The Environmental Law Arena and the Development of the One Health Approach

doi:10.1017/9781009653732.007

5 - The Environmental Law Arena and the Development of the One Health Approach

Addressing the Threats to the Health of the Planet

from Part I - One Health in Existing Legal Structures

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 September 2025

Claire Lajaunie

Edited by

Katie Woolaston and

Jane Kotzmann

Show author details

Katie Woolaston: Affiliation:
Griffith University, Queensland
Jane Kotzmann: Affiliation:
Deakin University, Victoria

Book contents

Summary

During the Symposium held in Manhattan in 2004 coining the One Health approach, the role of environmental law was underlined. The IUCN Commission on Environmental Law, through its representative from Southeast Asia, insisted on the importance of biodiversity conservation and the protection of wildlife while massive culling measures were taken to counteract zoonotic diseases. In this chapter we will show how the development of the One Health approach has been historically favoured by environmental law, acknowledging the interactions between health and biodiversity. We will detail how it has spread into the multilateral environmental agreements in relation to biodiversity conservation and how the environmental protection arena has evolved quite independently from the health sector in implementing the One Health approach until UNEP joined the FAO-OIE (WOAH)-WHO forces and the input from the OHHLEP (One Health High Level Expert Panel) in that respect. We will conclude with examples of One Health implementation in relation to environmental law, whether they concern research projects or training, notably in Southeast Asia.

Keywords

environmental law Manhattan Principles biodiversity conservation international law right to a healthy environment oceans

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of One Health and the Law
Existing Frameworks, Intersections and Future Pathways
, pp. 55 - 69

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009653732.007 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2025

5 The Environmental Law Arena and the Development of the One Health Approach Addressing the Threats to the Health of the Planet

5.1 Introduction

The need to implement the One Health approach to facilitate collaboration on human, animal, environmental, and climate health challenges has been highlighted in the Declaration on Climate and Health endorsed by global leaders on the first Health Day at the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP) in December 2023.Footnote ¹ It is one of numerous examples of the recent significance given to the One Health approach in the international arena, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic.

The development of modern international environmental law dates to the end of the 1960s with a growing scientific concern for the quality of the environment.Footnote ² The 1968 UNESCO Biosphere Conference was the first intergovernmental conference to consider both human and health ecology (scientific field that seeks to contribute to our understanding of health problems at the interfaces between humans, wild and domestic animals, and their environments) from a scientific point of view. Thus, it has had a leading role in addressing health issues related to ecological diversity on a global scale.Footnote ³ It insists on the need for integrated, planned, multidisciplinary policy action for the use and conservation of natural resources within the framework of international cooperation. The conference was organised by UNESCO, with the active participation of the United Nations, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO), and in cooperation with the International Biological Programme and the World Conservation Union which became the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).Footnote ⁴

The UNESCO Conference led to the first international conference to make the environment a major issue, the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment,Footnote ⁵ also known as the Stockholm Conference, held in 1972. The conference aimed to respond to ‘the need for intensified action at the national, regional and international level in order to limit and, where possible, eliminate the impairment of the human environment and in order to protect and improve the natural surroundings in the interest of man’.Footnote ⁶ The conference, which constitutes a landmark in the development of international environmental law, considered the quality of the environment in relation to human health. In the aftermath of the Stockholm Conference, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) was created to coordinate the activities of the United Nations in the field of the environment. It has played a decisive catalytic role in the development of international environmental law.

Subsequent international conferences such as the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (1992) and the World Summit on Sustainable Development (2002) have seen the refining of international environmental law principles first with a focus on global environmental issues and then on the links between environment and development.Footnote ⁷ The World Health Organisation developed a Global Strategy on Health and the Environment (1993),Footnote ⁸ focusing on human health while the UNEP, particularly through the multilateral environmental agreements linked to biodiversity, insists on the protection of the environment and biodiversity and its effect on health.Footnote ⁹ The trajectories of reflection on the link between health and the environment evolved in parallel in the disciplines relating to health (animal health or human health) on the one hand and conservation and environmental law on the other hand. Both did not officially converge until very recently.

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, the One Health approach is often presented as a new concept in environmental law while, since its official inception in 2004, its use has been associated with veterinary medicine and human health. The aim of this chapter is to show the role of conservation policies and environmental law in the development of the One Health approach.

It is important to come back to the recent origins of the One Health approach to identify the role, barely analysed, of the environmental law arena in the development and adoption of the concept by international organisations.

In this chapter we will show how the development of the One Health approach has been historically favoured by environmental law, acknowledging the interactions between health and biodiversity. We will detail how it has spread into the multilateral environmental agreements linked to biodiversity conservation and how the environmental protection arena has evolved quite independently from the health sector in implementing the One Health approach. The specific role of One Health in relation to the ocean and marine biodiversity will be highlighted. We will conclude with examples of One Health implementation related to environmental law, with particular reference to Southeast Asia.

5.2 From the 2004 Manhattan Symposium: The International Environmental Law Perspective on One Health

The acknowledgement of the close interlinkages between health and the environment is not new although it is still difficult to put them into practice in scientific settings or political decision-making.Footnote ¹⁰ Concerning animal health, for instance, the areas of wildlife conservation and veterinary medicine and livestock were working separately,Footnote ¹¹ until only two decades ago. In 2001, the Wildlife Disease Association and the Society for Tropical Veterinary Medicine held a scientific meeting to address the issue of diseases transmitted between domestic and wild animals. At that meeting, the conservation and veterinary medicine scientists insisted on the fact that the recognition of animal health sciences as a whole by donors and project funders is crucial to the design and management of sustainable wildlife-based or livestock-based programmes. They recognised the necessity to work together to build synergies and to encourage projects that foster integrative approaches to livestock production, food security, human health, economic growth, democracy and governance, biodiversity conservation, and natural resource management.Footnote ¹² They adopted the Pilanesberg resolution, which notably acknowledged the need to develop joint activities that require expertise in domestic animal health and wildlife health.Footnote ¹³ The resolution emphasises that the sustainable management of livestock as well as the conservation of wildlife require ground-level stewardship.

