Experts call for increased investment in One Health to reduce the burden of neglected zoonoses

One Health is a concept that recognizes that the health of people is linked to the health of animals and their shared environment. A One Health approach in preventing and controlling diseases therefore involves the collaborative efforts of multiple disciplines and sectors. This approach is especially useful for managing zoonoses, diseases that are transmitted between animals and people.

According to the World Health Organization, at least 61% of all human pathogens are zoonotic and have represented 75% of all emerging pathogens during the past decade. There are more than 200 known zoonotic diseases. The health and economic cost of these diseases falls largely on poorer countries which bear 98% of the global burden of zoonoses.

Additionally, in poorer countries, zoonoses comprise 25% of the human burden of infectious diseases. Just 13 of over 200 zoonotic diseases cause 2.4 billion cases of illness and 2.2 million deaths annually (not including COVID-19).

Most zoonotic diseases are endemic in nature. Apart from emerging zoonoses like severe acute respiratory syndrome, highly pathogenic avian influenza and now COVID-19, many endemic zoonoses such as brucellosis and cysticercosis are not prioritized by national and international health systems and are therefore termed neglected zoonoses.

The impact of neglected zoonoses is most severe on poor households in low-resource settings as most people living in rural areas depend on livestock for food, transport and farm work. People living in urban slums are also affected as the rise in urban livestock agriculture brings people and animals into closer contact.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has brought into sharp focus the interconnectedness of people, animals and the environment, and the need for multi-disciplinary approaches such as One Health to tackle the challenge. Preventing and controlling zoonoses in domestic and wild animal populations is a cost-effective way to ensure such diseases do not spread to human populations.

The International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) has a wealth of research expertise on zoonoses and One Health. The institute recently launched a set of seven research briefs that highlight the benefits of One Health in sustainable livestock production towards improving the health of people, animals and the environment.

The brief Preventing and controlling human diseases transmitted by animals saves millions of lives and livelihoods gives an overview of the burdens and risks of endemic zoonoses and highlights what can be done to reduce the burden of neglected zoonoses and prevent the spread of emerging zoonotic diseases.

For example, innovative community disease surveillance programs can help health experts to detect disease outbreaks rapidly and identify the specific disease hotspots for more timely and targeted interventions.

A research study on the business case for One Health shows that every one dollar invested in One Health generates five dollars’ worth of benefits. Now is the time for governments, investors and policymakers to increase investment in One Health to prevent and control neglected zoonoses and safeguard the health of millions of people and animals and their shared ecosystem.

Citation

ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute). 2021. Preventing and controlling human diseases transmitted by animals saves millions of lives and livelihoods. Livestock pathways to 2030: One Health Brief 2. Nairobi: International Livestock Research Institute.

Read more

ILRI’s expertise on One Health

ILRI’s expertise on zoonoses

One Health Research, Education and Outreach Centre in Africa

Photo credit: Camels drinking at a water pan in Wajir county in Kenya (ILRI/George Wamwere-Njoroge)

 

Nairobi is rapidly losing its green spaces: this could open the door to more diseases

Hundreds of trees have been felled along Nairobi’s Uhuru and Waiyaki highways to make space for a new expressway. CELINE CLERY/AFP via Getty Images

Eric Fèvre, University of Liverpool and James Hassell, Yale University

There’s been widespread concern in Kenya over the shrinking of green spaces in Nairobi, the capital city. Most recently, there was uproar over the construction of a raised highway. This resulted in the felling of hundreds of trees, though protests managed to save the life of one 100-year-old fig tree.

It was also proposed that part of the highway run through Uhuru park – one of the city’s few recreational parks. Protests successfully diverted the highway to the park’s outskirts, but development still threatens the city’s few undeveloped spaces.

To give an idea of how much green space has already been lost, between 1976 and 2000, Nairobi’s forest cover went from 14% to 3%. Bushland cover, over the same period, was also reduced from 22% to 13%.

This will have an impact on the city’s wildlife and livestock. Nairobi, like other urban environments in the tropics, has an ecosystem that includes wildlife – such as birds, rodents, primates – and livestock such as cattle, goats, sheep and pigs. As green spaces are lost, native wildlife and bird species can dwindle and non-native species proliferate.

But very few studies explore how development affects wildlife and livestock in tropical cities. Recognising this gap, we explored the impact of a growing and changing urban environment on the wildlife and livestock that live with people in Nairobi from 2013 to 2018.

