project can limit the scope of issues addressed. While beneficial to utilize one health and one welfare frameworks when appropriate, projects should not feel beholden to using it, or require linkages to human or environmental health and welfare for every project. Animal welfare issues may not have linkages to human or environmental wellbeing, but that doesn’t make them any less important to address. It could potentially be more challenging to address them if communities or other stakeholders with whom you may wish to engage do not share the same animal welfare improvement priorities. In such cases, using the science of human behaviour change and best practices in participatory community engagement and development is recommended to inform project design and improve the effectiveness of implementation and attainment of desired results.
• It can be challenging to collaborate and coordinate work across disciplines and different stakeholders e.g. identifying and establishing collaborations can be time consuming, there may be differences in ways of working or availability of resources that need to be resolved.

While these challenges should not be ignored, it is clear the potential benefits of collaborating in terms of the health and well-being of animals, people, and the environment, as well in terms shared resource investments in such projects, make them worthwhile when feasible.

Link to References Cited