In 2004, The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) organised a symposium on the current and potential movements of diseases among human, domestic animal, and wildlife populations with health experts (veterinary medicine, human health, conservation) and with representatives from the WHO, the FAO, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the IUCN Commission on Environmental Law.Footnote ¹⁴ It is interesting to reflect on the presence of the Commission on Environmental Law providing a legal perspective during that symposium which officially minted the term One Health (in the expression ‘One World, One Health’). Professor Kheng-Lian Koh, the representative of the commission, demonstrated how the One Health approach led to novel legal issues that had more questions than answers. She specifically highlighted the contradictions between conservation policies and the precautionary principle, used as a one-time approach as a risk management method resulting in the culling of animals. She emphasised the interest of using the ecosystem approach as a holistic view on these issues. She referred to the international environmental agreements such as the CITES to address the circulation of zoonotic diseases at the interface between human, domestic animals, and wildlife and highlighted the need for regional cooperation. The meeting resulted in the adoption of the Manhattan Principles, which promote the integration of biodiversity conservation aspects into decision making (principle 6), culling measures (principle 8), or the collaboration between different sectors (principle 10).Footnote ¹⁵

Months later a follow-up workshop was hosted in Bangkok by the Thai Ministry of Public Health that aimed to go ‘Beyond Zoonoses’, with a focus on the policy implications of the threat of emerging diseases. That meeting gathered speakers from different organisations and disciplines, including various representatives of the environmental law arena such as the IUCN Commission on Environmental Law; the IUCN Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy; the International Institute for Sustainable Development; the Centre for Environmental Legal Studies of Pace University School of Law; and the Asia-Pacific Centre for Environmental Law at the National University of Singapore. The IUCN advocated for building capacity within national and global institutions responsible for public health and animal health to analyse and address issues at the nexus between human, domestic animal, and wildlife health.Footnote ¹⁶

The questioning about the integration of the One Health approach into international environmental law took a specific path in relation to international events related to the environment and health. The ecosystem approach highlighted during the Manhattan Symposium and put forward by the Convention on Biodiversity in 2000 has a ‘strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way’ and by the IUCN.Footnote ¹⁷

The objective of the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), launched in 2000, was to assess the consequences of ecosystem change for human well-being. In the Health synthesis of the MA published in 2005, the WHO states that ‘ecosystems are essential to human well-being and especially to human health’.Footnote ¹⁸ The WHO distinguishes two strategies to address the health consequences of ecosystems change ‘One – preferable in principle – is to prevent, limit or manage the environmental damage. The other is to make adaptive changes that will protect individuals and populations from the adverse consequences of ecosystem change.’Footnote ¹⁹ It entails cross-sectoral policies, institutions, and investments on local, national, regional, and global scales.

The promotion of the ecosystem approach, then of the ecosystem health associated with human health led to the acknowledgement of the One Health approach in the international conventions linked to the protection of biodiversity.

5.3 International Agreements on Biodiversity Conservation: The One Health Approach in International Environmental Law

The ecosystem approach is the primary framework for action under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).Footnote ²⁰ It is mentioned in the elaboration and implementation of the various thematic and cross-cutting programmes of work and in the guidelines regarding these programmes.Footnote ²¹

In a previous analysis,Footnote ²² we examined thoroughly how the notion of health then the One Health approach historically emerged in international conventions related to biodiversity in the CBD – the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (1979);Footnote ²³ the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (1973);Footnote ²⁴ and the Convention on Wetlands (also known as Ramsar Convention, 1971)Footnote ²⁵ – through the study of the text of the conventions themselves and of all the resolutions or decisions adopted during all the COPs (Conference of the Parties, the decision-making body of the Conventions from the first COP to 2014).Footnote ²⁶ In this chapter, we refer to that work and select the explicit references made to the One Health approach to present how they emerged.

After various SARS and avian influenza episodes and in accordance with the WHO International Health Regulations (2005), initiatives were developed to improve international awareness and cooperation to prevent infectious disease pandemics. The Convention on Migratory Species, in cooperation with the Agreement on the Conservation of African Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA), created the Scientific Task Force on Avian Influenza and Wild Birds to integrate migratory species and other environmental considerations into the international efforts to combat Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza.Footnote ²⁷

The promotion of cooperation between all relevant international instruments and processes to enhance policy coherence is one of the objectives of the Strategic Plan of the CBD (2002–2010). Liaison groups for cooperation between multilateral environmental agreements – the Joint Liaison Group between the Rio conventions (2001) (i.e. the CBD),Footnote ²⁸ the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), and the Biodiversity Liaison Group between the seven biodiversity-related conventions (2004)Footnote ²⁹ – have been created to foster the synergies and avoid duplication of the decisions. Thus, the Scientific Task Force coordinated by the CMS Secretariat welcomed the CBD in 2006.Footnote ³⁰

The synergies between conventions are expressed by mutual references in the diverse COP decisions, shared knowledge, and a common focus. In 2008, the CMS adopted a resolution to respond to the challenges of emerging and reemerging diseases in migratory species.Footnote ³¹ This resolution is of importance as it calls for the creation of a Scientific Task Force on Wildlife Disease with a broader focus than the Task Force on Avian Influenza and Wild Birds created in 2006.

This resolution contains the first explicit reference to One Health as it requests the FAO to integrate ‘disease and management issues that can be brought to the attention of the Scientific Task Force on Wildlife Disease’ into the One Health approach.Footnote ³² It also refers to the outcomes of the COP 10 of the Ramsar Conference on the theme of ‘Healthy Wetlands, Healthy People’ held earlier in 2008, which stressed the functional linkages between the role that wetlands play in providing ecosystem services for the support of both human and wildlife populations; and that aquatic waterbirds and other migratory species can be valuable indicators of ecosystem health.Footnote ³³

In 2008, the Strategic Framework for Reducing Risks of Infectious Diseases, drafted by the FAO, Office International des Epizooties (OIE) (now known as the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH)), UNICEF, UN System Influenza Coordination, World Bank, and the WHO was launched.Footnote ³⁴

In 2011, the CMS adopted a resolution on wildlife and migratory species, acknowledging the increasing progress of the One Health approach as a multidisciplinary way of addressing emerging infectious diseases and noting that the concept had been endorsed by several international organisations.Footnote ³⁵ This resolution renamed the Task Force on Wildlife Disease to the ‘Scientific Task Force on Wildlife and Ecosystem Health’ to ‘reflect more comprehensively the One Health approach to integrating wildlife, livestock, human and ecosystem health issues’. The CITES Secretariat was invited by the Secretariat of the CMS to become a core affiliate of the Scientific Task Force.