We found that, as land use in Nairobi transformed, there have been significant changes.

Competition between invasive and endemic species has grown, to the detriment of native biodiversity. Species – many of which play important roles in ecosystems such as fruit bats, primates and pollinators – are lost. And as the ecological landscape becomes less diverse, wildlife species that co-exist with humans – such as rats, scavenging and seed-eating birds (collectively known as synanthropes) – thrive, particularly in the poorer, most densely populated areas of Nairobi.

This is troubling because evidence suggests that synanthropes host more germs and could pass diseases on to people and make them sick. These are called “zoonotic diseases” and range from minor short-term illness to major life-changing illness and even death.

We could not assess the risk posed by zoonoses in Nairobi in our study. What we do know is that the city (and likely most other biodiverse, tropical cities) harbours all the ingredients for zoonotic spillover to occur between animals and people, particularly in the most densely populated areas.

Urban development policymakers must recognise that by shrinking green spaces, they increase the likelihood that people will catch zoonotic diseases. This is because species such as rodents proliferate.

Which species dominate, and where

We studied 99 household compounds – people’s houses and private land – across the city. These were selected to represent the different ways in which people interact with livestock and wildlife across the city. Households were stratified by people’s wealth, the types of livestock they kept and the ecological habitats in which they live.

Our data show that synanthropic species – like rats and insectivorous bats – dominate lower income, densely populated areas of the city. Here the synanthropes live in close quarters with poultry, pigs and small ruminants, such as goats and sheep.

We found that the decline in biodiversity – and subsequent colonisation by synanthropes – was driven by urban development. Trees and other forms of vegetation were replaced by man-made structures, removing the natural resources that most wildlife require to survive. Meanwhile, the resources (such as waste) on which synanthropes thrive increased.

As we argue in our paper, this kind of restructuring has important implications for the emergence of novel diseases at urban interfaces, which is why we used our research results to generate a set of testable hypotheses that explore the influence of urban change on microbial communities.

By testing the hypotheses we provide insights into how rapid urbanisation can generate interfaces for pathogen emergence, which should be targeted for surveillance.

Research done elsewhere shows that synanthropes – which thrive in disturbed environments with lower biodiversity – host more pathogens. And synanthropes seek resources provided by humans and their livestock, such as waste, which brings them into closer contact and increases opportunities for pathogens to cross between them.

For instance, our work in Nairobi shows that, as densities of humans and livestock increase, there is more sharing of antimicrobial resistance with wild birds.

Policy recommendations

Our findings have important implications for the public health and the sustainable planning and management of cities, particularly rapidly developing, biodiverse cities.

The high levels of competent disease carriers near humans is a huge risk to public health. The current response to COVID-19 has shown that the ability to limit the spread of a disease depends upon good public health infrastructure. Developing this infrastructure, while more studies are conducted to assess the risk of zoonotic disease transmission, is crucial.

Mitigating steps can be taken. One would be to maintain areas of forests, grasslands and clean waterways throughout the city. This would preserve and increase the wildlife biodiversity that competes with synanthropes, while also improving biosecurity within households, which could help moderate the presence of synanthropic species in urban centres.

It is, however, worth noting that some synanthropes, like insectivorous bats, help to control mosquito populations and agricultural pests in heavily urbanised environments. Eradicating them would not be advisable. Managing people’s interactions with synanthropes through smart urban planning – for example by removing resources on which synanthropes rely such as manure and rubbish from households – is best.

Our findings also raise important concerns about the social equality of urban development. The benefits of urban biodiversity and risks posed by human exposure to animal-borne diseases are not equally distributed. Currently equitable access to green spaces is restricted in many cities due to socioeconomic barriers, such as land ownership, proximity or lack of transportation. Reconfiguring the distribution of green space from the peri-urban fringe of the city to densely populated areas would build a more equitable society, allowing more city dwellers to have access to recreational space.

David Aronson, Senior Communications Advisor with ILRI, and Timothy Offei-Addo, a Princeton-in-Africa fellow with ILRI, contributed to the writing of this article.

Eric Fèvre, Professor of Veterinary Infectious Diseases, University of Liverpool and International Livestock Research Institute, Kenya, University of Liverpool and James Hassell, Wildlife Veterinarian with Smithsonian’s Global Health Program, and adjunct Assistant Professor, Yale University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

 

Mapping the risk of livestock anthrax in Kenya helps identify disease hotspots to improve prevention and control

Developing risk maps for endemic livestock diseases is important for effective disease prevention and control, particularly in resource-limited countries.