Later, the Ramsar COP XI, in 2012, adopted a resolution acknowledging the One Health and the EcoHealth movements (already supported by many organisations),Footnote ³⁶ as they ‘place disease dynamics in the broader contexts of sustainable agriculture, socio-economic development, environment protection and sustainability, and the complex patterns of global change’.Footnote ³⁷ The same year, the Animal Committee of the CITES adopted the term of reference of the Scientific Task Force on Wildlife and Ecosystem Health, which states:

It has become clear that while the emergence of pathogens is highly complex in nature, it can be traced back to ecosystem changes associated with an expanding human population, food insecurity, and unsustainable use of natural resources resulting in biodiversity loss and changes to ecosystem functioning … The health of all species including wildlife, livestock, humans, and plant life are negatively impacted by decreased availability of ecosystem services.Footnote ³⁸

Thus, the vision of the Task Force expressed in this document was to achieve better health for ecosystems, wildlife, livestock, and people by promoting an integrated scientific approach within the ‘One Health’ framework.

In 2013, the Committee on Science and Technology of the UNCCD recognised that One Health as ‘an integrated approach in managing health risks through an interdisciplinary interface for human, animal and environmental health care – can be a powerful tool to successfully cope with the drivers and consequences of desertification’.Footnote ³⁹ The same year, the CBD and the OIE signed a cooperation agreement in fields of mutual interest such as the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, improvement of animal health and welfare, and the promotion of the ‘One Health’ approach to manage the risks presented by animal diseases and zoonoses at the animal–human–ecosystem interface.Footnote ⁴⁰

During the following COP of the CBD in 2014, two resolutions acknowledged the One Health approach: one on bushmeat and sustainable wildlife management and the other on biodiversity and human health,Footnote ⁴¹ which considered One Health as ‘an integrated approach consistent with the ecosystem approach (decision V/6) that integrates the complex relationships between humans, microorganisms, animals, plants, agriculture, wildlife and the environment’.Footnote ⁴²

In another work, drawing an analogy to epidemiology, we studied the transmission, circulation, and persistence of health issues in the CBD, CMS, and CITES Conventions and in the resolutions or decisions of their COPs. The analysis, using text-mining, shows how these terms are diffusing in the conventions and in the resolutions of their COPs over time through a network induced by their transmission between texts. The CBD plays a central role as a source of terms related to health and the environment.Footnote ⁴³

Since 2014, each Conference of the Party of the CBD has adopted a resolution on biodiversity and health refining the value of the One Health approach. The acknowledgement of this approach started with a reflection on how to tackle the spread of zoonotic diseases like avian influenza and SARS. It appeared necessary to consider zoonotic, wildlife diseases and finally the health of all species in relation to biodiversity in general or to specific ecosystems such as wetlands or deserts.

5.4 From Southeast Asia to the International Arena

The Southeast Asian region, the epicentre of the emergence of several infectious diseases, has established foregoing and favourable ingredients to the One Health approach. Since the 1980s, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) considered health as an essential part of the socio-economic development of the region and aimed for a coordinated action of its member states in the public health sector.Footnote ⁴⁴ In 1993, following the WHO Global Strategy on Health and the Environment, the two regional offices of the WHO adopted a Regional Strategy on Health and the Environment.Footnote ⁴⁵ The Strategy of the Southeast Asia Regional Office states that environmental interventions may contribute to enhancing health and that a holistic approach of health, environment, and development in accordance with the Rio Declaration (1992) is needed. Together with hygiene, sanitation, water supply, and the environmental health aspects of water resources, the regional priorities integrate infectious disease risks (waterborne, vector-borne, or foodborne diseases). Building on successful experiences and initiatives related to health and the environment,Footnote ⁴⁶ the region played a leading role in the international adoption of this approach.Footnote ⁴⁷ In this section, this chapter presents the main decisive steps towards the adoption of the One Health approach in Southeast Asia, in association with international organisations.

The Asia Pacific Strategy for Emerging Diseases was first launched in 2005 to support member states in meeting the obligations of the International Health Regulations (2005).Footnote ⁴⁸ It is a common strategic action framework for member states of the WHO Southeast Asia and Western Pacific regions and their partners. It aims to strengthen regional and national core capacities to effectively prepare for and respond to threats posed by emerging infectious diseases and other public health emergencies.

At the Interministerial Conference on Animal and Pandemic Influenza in Hanoi in 2010, the states and international agencies gathered to develop a coordinated response to pandemic risks (in particular avian influenza) and to control infectious diseases.Footnote ⁴⁹ They formally decided to operate a One Health approach. Noticing a deficit of regional coordination within the ASEAN, the European Commission developed a programme to improve regional coordination regarding highly pathogenic and emerging diseases.Footnote ⁵⁰ This programme, called Highly Pathogenic and Emerging Diseases (HPED) targeted a global response to avian flu by adopting the One Health approach. In a workshop gathering the various partners of the programme in Bangkok in 2011, one relevant agenda item was the variety of definitions and perceptions of the One Health approach and the difficulties regarding its notably trans-sectoral implementation.Footnote ⁵¹

Thailand plays a key role in promoting the One Health approach among the ASEAN member states, and in the region, notably through the network of the Southeast Asian One Health Universities Network. That regional network, created in 2011, is based in Chiang Mai (Thailand) and gathers more than ninety-five universities in seven Southeast Asia countries (Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam) and six universities in Taiwan, an associated member state.Footnote ⁵² The aim of this network is to improve One Health manpower capacity by leveraging education to train the next generation of One Health professionals in using a systems approach to problem solving that considers all aspects of the human–animal–ecosystem interface. Thailand hosts numerous regional offices of international organisations (including UNEP, WOAH, WHO, FAO, UNDP, UNESCO, UN Habitat, and UN ESCAP) which facilitates the dialogue between the regional level and international organisations.