For endemic and easily diagnosed diseases such as anthrax, a useful approach involves analysis and mapping of historical data to identify disease hotspots and define risk factors of its occurrence.

A new paper published in BMC Infectious Diseases (Feb 2021) presents the results of risk mapping of the 666 livestock anthrax events that occurred in Kenya between 1957 and 2017.

The mapping exercise found that there were about 10 anthrax events in Kenya annually, with the number increasing to as many as 50 events annually by 2005.

Mapping also revealed spatial clustering of the disease events in certain sub-counties; 12% of sub-counties were responsible for over 30% of anthrax events while 36% of sub-counties did not report any incidents of anthrax over the 60-year period under study.

Additionally, there was significantly greater risk of anthrax occurring in agro-alpine high- and medium-potential agro-ecological zones than in the arid and semi-arid regions of the country.

Cattle were over 10 times more likely to be infected by Bacillus anthracis (the bacterium that causes anthrax) than sheep, goats or camels.

There was lower risk of anthrax in August and December, months that follow the long and short rain periods, respectively.

By enabling analysis of the trends and patterns of occurrence of livestock anthrax across different regions over the years, the risk maps will be a useful tool for livestock health officials to identify and characterize Kenya’s anthrax hotspots, leading to better targeting of disease management interventions.

Citation
Nderitu, L.M., Gachohi, J., Otieno, F., Mogoa, E.G., Muturi, M., Mwatondo, A., Osoro, E.M., Ngere, I., Munyua, P.M., Oyas, H., Njagi, O., Lofgren, E., Marsh, T., Widdowson, M.-A., Bett, B. and Njenga, M.K. 2021. Spatial clustering of livestock anthrax events associated with agro-ecological zones in Kenya, 1957-2017. BMC Infectious Diseases 21(1): 191.

Photo credit: Cattle and wildlife at the ILRI Kapiti Research Station (ILRI/Paul Karaimu)

 

Experts call for policies and better data to mitigate antimicrobial resistance and zoonoses in intensive livestock production

The intensification of livestock production calls for the development of contextually relevant policy frameworks that mitigate potential human health risks such as antimicrobial resistance and zoonotic diseases, a new expert review paper says.

The review by scientists from the University of Liverpool and the International Livestock Research Institute also calls for better data on the burden of antimicrobial resistance and zoonoses arising from intensive livestock production. This would improve evidence-based approaches and resource allocation towards managing these global health challenges.

The paper, published in the journal Animal (Feb 2021), reviews the drivers of livestock intensification and the negative externalities that may arise from it in terms of antimicrobial resistance and zoonoses.

The authors highlight the need for livestock development plans to incorporate risk mitigation measures, including supportive national policies and development of professional capacity in the veterinary and public health sectors.

Quantifying the burden of animal diseases stemming from livestock intensification, establishing surveillance for antimicrobial resistance and recording the use of antimicrobial products are required to enable governments to appropriately allocate resources to mitigate the twin health risks of antimicrobial resistance and zoonoses, the authors say.

Citation
Gilbert, W., Thomas, L., Coyne, L. and Rushton, J. 2021. Review: Mitigating the risks posed by intensification in livestock production: The examples of antimicrobial resistance and zoonoses. Animal 15(2): 100123.

Photo credit: Sheep market in Doyogena, Ethiopia (ILRI/Zerihun Sewunet)

 

Experts call for global One Health platform to consolidate evidence on actions to tackle antimicrobial resistance

The World Health Organization has declared that antimicrobial resistance is one of the top 10 global public health threats facing humanity. It requires urgent multisectoral action in order to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.

Improving evidence for action is crucial to tackle this global challenge. The number of interventions for antimicrobial resistance is increasing but current research has major limitations in terms of efforts, methods, scope, quality and reporting.

Moving the agenda forward requires an improved understanding of the diversity and feasibility of interventions, the factors that influence their effectiveness, and the ways in which individual interventions might interact to affect actions against antimicrobial resistance in different contexts.

As part of efforts to strengthen the global governance of antimicrobial resistance, a group of international research experts is advocating for an evidence-based approach to the challenge through the creation of an international One Health platform for online learning that will synthesize the evidence for actions on antimicrobial resistance into a fully accessible database.