In 2008, the health ministers of the ASEAN member states of China, Japan, and South Korea (ASEAN+3) met in Manila with the common goal to improve the sanitary conditions in the region and committed to adopt the One Health approach for the prevention and control of emerging infectious diseases and to consider the adverse impacts of trade liberalisation.Footnote ⁵³ In a Declaration on Animal Health and Zoonoses, the ministers of Agriculture and Forestry of the ASEAN gathered in Phnom Penh (Cambodia) and declared their commitment to advance the One Health approach and support existing collaborative frameworks on animal and public health governance at global, regional, and national levels to address vulnerabilities associated with zoonotic diseases.Footnote ⁵⁴

These examples show the acknowledgement of the One Health approach in the definition of regional policies. In 2017, the Chief of States and government of the ASEAN decided to combat antimicrobial resistance through the One Health approach (ASEAN Leaders’ Declaration on Antimicrobial Resistance, 2017),Footnote ⁵⁵ with the elaboration of a Global Action Plan to be implemented by the member states through comprehensive multisectoral responsibility and governance; inclusive mechanisms to actively engage the participation of relevant stakeholders; and defined objectives and goals that are aligned with the ASEAN Global Action Plan. The ASEAN Strategic Framework to Combat Antimicrobial Resistance through the One Health Approach (2019–2030) states its mission: ‘to formulate and implement an ASEAN regional action plan adopting the One Health Approach in combating AMR through the comprehensive multisectoral and multidisciplinary engagement and participation of all governments and stakeholders’. It details activities in four main sectors: human, animal and agriculture, food safety, and environment.Footnote ⁵⁶ Among the strategic objectives, objective 5 is ‘to conduct research to support the implementation of the ASEAN Strategic Plan to Combat AMR through One Health approach’,Footnote ⁵⁷ materialised by the provision of a platform for the ASEAN member states to share and disseminate existing research on AMR (e.g. websites, research fora, conferences, publications). Objective 6 is ‘to ensure adequate and sustainable resource management and mobilisation, as appropriate at national or regional levels, for the implementation of the regional AMR activities’,Footnote ⁵⁸ which aims to foster international collaboration and partnerships, as well as benchmarking, in the sharing of technical expertise and experience in the ASEAN network.

As an example of implementation of these obligations in the sphere of environmental law, in 2020, the ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity (ACB),Footnote ⁵⁹ in collaboration with the Vietnam Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, the ASEAN Secretariat, the WOAH, and the WCS organised a webinar with a focus on wildlife conservation and animal health linkage to zoonotic diseases spread and prevention as well as preparedness for the future with a One Health approach.Footnote ⁶⁰ The purpose of this meeting is to inform the ASEAN sectoral bodies and the relevant stakeholders of issues and efforts relating to the links between animal and human health, especially in the areas of livestock production, wildlife habitat protection, wildlife trade, zoonotic and emerging infectious diseases; it is also to inform the public on these issues and to highlight the efforts of ASEAN and its member states as well as organisations working in the region.

The ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Animal Health and Zoonoses (ACCAHZ) was created in 2016 to provide a framework of cooperation and coordination among ASEAN Member States to prevent, control, and eradicate transboundary animal diseases and zoonoses in ASEAN and to contribute towards food security and safety, animal and human health, poverty alleviation, and the well-being and livelihood of the people of ASEAN. To complete its actions, in 2020, leaders of all the ASEAN countries decided on the creation of the ASEAN Centre for Public Health Emergencies and Emerging Diseases (ACPHEED) in Bangkok.Footnote ⁶¹

At the regional level, the dynamic of networks launched in a more-or-less formal way to respond to health or environmental issues and associated numerous actors to create a flexible network of organisations that favour the implementation of the One Health approach with the constant development of intersectoral work at the ASEAN level and a dialogue with international organisations.Footnote ⁶²

5.5 The International Definition of One Health and Its Environmental Dimension

The FAO, the WHO, and the WOAH (formerly OIE), also known as the Tripartite, have developed joint strategies and guidelines based on the One Health approach from 2006; however, at that time, the environmental side was not formally represented.

5.5.1 International Definition of One Health

The creation of a One Health High-Level Expert Panel (OHHLEP) was officially announced by the French and German Foreign Ministers and the leadership of the WHO, the WOAH, the FAO, and the UNEP at the Paris Peace Forum on 12 November 2020.Footnote ⁶³ In May 2021, the OHHLEP was launched with 26 selected key international experts selected by the Tripartite plus UNEP.Footnote ⁶⁴ OHHLEP is a One Health advisory group created to provide the Quadripartite with evidence-based scientific and policy advice to address the challenges raised at the animal–human–environment interface using the One Health approach. The first task of OHHLEP has been to develop a comprehensive definition of One Health, promoting a clear understanding across sectors and areas of expertise.

There is now an international and common definition of One Health:

One Health is an integrated, unifying approach that aims to sustainably balance and optimise the health of people, animals, and ecosystems. It recognises the health of humans, domestic and wild animals, plants, and the wider environment (including ecosystems) are closely linked and interdependent.

The approach mobilises multiple sectors, disciplines, and communities at varying levels of society to work together to foster well-being and tackle threats to health and ecosystems, while addressing the collective need for healthy food, water, energy, and air, taking action on climate change and contributing to sustainable development.Footnote ⁶⁵

5.5.2 The Acknowledgement of the Right to a Healthy Environment

UNEP joined the Tripartite in 2022 and the same year the United Nations General Assembly recognised the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment.Footnote ⁶⁶ This resolution followed the acknowledgement of this right by the United Nations Human Rights Council in October 2021.Footnote ⁶⁷ It affirms that the promotion of the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment requires the full implementation of the multilateral environmental agreements under the principles of international environmental law. This right is related to other rights and existing international law.

Let us recall that in a 2017 report, the United Nations Special Rapporteur J. H. Knox concluded that biodiversity is necessary for ecosystem services that support the full enjoyment of a wide range of human rights, including the rights to life, health, food, water, and culture. In order to protect human rights, states have a general obligation to protect ecosystems and biodiversity.Footnote ⁶⁸

Thus in 2022 the United Nations Environment Assembly ‘Strengthening Actions for Nature to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals’ requests the Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme and the Quadripartite to support member states and members of specialised agencies, upon their request, in assessing the environmental dimension of health.Footnote ⁶⁹

The Quadripartite One Health Joint Plan of Action (OH JPA) contains a specific action track aiming at integrating the environment into One Health.Footnote ⁷⁰ Acknowledging the fact that every form of environmental degradation has direct or indirect negative consequences for human and animal health, the Action Plan details activities (associated to deliverables and a timeline) under four main actions in relation to the main objective of this action track: ‘Protect and restore biodiversity, prevent the degradation of ecosystems and the wider environment to jointly support the health of people, animals, plants and ecosystems, underpinning sustainable development’.Footnote ⁷¹ The OH JPA is guided by the Theory of Change developed by OHHLEP which defines the pathways of change and high-level actions. While the right to a healthy environment can constitute a way to strengthen the implementation of the One Health approach into environmental law, two pathways of the Theory of Change should be considered jointly in order to promote sound One Health environmental law and policies. The first pathway refers to actions related to policy development, political will, and regulatory frameworks, and the third pathway targets actions related to strengthening the scientific evidence base. A strong scientific basis is crucial to develop efficient environmental law and policies that can be monitored thanks to quantitative indicators in addition to qualitative criteria.

5.5.3 One Health and the Need to Improve the Science Policy Dialogue: The Example of One Health and the Ocean

The OH JPA highlights that many negative consequences of human activities are ‘compounded by climate change, which only multiplies these threats, exacerbating their impact and undermining the resilience of environmental and ecological systems’.Footnote ⁷² During a side event of the UNFCC COP26,Footnote ⁷³ we presented a textual analysis of the UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) document of the UN Ocean Decade.Footnote ⁷⁴ For the IOC, the Ocean Decade was an ‘opportunity to engage the ocean science community in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals’. The document mentions ocean health and evokes major themes that can be related to ocean health as seen through environmental, ecosystemic, and bio-physical lenses. However, no mention is made of the One Health approach. The United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (2021–2030) aims at the development of good science to ensure the conservation of the ocean, the sustainability of its uses, and the protection of ocean health. Nevertheless, there is no common understanding of what ‘ocean health’ could encompass under the Decade, and definitions in the literature differ, depending on the scientific discipline concerned.Footnote ⁷⁵

We analysed the metadata of 4,886 scientific papers mentioning One Health (over the period from January 2004 to April 2021) found in the Web of Science. Only twenty-four of them mention at least one of the seventy-six expressions of the UN Decade directly related to the ocean,Footnote ⁷⁶ such as the ‘blue economy’, ‘marine conservation’, ‘marine pollution’, ‘ocean acidification’, ‘ocean literacy’, ‘marine and coastal environment’, or ‘coastal communities’. In contrast, 4,377 One Health articles contain at least one of the 148 keywords of the UN Decade that relate to the field of governance. Thus, very little research is yet devoted to the links between ocean science and the interconnection between human, animal health, and health of the marine environment. The potential contributions of the One Health approach in marine resources management and use, particularly biological and genetic resources, also seem to be relatively poorly identified and explored. Conversely, the UN Decade document does not integrate a One Health perspective into the initiatives it promotes. While the UN Decade and One Health can easily find a common area of action through the establishment of multi-level governance, marine sciences in connection with human, animal and marine ecosystem health are not yet in a position to nourish this governance with a body of knowledge that could inform public action. The Ocean Decade is expected to help strengthen the development and implementation of science-based solutions, but the ongoing scientific research on the ocean is barely in line with the challenges identified by the Ocean Decade. While the goal of the Ocean Decade is to protect ocean health, there is no common scientific definition of ocean health.

In 2022, during the Fifth Asia-Pacific Day for the Ocean organised by the UN ESCAP, during the dialogue on ocean and climate change, we presented on how the One Health approach is an integrated approach that should be extended to the ocean in accordance with the roadmap given by the OHHLEP.Footnote ⁷⁷ We presented the first results of the Session on One Health and the ocean during the Science Summit UNGA77, drawing attention to the following:Footnote ⁷⁸ the lack of interlinkages between norms and policies from different sectors; the lack of a global standard for microplastic collection, and lack of consistency among norms and sectors involved; the need to have the best available ocean science observation, data, and services to meet the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets; the role of ocean policies that focus on intersectorality in facilitating the implementation of the One Health approach, such as policies in the Pacific; and a potential opportunity after COVID-19 to shift from an implicit to an explicit use of the One Health approach. We insisted on the need to strengthen dialogue between science and policy in order to structure a coherent set of actions for One Health.

5.6 Conclusion

As we have seen, Southeast Asia and more broadly the Asia-Pacific region already largely contributed to the adoption of the One Health approach at the international level and engaged in its implementation at the regional level.Footnote ⁷⁹ The ASEAN-UN Comprehensive Partnership is significant in the collective efforts in addressing global and regional concerns and ASEAN recognised the instrumental role of the UN in ensuring multilateral approaches and solutions to global challenges in close collaboration with regional organisations.Footnote ⁸⁰ In May 2023, the ASEAN leaders adopted a Declaration on the One Health Initiative: they decided to establish a One Health Network to strengthen multisectoral collaboration and coordination of the One Health Initiative among ASEAN member states and to develop an ASEAN One Health Joint Plan of Action to improve regional and national capacity and capabilities with targets that are tangible, measurable, and time-bound, that calls for a stronger cross-sectoral collaboration between the relevant sectors involved in human, animal, plant, and environmental health, as well as food safety among the ASEAN member states. In August of the same year, the ASEAN Environmental Rights Working Group convened its first meeting in Bangkok, chaired by the Representative of Thailand to the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights. This working group committed to developing a framework in line with the internationally recognised norms and standards on the rights to a safe, clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, taking into consideration national circumstances and domestic laws of the member states.