The researchers discuss this One Health learning approach to antimicrobial resistance in an article published in Lancet Infectious Diseases (1 Dec 2020), noting that there are currently significant limitations in terms of availability of context-specific evidence on appropriate actions to tackle antimicrobial resistance.

The proposed platform will also offer new scientific insights into the design, implementation, evaluation and reporting of the range of interventions relevant to addressing antimicrobial resistance.

“Fundamental gaps in knowledge hinder action against antimicrobial resistance, but the limitations of research into interventions for antimicrobial resistance serve as even bigger obstacles,” the authors say.

The range of interventions to tackle antimicrobial resistance is wide: from simple actions to complex ones, from regulatory to behavioural approaches, and from those focusing on prevention of infection to those focusing on responsible use of antimicrobials. Therefore, it is crucial to consolidate an evidence-based approach to the challenge.

The authors also note that the open access One Health learning platform will be useful to health-care professionals, public health practitioners, policymakers, industries and consumer groups.

“Ultimately, this will contribute to building societal resilience to this central challenge of the 21st century.”

Citation

Wernli, D., Jørgensen, P.S., Parmley, E.J., Troell, M., Majowicz, S., Harbarth, S., Léger, A., Lambraki, I., Graells, T., Henriksson, P.J.G., Carson, C., Cousins, M., Ståhlgren, G.S., Mohan, C.V., Simpson, A.J.H., Wieland, B., Pedersen, K., Schneider, A., Chandy, S.J., Wijayathilaka, T.P., Delamare-Deboutteville, J., Vila, J., Lundborg, C.S. and Pittet, D. 2020. Evidence for action: A One Health learning platform on interventions to tackle antimicrobial resistance. Lancet Infectious Diseases 20(12): e307–e311.

Photo credit: Landscape in Hoa Binh province, northwest of Vietnam (photo credit: ILRI/Vu Ngoc Dung).

 

Lancet Countdown 2020 report calls for governments to align global COVID-19 recovery with response to climate change

The COVID-19 pandemic and climate change represent converging challenges to which no continent, country or community is immune. Aligning the global recovery from COVID-19 with our response to climate change offers a triple win: protect public health, promote a sustainable economy and preserve our planet.

This is according to a new report by the Lancet Countdown initiative, an international, multi-disciplinary research collaboration that tracks the evolving public health impacts of climate change and publishes its findings annually in The Lancet medical journal ahead of the United Nations climate change negotiations.

The Lancet Countdown 2020 report, launched on 3 December 2020, tracks the links between health and climate change across 43 indicators in five domains:

• climate change impacts, exposures and vulnerabilities;
• adaptation, planning and resilience for health;
• mitigation actions and health co-benefits;
• economics and finance; and
• public and political engagement.

The report represents the findings and consensus of the 35 leading academic institutions and United Nations agencies that make up the Lancet Countdown initiative, and draws on the expertise of climate scientists, geographers, engineers, experts in energy, food and transport, economists, social and political scientists, data scientists, public health professionals and doctors.

Among the report’s co-authors is Delia Grace, professor of food safety systems at the Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich and contributing scientist at the International Livestock Research Institute.

Visit the Lancet Countdown 2020 website to read thematic summaries and key findings of the report. The full text of the report is available for free via The Lancet (you will need to create a free account with The Lancet).

Photo credit: A Maasai pastoralist taking livestock to drink from the Olkitikiti Dam in Olkitikiti village, Kiteto, Tanzania (ILRI/Fiona Flintan)

 

Flattening the curve on foodborne illness and its costs in Africa

Food safety has never featured prominently on Africa’s development agenda. When it is an issue, typically the focus has been on high-value food items produced for export, while food safety in domestic markets has been largely neglected, both by governments and development partners. This must change. Recent research has shown that the health and economic consequences of foodborne diseases in Africa are significant and growing, as urbanization and income growth prompt dietary changes that increasingly expose consumers to food safety hazards.

The coming decade is critical. A ‘business as usual’ approach to food safety, involving a combination of post-outbreak firefighting and fragmented regulatory and ad hoc interventions, will do little to check the threats posed by unsafe food in many African countries. The good news is that many of these problems can be controlled and their costs reduced. A combination of incremental and systematic measures, well within the capacity of most governments, can flatten the curve of foodborne illness.