The cross-sectoral collaboration should also include the findings of a long-standing collaborative research between scientists, communities, and local administrations. The targets to be included into a One Health National Plan of Action should result from co-designed research involving the local actors. This kind of research is developed by the new international research laboratory, HealthDEEP (Health, Disease Ecology, Environment, and Policy), under the supervision of the CNRS together with Kasetsart University and Mahidol University (Bangkok, Thailand), well positioned to coordinate large interdisciplinary projects involving French institutions and other research networks and universities in Asia and within the PREZODE initiative.Footnote ⁸¹ The Social–Ecological Observatory of Health and Biodiversity of Saen Thong,Footnote ⁸² located in Nan Province, is one of the two observatories of HealthDEEP. The different projects conducted in Saen Thong brought a substantial set of qualitative and quantitative data to be used by various scientific fields (anthropology, sociology, medicine, ecology, molecular genetics, geography, law) and by the stakeholders (local administration, primary care unit). The local empirical knowledge is considered in order to guide research while Thailand International Cooperation Agency (TICA) provide support for projects involving foreign experts.Footnote ⁸³

Thanks to a broad partnership with research institutions and international organisations in the region, collaborative grounded research can contribute to a better understanding of environmental issues in the One Health community and improve the science-policy dialogue locally, regionally, and globally.

Footnotes

¹ COP28 Presidency, World Health Organization, ‘COP28 UAE Declaration on Climate and Health’, Dubai, 2 December 2023. Available at: www.who.int/publications/m/item/cop28-uae-declaration-on-climate-and-health.

² Alexandre Charles Kiss, Introduction to International Environmental Law (UNITAR 2005).

³ Serge Morand and Claire Lajaunie, Biodiversity and Health: Linking Life, Ecosystems and Societies (Elsevier 2017), 173.

⁴ Malcolm Hadley, ‘A Practical Ecology: The Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme’ in Patrick Petitjean, Vladimir Zharov, Gisbert Glaser, et al. (eds.), Sixty Years of Science at UNESCO 1945–2005 (UNESCO 2005) 260–261.

⁵ United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm, Sweden, 5–16 June 1972. Available at: https://docs.un.org/en/A/CONF.48/INF.5/rev.1.

⁶ United Nations General Assembly, ‘Resolution on Problems of the Human Environment’ (entered into force 3 December 1968). Available at: https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/2398(XXIII).

⁷ United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3–14 June 1992; World Summit on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg, South Africa, 26 August–4 September 2002. Available at: https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/44/228.

⁸ World Health Assembly, Resolution 45.31 Health and Environment (May 1992) §4, al. 1; WHO Global Strategy for Health and Environment (1993). Available at: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/175841/WHA45_R31_eng.pdf.

⁹ The Preamble of the Convention on Biological Diversity states ‘Aware that conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity is of critical importance for meeting the food, health and other needs of the growing world population’. Available at: www.cbd.int/convention/text.

¹⁰ Morand and Lajaunie, Biodiversity and Health, 12–14.

¹¹ William B Karesh, Steven A. Osofsky, Tonie E. Rocke, and Paul L. Barrows, ‘Joining Forces to Improve Our World’ (2002) 16(5) Conservation Biology 1432.

¹² Wildlife Disease Association and the Society for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, ‘Pilaneberg Resolution 2001’, Pilanesberg, South Africa (22–27 July 2001). Available at: www.wcs-ahead.org/pilanesberg.html.

¹³ William B Karesh et al., ‘Joining Forces to Improve Our World’.

¹⁴ World Conservation Society, Symposium One World, ‘One Health: Building Interdisciplinary Bridges to Health in a Globalized World’, September 2004. Available at: www.oneworldonehealth.org/sept2004/owoh_sept04.html.

¹⁵ The Twelve Manhattan Principles, ‘One World, One Health’, www.oneworldonehealth.org/.

¹⁶ IUCN World Conservation Congress, ‘Resolution 3.011 Addressing the Linkages between Conservation, Human and Animal Health, and Security’, Bangkok, Thailand, 17–25 November 2004. Available at: https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/resrecfiles/WCC_2004_RES_11_EN.pdf.

¹⁷ Convention on Biological Diversity, COP5, Decision V/6 Ecosystem approach, Nairobi, Kenya, 15–26 May 2000, available at: www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/esa/ecosys-01/other/ecosys-01-dec-cop-05-06-en.pdf; Richard D Smith and Edward Maltby, Using the Ecosystem Approach to Implement the Convention on Biological Diversity: Key Issues and Case Studies (IUCN 2003) 118.

¹⁸ WHO, Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well–Being: Biodiversity Synthesis (Island Press 2005).

¹⁹ WHO, Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well–Being.

²⁰ UNEP, Convention on Biological Diversity, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 5 June 1992. Available at: www.cbd.int.

²¹ ‘The ecosystem approach is based on the application of appropriate scientific methodologies focused on levels of biological organization, which encompass the essential structure, processes, functions and interactions among organisms and their environment. It also recognises that humans, with their cultural diversity, are an integral component of many ecosystems’: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, The Ecosystem Approach: CBD Guidelines (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2004), 50.

²² Claire Lajaunie and Pierre Mazzega, ‘One Health and Biodiversity Conventions: The Emergence of Health Issues in Biodiversity Conventions’ (2016) 8 IUCN Academy of Environmental Law eJournal 105.

²³ Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, Bonn, Germany, 23 June 1979, in force 1 November 1983. Available at: www.cms.int.

²⁴ Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, Washington, United States, 3 March 1973, into force 1 July 1975. Available at: www.cites.org.

²⁵ Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat, Ramsar, Iran, 2 February 1971, into force 21 December 1975. Available at: www.ramsar.org.

²⁶ Lajaunie and Mazzega, ‘One Health and Biodiversity Conventions’, 105–121.

²⁷ It gathered representatives from UNEP, CMS, AEWA, Ramsar, BirdLife International, the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC), Wetlands International, the Wildlife Conservation Society, and the Zoological Society of London, with the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), WHO, and the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) participating as observers.

²⁸ Convention on Biological Diversity, COP 6 Decision VI/20 Cooperation with other organisations, initiatives, and conventions, The Hague, Netherlands, 7–19 April 2002. In 2001, the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice of the UNFCCC welcomed an oral report provided by the secretariat relating to the work of a joint liaison group between the secretariats of the UNFCCC, the CBD, and the CCD, and the information provided by the representatives of the CBD and UNCCD secretariats. See UNFCCC/SBSTA/2001/L.14 Cooperation with relevant international organisations, Marrakesh, Morocco, 29 October–6 November 2001, available at: https://unfccc.int/documents/2462. In August 2001, the Conventions established a Joint Liaison Group as an informal forum for exchanging information, exploring opportunities for synergistic activities and increasing coordination.