Until recently, research on foodborne diseases was mostly limited to high-income countries. Research and public health interventions in poorer countries largely focused on the so-called big three—tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and malaria—and on maternal and child mortality. Yet, recent epidemiological research from the World Health Organization shows the costs of neglecting foodborne diseases in developing countries. Worldwide, the global health burden of foodborne diseases is on par with the big three. The young, old, malnourished and poor are disproportionately impacted and children under five years of age are especially vulnerable.

Globally, Africa south of the Sahara and emerging Asia have the highest incidence of and death rates from foodborne diseases. Yet while the incidence rates of the two regions are comparable, Africa’s estimated death rate is nearly four times higher. The reasons for that difference are not fully understood, but the prevalence of endemic ailments and poor diagnostic and treatment options probably account for much of it. Drawing on data from the World Health Organization and other recent sources, we estimate that Africa experiences around 135 million cases of foodborne diseases and 180,000 foodborne disease-related deaths per year. Microbial pathogens—especially Salmonella spp., toxigenic Escherichia coli, norovirus and Campylobacter spp.—account for about 80% of Africa’s foodborne disease burden.

The economic consequences of foodborne diseases in Africa are correspondingly severe. A recent World Bank study estimated the productivity losses alone attributed to unsafe food within Africa at $20 billion in 2016 and the cost of treating these illnesses at an additional $3.5 billion. These costs are heaviest in larger, middle-income countries such as South Africa, Nigeria and Egypt, yet are also significant elsewhere. Overall, the relative economic burden of foodborne diseases is higher for African countries than for developing countries elsewhere.

Both the health and economic consequences of foodborne diseases in Africa are likely to grow as the continent develops. In low-income countries, food is typically produced close to the point of consumption and undergoes limited transformation. Starchy staples such as cassava, maize and rice predominate. Traditional processing techniques dominate and are often fairly effective at reducing risk. As they develop and urbanize, countries experience rapid shifts in diet and towards more intensified agriculture. Such transitions typically lead to increased consumption of fresh produce and animal-sourced foods and a lengthening of food supply chains. Yet much of this perishable food continues to be handled and distributed through informal channels, creating potentially multiple points for food hazards to develop. In these transitioning food systems, the official regulatory apparatus is often overwhelmed by the breadth and depth of emerging challenges.

Until very recently, domestic food safety programs in Africa have been few and poorly funded. By contrast, literally hundreds of projects supported by trade partners or development agencies have sought to address international trade-related food safety problems. These have been beneficial and have helped to push Africa’s trade in safety-sensitive foods such as fish, fresh fruit and vegetables from $3.8 billion in 2001 to $16.1 billion in 2017. But overall, the available evidence suggests that the trade-related costs associated with unsafe food in African countries are small compared to the domestic public health costs and productivity losses. In fact, we estimate the ratio between domestic and trade-related costs is likely to be on the order of 40 to 1, suggesting that the predominant attention of policymakers on the trade impacts of food safety has been deeply misguided.

African countries must implement better domestic food safety policies and support them with needed investment. But this, in itself, will not be enough to give them the upper hand against foodborne diseases. What they need is nothing less than a food safety paradigm shift. The traditional regulatory model, imported from high-income countries, centres on enforcement through regular inspection of food facilities and product testing, with set legal and financial penalties. This model is ill-suited to food systems in Africa, where smallholder farmers, micro- and small enterprises and informal food channels predominate, surveillance and inspection mechanisms can be weak and court procedures challenging and slow. It introduces an antagonistic and often unproductive relationship between government and the private sector as regulator versus regulated.

A better approach is to think of food safety as a shared responsibility between food business operators, consumers and the government. In this model, governments set forth a vision, convene stakeholders and offer a diverse set of policy instruments to involve, incentivize and leverage the actions of key value chain actors. Instead of being the ‘official food control’ authority, governments should act as facilitators encouraging investments and behaviour change. Experimentation and flexibility will be critical.

There are no quick fixes to Africa’s food safety challenges. They require a comprehensive approach that focuses on improving food safety awareness, practices and governance. Foundational investments will be needed in people, infrastructure and institutions. Addressing these issues will require sustained attention from technical agencies and government ministries as well as donors. It will require broader interventions to improve access to quality public health services, clean water and sanitation and improved agricultural productivity. It will require, in short, a commitment commensurate to the scale of the problem. It is also likely, as in other parts of the world, that improvements will ultimately be driven by better-aware consumers demanding food safety and eliciting responses from public sector and food suppliers. Recognizing that is a good place to start.

This article by Steven Jaffee and Delia Grace was originally posted on the International Food Policy Research Institute website. It is based on a chapter they and others co-authored in the 2020 Annual Trends and Outlook Report: ‘Why Food Safety Matters to Africa: Making the Case for Policy Action’ by Steven Jaffee, Spencer Henson, Delia Grace, Mateo Ambrosio and Franck Berthe.

Steven Jaffee is a lecturer at the University of Maryland. Delia Grace is a professor of food safety systems at the Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich and a contributing scientist at the International Livestock Research Institute.

Photo credit: Market place in Kenya (World Bank/Sambrian Mbaabu).

 

One Health in action: Research by ILRI and partners improves the health of people, animals and the environment

The current coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has brought into sharp focus the interconnectedness of people, animals and the environment and how this can contribute to the spread of disease.

One Health is a concept that recognizes that the health and well-being of people is intricately linked to the health of animals and the environment. For this reason, disease outbreaks are best tackled through a One Health approach that harnesses the collaborative efforts of multiple disciplines and sectors. This is especially so for zoonotic diseases that are spread between animals and people. One Health is also useful for addressing other public health issues such as antimicrobial resistance and food safety. 

One Health is not a new concept, but it has become more important in recent years. This is because many factors have changed interactions between people, animals and the environment. These changes have led to the emergence and re-emergence of zoonotic diseases.

The International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) has an established record of collaborative One Health research in Africa and Southeast Asia. To mark One Health Day coming up next week on 3 November, we bring you highlights of some One Health research initiatives by ILRI and partners.

Ecosystem approaches to the better management of zoonotic emerging infectious diseases in Southeast Asia

This project worked directly with over 100 actors involved in managing zoonotic emerging infectious diseases across eight multi-disciplinary teams in Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam. The project increased the capacity of researchers and policy implementers to use One Health approaches for better control of zoonotic diseases. The project also produced various research outputs and increased understanding of the teams’ knowledge, attitudes and practice in relation to One Health and how this approach could lead to better health outcomes for people, animals and the environment.

One Health Regional Network for the Horn of Africa

This project aims to improve the health and wealth of the people of the Horn of Africa by developing a regional network of individuals and organizations that can undertake high quality research into the link between people’s health and that of livestock and the environment. The project builds capacity to undertake basic and applied research in One Health through training programs and research placements for both research and non-research staff from participating institutions.

One Health Research, Education and Outreach Centre in Africa

The One Health Research, Education and Outreach Centre in Africa was launched barely a week ago (on 22 October 2020) and is hosted at ILRI’s Nairobi campus. Its goal is to improve the health of humans, animals and ecosystems through capacity building, strengthening of local, regional and global networks and provision of evidence-based policy advice on One Health in sub-Saharan Africa. It has four research themes: control of neglected tropical zoonotic diseases; emerging infectious diseases; food safety and informal markets; and prevention and control of antimicrobial resistance. The centre is currently supporting the Government of Kenya’s national response to the COVID-19 pandemic through COVID-19 testing in ILRI’s bioscience laboratories.

One Health Units for Humans, Environment, Animals and Livelihoods

This project applies a One Health approach to enhance the well-being and resilience of vulnerable communities in pastoralist and agro-pastoralist areas of Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia. The project brings together professionals in human and animal health and the environment to achieve better access to human and veterinary health services and sustainable natural resource management.

Photo credit: Cattle coming in from the fields in the evening in Lhate Village, Chokwe, Mozambique (ILRI/Stevie Mann)

 

Celebrating Open Access Week 2020 with a focus on ILRI’s open access research on animal and human health

International Open Access Week is an opportunity to raise awareness about open access publishing of research outputs to enable their universal online accessibility. Research outputs are wide-ranging and include articles in peer-reviewed journals, books, book chapters, conference proceedings, infographics, presentations, posters, reports, theses and videos.

The theme of this year’s Open Access Week (19–25 October) is ‘Open with purpose: taking action to build structural equity and inclusion’.

The Animal and Human Health program of the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) seeks to effectively manage or eliminate livestock, zoonotic and foodborne diseases that matter to the poor through the generation and use of knowledge, technologies and products, leading to higher farmer incomes and better health and nutrition for consumers and livestock.

To celebrate Open Access Week 2020, we bring you a curated selection of recently published open access outputs authored and co-authored by scientists from ILRI’s Animal and Human Health program from across our research portfolio on antimicrobial resistance, food safety, One Health and zoonotic diseases.