²⁹ The Biodiversity Liaison Group links the secretariats of the seven biodiversity-related conventions: the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES); the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS); the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar); the UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage; the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture; and the International Plant Protection Convention. See Mandate for Establishing the Liaison Group of Biodiversity-related Conventions was Set Out by the Parties to the CBD, in decision VII/26 (paragraphs 1 and 2), available at: www.cbd.int/decision/cop/default.shtml?id=7763.

³⁰ In 2007, the FAO became a full member of the task force and contributed to its coordination.

³¹ Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, ‘COP9 Resolution 9.8, Responding to the Challenge of Emerging and Re-emerging Diseases in Migratory Species, including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5n1’, Rome, Italy, 1–5 December 2008.

³² It refers to ‘One World, One Health’, the expression used during the Manhattan Symposium, 2004.

³³ See Ramsar convention, Resolution X.3 The Changwon Declaration on human well-being and wetlands, Changwon, Republic of Korea, 28 October to 4 November 2008 www.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/res/key_res_x_03_e.pdf.

³⁴ FAO, OIE, WHO, UN System Influenza Coordination, UNICEF, and the World Bank, ‘Contributing to One World, One Health. A Strategic Framework for Reducing Risks of Infectious Diseases at the Animal-Human-Ecosystems Interface’ (14 October 2008).

³⁵ CMS, ‘COP10, Resolution 10.22 Wildlife Disease and Migratory Species’, Bergen, Norway, 20–25 November 2011. Available at: www.cms.int/sites/default/files/document/10_22_diseases_e_0_0.pdf.

³⁶ Ramsar, ‘COP11, Resolution 11.12 Wetlands and Health: Taking an Ecosystem Approach’, Bucharest, Romania, 6–13 July 2012. Available at: www.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/cop11/res/cop11-res12-e.pdf.

³⁷ Footnote Ibid.

³⁸ CITES, Animals Committee, ‘Relationship between Wildlife Trade and Wildlife Diseases’, 26th Meeting, AC26 Doc. 23 (Rev. 1), Annex Terms of Reference, Geneva (Switzerland), 15–20 March 2012 and Dublin (Ireland), 22–24 March 2012. Available at: www.cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/com/ac/26/E26-23.pdf.

³⁹ UNCCD COP11, Committee on Science and Technology, Final outcome of the UNCCD 2nd Scientific Conference, COP (11)/CST/INF.3/Corr.1, §29, Windhoek, Namibia, 17–20 September 2013. Available at: www.unccd.int/sites/default/files/sessions/documents/ICCD_COP11_CST_INF.3/cstinf3eng.pdf.

⁴⁰ Cooperation Agreement between the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), 15 February 2013. Available at: www.woah.org/app/uploads/2021/03/cbd-accord-ang.pdf.

⁴¹ CBD COP12, Decision 12.18 Sustainable Use of Biodiversity: Bushmeat and Sustainable Wildlife Management and CBD COP 12 Decision 12.21 Biodiversity and Human Health, Pyeongchang, Republic of Korea, 6–17 October 2014.

⁴² Footnote Ibid.

⁴³ Claire Lajaunie and Pierre Mazzega, ‘Transmission, circulation et persistance des enjeux de santé dans les conventions internationales liées à la Biodiversité et Conventions de Rio’ in Sandrine Maljean-Dubois (ed), Numero Special Diffusion de normes et circulations d’acteurs dans la gouvernance internationale de l’environnement (Confluence des Droits 1, DICE Editions 2017) 61–80.

⁴⁴ Claire Lajaunie and Pierre Mazzega, ‘Organization Networks as Information Integration System: Case Study on Environment and Health in Southeast Asia’ (2016) 5 ACSIJ Adv Computer Science 28–39.

⁴⁵ WHO SEARO, Regional Strategic Plan for Health and Environment for the WHO Southeast Asia Region (New Delhi: WHO SEARO, 1993).

⁴⁶ Lajaunie and Mazzega, ‘Organization Networks as Information Integration System: Case Study on Environment and Health in Southeast Asia’, 28.

⁴⁷ Claire Lajaunie and Serge Morand, ‘L’approche One Health: l’Asie du Sud-Est comme lieu privilégié de sa mise en œuvre’ in Gabriel Facal et Jérôme Samuel (eds.), L’Asie du Sud-Est 2022: bilan, enjeux et perspectives (Bangkok, Thailand: Institut de recherche sur l’Asie du Sud-Est contemporaine, 2023) 33–47.

⁴⁸ WHO WPRO, Asia Pacific Strategy for Emerging Diseases (WHO WPRO, 2005) 50.

⁴⁹ Interministerial Conference on Animal and Pandemic Influenza (IMCAPI) ‘Animal and Pandemic Influenza: The Way Forward’ hosted by the Government of Vietnam, in coordination with the European Union and the United States of America, with the support of the UN System Influenza Coordination and international organisations, Hanoi, Vietnam, 19–21 April 2010.

⁵⁰ European Commission, Outcome and Impact Assessment of the Global Response to the Avian Influenza Crisis 2005–2010 (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2010) 29.

⁵¹ HPED networking event, 2011, ‘Linking the Actors of the EU-Asia Regional One Health Programme’, Workshop Report, Bangkok, 18–19 January 2011, 42–43.

⁵² SEAOHUN, ‘The 1st One Health International Conference in Taiwan’, 7 October 2019. Available at: www.seaohun.org/single-post/the-1st-one-health-international-conference-in-taiwan.

⁵³ Joint Statement of the Third ASEAN Plus Three Health Ministers Meeting, ‘Trade Liberalisation: Its Adverse Impact on our Borderless Health Problems’, Manila, 10 October 2008. Available at: www.asean.org/joint-statement-of-the-third-asean-plus-three-health-ministers-meeting-manila/.

⁵⁴ Thirty-Second Meeting of the ASEAN Ministers on Agriculture and Forestry (32nd AMAF), ‘ASEAN Ministerial Statement on ASEAN Cooperation on Animal Health and Zoonoses: Avian Influenza and Beyond’, Phnom Penh, 23 October 2010. Available at: www.asean.org/the-thirty-second-meeting-of-the-asean-minsters-on-agriculture-and-forestry-32nd-amaf-phnom-penh-23-october-2010/.

⁵⁵ ASEAN Head of States and Government of the Member States, ‘ASEAN Leaders’ Declaration on Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR), Combating AMR through One Health Approach, Manila’, 13 November 2017. See Chapter 16. Available at: www.asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/3.-ADOPTION_2017_ALD-on-AMR_Endorsed-13th-AHMM.pdf.

⁵⁶ Asean Health Ministers, ‘ASEAN Strategic Framework to Combat Antimicrobial Resistance through One Health Approach [2019–2030]’. Available at: www.asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Agd-6.2.b_ASEAN-Strategic-Framework-to-Combat-AMR_Adopted-by-AHMM.pdf.

⁵⁷ Footnote Ibid.

⁵⁸ Footnote Ibid.

⁵⁹ The ACB is an intergovernmental organisation that facilitates cooperation and coordination among the ten ASEAN Member States and with regional and international organisations on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.

⁶⁰ ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity, ‘Wildlife Conservation and Zoonotic Diseases: Halting Species Loss and Tackling Public Health in the ASEA’, Webinar, 19 November 2020. Available at: https://asean.chm-cbd.net/wildlife-conservation-and-zoonotic-diseases-halting-species-loss-and-tackling-public-health-asean.

⁶¹ 37th ASEAN Summit (chaired by Vietnam), ASEAN Strategic Framework for Public Health Emergencies, II, § 5, November 2020.

⁶² Pierre Mazzega and Claire Lajaunie, ‘Modelling Organisation Networks Collaborating on Health and Environment within ASEAN’ in Rebecca S Martinez (ed.), Complex Systems: Theory and Applications (NOVA Publ. Hauppauge 2017), Chap. 5, 117–148.

⁶³ Following a proposal by the French and German governments. Cf. Thomas C Mettenleiter et al., ‘The One Health High-Level Expert Panel (OHHLEP)’ (2023) 5 One Health Outlook 1–8.

⁶⁴ UNEP joined the Tripartite in May 2021 and in March 2022 the four international agencies signed a Memorandum of Understanding which provides a legal and formal framework to tackle the challenges at the human, animal, plant, and ecosystem interface using a more integrated and coordinated approach constituting the Quadripartite.

⁶⁵ One Health High-Level Expert Panel, Wiku B Adisasmito, Salama Almuhairi, Casey Barton Behravesh, et al., ‘One Health: A New Definition for a Sustainable and Healthy Future’ (2022) 18 PLoS Pathogens e1010537.

⁶⁶ United Nations General Assembly, Resolution A/RES/76/300, The Human Right to a Clean, Healthy and Sustainable Environment, July 2022. See Chapter 7.

⁶⁷ United Nations Human Rights Council, Resolution 48/13 48/13, The Human Right to a Clean, Healthy and Sustainable Environment, October 2021.

⁶⁸ J. H. Knox, ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Issue of Human Rights Obligations Relating to the Enjoyment of a Safe, Clean, Healthy and Sustainable Environment’, A/HRC/34/49, January 2017, 21.

⁶⁹ UNEP, UNEA, Resolution 5.6 Biodiversity and Health, March 2022, § 4.

⁷⁰ Action Track 6.

⁷¹ Action 6.1. Protect, restore and prevent the degradation of ecosystems and the wider environment; Action 6.2. Mainstream the health of the environment and ecosystems into the One Health approach; Action 6.3. Integrate environmental knowledge, data and evidence into One Health decision-making; Action 6.4. Create an interoperable One Health academic and in-service training programme for environmental, medical, agricultural and veterinary sector professionals. In FAO, UNEP, WHO, and WOAH. 2022. One Health Joint Plan of Action (2022–2026). Working together for the health of humans, animals, plants, and the environment. Rome.

⁷² Footnote Ibid., 3.

⁷³ Claire Lajaunie and Pierre Mazzega, ‘Connecting the One Health Approach to the Ocean-Climate Nexus’, One Ocean Hub, 23 November 2021. Available at: https://oneoceanhub.org/connecting-the-one-health-approach-to-the-ocean-climate-nexus/.

⁷⁴ UNESCO-IOC, The Science We Need for the Ocean We Want: The United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (2021–2030) (Paris: UNESCO, 2020).

⁷⁵ Lajaunie and Mazzega, ‘Connecting the One Health Approach to the Ocean-Climate Nexus’.

⁷⁶ Note that the word ‘ocean’ is one of these expressions.

⁷⁷ Claire Lajaunie and Pierre Mazzega, ‘Presentation One Health, the Ocean and Climate Change, Fifth Asia-Pacific Day for the Ocean’, 30 November 2022: cf. UN ESCAP, ‘Fifth Asia-Pacific Day for the Ocean’, Meeting Report (Bangkok: UN ESCAP, UNDP, UNEP, 2022).

⁷⁸ ‘Session One Health and the Ocean, from the Coast to the Deep Sea’, Science Summit at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA77) convened by Claire Lajaunie, 19 September 2021. Available at: https://ssunga77.sched.com/event/14WL4/ref-19044-one-health-and-the-ocean-from-the-coast-to-the-deep-sea-convened-by-claire-lajaunie.

⁷⁹ UN ESCAP, Accelerating One Health in Asia and the Pacific. Policy Brief (Bangkok: UN ESCAP, 2022).

⁸⁰ Chairman’s Statement of the 12th ASEAN-United Nations Summit, ‘ASEAN A.C.T: Addressing Challenges Together’, Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 11 November 2022. Available at: www.asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/7.-Final-CS-12th-ASEAN-UN-Summit.pdf.

⁸¹ Serge Morand and Claire Lajaunie, ‘Biodiversity and Covid-19: A Report and a Long Road Ahead to Avoid a Next Pandemic’ (2021) 4(7) One Earth, 920–923.

⁸² Kittipong Chaisiri et al., ‘A Social-Ecological and One Health Observatory: Ten Years of Collaborative Studies in Saen Thong (Nan, Thailand)’, CABI One Health Cases (2023).

⁸³ HealthDEEP and its French researchers benefit from this recognition through the ‘Innovative Animal Health Project’ granted by TICA.

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.