Book chapters

• Bett, B., Randolph, D. and McDermott, J. 2020. Africa’s growing risk of diseases that spread from animals to people. In: Swinnen, J. and McDermott, J. (eds), COVID-19 and global food security. Washington, D.C.: IFPRI. pp. 124–128. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108990
• Kang’ethe, E., Grace, D., Alonso, S., Lindahl, J., Mutua, F. and Haggblade, S. 2020. Food safety and public health implications of growing urban food markets. In: AGRA, Africa Agriculture Status Report. Feeding Africa’s cities: Opportunities, challenges, and policies for linking African farmers with growing urban food markets. Issue 8. Nairobi, Kenya: Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA): 101–119. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/109386

Peer-reviewed journal articles

• Ferguson, A.W., Muloi, D., Ngatia, D.K., Kiongo, W., Kimuyu, D.M., Webala, P.W., Olum, M.O., Muturi, M., Thumbi, S.M., Woodroffe, R., Murugi, L., Fèvre, E.M., Murray, S. and Martins, D.J. 2020. Volunteer based approach to dog vaccination campaigns to eliminate human rabies: Lessons from Laikipia County, Kenya. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases 14(7): e0008260. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108692
• Hu Suk Lee, Vuong Nghia Bui, Huyen Xuan Nguyen, Anh Ngoc Bui, Trung Duc Hoang, Hung Nguyen-Viet, Randolph, D.G. and Wieland, B. 2020. Seroprevalences of multi-pathogen and description of farm movement in pigs in two provinces in Vietnam. BMC Veterinary Research 16: 15. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/106618 
• Kemboi, D.C., Antonissen, G., Ochieng, P.E., Croubels, S., Okoth, S., Kang’ethe, E.K., Faas, J., Lindahl, J.F. and Gathumbi, J.K. 2020. A review of the impact of mycotoxins on dairy cattle health: Challenges for food safety and dairy production in sub-Saharan Africa. Toxins 12(4): 222. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108030
• Kivali, V., Kiyong’a, A.N., Fyfe, J., Toye, P., Fèvre, E.M. and Cook, E.A.J. 2020. Spatial distribution of trypanosomes in cattle from western Kenya. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 7: 554. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/109133
• Kiyong’a, A.N., Cook, E.A.J., Okba, N.M.A., Kivali, V., Reuksen, C., Haagmans, B.L. and Fèvre, E.M. 2020. Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) seropositive camel handlers in Kenya. Viruses 12(4): 396. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/107946
• Long Pham-Thanh, Magnusson, U., Minh Can-Xuan, Hung Nguyen-Viet, Lundkvist, Å. and Lindahl, J. 2020. Livestock development in Hanoi city, Vietnam—Challenges and policies. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 7: 566. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/109404
• Mitchell, M.E.V., Alders, R., Unger, F., Hung Nguyen-Viet, Trang Thi Huyen Le and Toribio, J.-A. 2020. The challenges of investigating antimicrobial resistance in Vietnam – what benefits does a One Health approach offer the animal and human health sectors? BMC Public Health 20: 213. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/107087 
• Mutua, F., Sharma, G., Grace, D., Bandyopadhyay, S., Shome, B. and Lindahl, J. 2020. A review of animal health and drug use practices in India, and their possible link to antimicrobial resistance. Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control 9: 103. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108734
• Njenga, M.K., Ogolla, E., Thumbi, S.M., Ngere, I., Omulo, S., Muturi, M., Marwanga, D., Bitek, A., Bett, B., Widdowson, M.-A., Munyua, P. and Osoro, E.M. 2020. Comparison of knowledge, attitude, and practices of animal and human brucellosis between nomadic pastoralists and non-pastoralists in Kenya. BMC Public Health 20: 269. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/107419
• Wernli, D., Jørgensen, P.S., Parmley, E.J., Troell, M., Majowicz, S., Harbarth, S., Léger, A., Lambraki, I., Graells, T., Henriksson, P.J.G., Carson, C., Cousins, M., Ståhlgren, G.S., Mohan, C.V., Simpson, A.J.H., Wieland, B., Pedersen, K., Schneider, A., Chandy, S.J., Wijayathilaka, T.P., Delamare-Deboutteville, J., Vila, J., Lundborg, C.S. and Pittet, D. 2020. Evidence for action: A One Health learning platform on interventions to tackle antimicrobial resistance. Lancet Infectious Diseases. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/109151

Infographic

• Grace, D., Alonso, S., Mutua, F., Hoffmann, V., Lore, T. and Karugia, J. 2020. Food safety in Kenya: Focus on dairy. Infographic. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/109143

Presentations and posters

• Diarra, S., Dione, M., Konkobo-Yameogo, C., Ilboudo, G., Roesel, K., Lallogo, V.R., Ouattara, L. and Knight-Jones, T. 2020. Value chain assessment of animal source foods and vegetables in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: Food safety, quality and hygiene perceptions and practices. Presentation at a project webinar, 20 May 2020. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108633
• Hung Nguyen-Viet, Unger, F., Hu Suk Lee, Lindahl, J., Thang Nguyen, Bett, B., Fèvre, E., Tum, S., Sinh Dang Xuan, Moodley, A. and Grace, D. 2020. One Health research at the International Livestock Research Institute to address neglected tropical diseases, zoonoses and emerging infectious diseases in Southeast Asia. Presentation at a webinar by the One Health Collaborating Center Universitas Gadjah Mada, ‘World Zoonoses Day 2020: Lessons learned and future directions’, 7 July 2020. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108791
• Lindahl, J., Mutua, F. and Grace, D. 2020. Livestock interventions in low-income countries: A theory of change for improved nutrition. Poster presentation at the virtual 2020 Agriculture, Nutrition and Health (ANH) Academy Week research conference, 30 June–2 July 2020. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108715
• Wieland, B., Moodley, A., Mbatidde, I., Ndoboli, D., Tenhagen, B.-A., Roesler, U., Erechu, R., Litta-Mulondo, A., Kakooza, S., Waiswa, J. and Kankya, C. 2020. Mitigating agriculture-associated antimicrobial resistance in poultry value chains in Uganda. Poster presented at the virtual annual planning meeting of the Boosting Uganda’s Investment in Livestock Development (BUILD) project, 10–12 June 2020. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108689

Project report

• Blackmore, E., Guarín, A., Alonso, S., Grace, D. and Vorley, B. 2020. Informal milk markets in Kenya, Tanzania and Assam (India): An overview of their status, policy context, and opportunities for policy innovation to improve health and safety. ILRI Research Report. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/109797

Research briefs

• Lam, S., Huyen Thi Thu Nguyen, Hung Nguyen-Viet and Unger, F. 2020. Mapping pathways toward safer pork in Vietnam. ILRI Research Brief 95. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108768
• Nguyen Thi Thinh, Grace, D., Pham Van Hung, Le Thi Thanh Huyen, Hung Nguyen Viet, Sinh Dang-Xuan, Nguyen Thi Duong Nga, Nguyen Thanh Luong, Nguyen Thi Thu Huyen, Tran Thi Bich Ngoc, Pham Duc Phuc and Unger, F. 2020. Food safety performance in key pork value chains in Vietnam. ILRI Research Brief 94. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108320
• Pham Duc Phuc, Toribio, J.-A., Ngo Hoang Tuan Hai, Sinh Dang-Xuan, Nguyen Thanh Luong, Langley, S.J., Dunham, J.G., Dinh Thanh Thuy, Dang Vu Hoa, Hung Nguyen-Viet, Grace, D. and Unger, F. 2020. Food safety risk communication and training need of stakeholders and consumers regarding pork value chain in Vietnam. ILRI Research Brief 96. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108769

Videos

• ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute). 2020. ILRI expertise on zoonotic diseases. Video. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108422
• ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute). 2020. Market-based approaches to improving the safety of pork in Vietnam. Video. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108425

Photo credit: International Open Access Week website

 

Experts review policy innovation to improve milk safety in informal markets

A new research report (Oct 2020) by scientists from the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) and the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) reviews the status and policy contexts of informal milk markets in Kenya, Tanzania and Assam (India) to better understand the opportunities for a policy innovation based on training and certification to overcome market access barriers for sellers of informal milk by improving the health and safety practices of informal milk traders, thereby addressing policymakers’ concerns. It is based on an extensive review of available literature and a small number of expert interviews and contributions.

Citation

Blackmore, E., Guarín, A., Alonso, S., Grace, D. and Vorley, B. 2020. Informal milk markets in Kenya, Tanzania and Assam (India): An overview of their status, policy context, and opportunities for policy innovation to improve health and safety. ILRI Project Report. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI.

Photo credit: Milk cans at the Ol Kalou Dairy Plant, Kenya (ILRI/Paul Karaimu)