The growing volumes of food globally lost or wasted and implications for food security and sustainability have raised the concern of researchers, governments, international organizations and grass-root movements. Much research and experiences investigating food waste causes and drivers focus on one specific segment of the food supply chain and limit the analysis to the situation of one or few countries, while the few studies of wider geographical scope also target other relevant and diversified objectives (e.g., food waste definition, quantification, environmental and economic impacts, and recommendations for interventions). This study, carried out by a network of European institutions involved in research and initiatives against food waste, focuses on the analysis of a broad area, Europe, through a wide and systematic literature review and consultation with stakeholders in international focus groups. The food supply chain was divided into seven segments and three main contexts were defined for the examination of food waste sources: Technological, Institutional (related to organisational factors, i.e., business management, economy, legislation, and policy), and Social (related to consumers’ behaviours and lifestyles). Results suggest a wide and multifaceted problem, interconnected across all stages of the food supply chain, from primary production, to final consumption. Within each context, the identified drivers have been grouped according to the possibilities and the type of interventions for food waste reduction. A final cross-contextual prioritization distinguished food waste sources related to (A) inherent characteristics of food; (B) social and economic factors; (C) individual non-readily changeable behaviours; (D) other priorities targeted by private and public stakeholders; (E) diversified factors, such as mismanagement, inefficient legislation, lack of awareness or information; and sub-optimal use of available technologies, which could be more promptly changed. Such diversification of causes calls for specific monitoring systems, targeted policy measures, and actions of individual stakeholders at each stage of the food supply chain.

Challenges calling for integrated approaches to health, such as the One Health (OH) approach, typically arise from the intertwined spheres of humans, animals, and ecosystems constituting their environment. Initiatives addressing such wicked problems commonly consist of complex structures and dynamics. As a result of the EU COST Action (TD 1404) “Network for Evaluation of One Health” (NEOH), we propose an evaluation framework anchored in systems theory to address the intrinsic complexity of OH initiatives and regard them as subsystems of the context within which they operate. Typically, they intend to influence a system with a view to improve human, animal, and environmental health. The NEOH evaluation framework consists of four overarching elements, namely: (1) the definition of the initiative and its context, (2) the description of the theory of change with an assessment of expected and unexpected outcomes, (3) the process evaluation of operational and supporting infrastructures (the “OH-ness”), and (4) an assessment of the association(s) between the process evaluation and the outcomes produced. It relies on a mixed methods approach by combining a descriptive and qualitative assessment with a semi-quantitative scoring for the evaluation of the degree and structural balance of “OH-ness” (summarised in an OH-index and OH-ratio, respectively) and conventional metrics for different outcomes in a multi-criteria-decision-analysis. Here, we focus on the methodology for Elements (1) and (3) including ready-to-use Microsoft Excel spreadsheets for the assessment of the “OH-ness”. We also provide an overview of Element (2), and refer to the NEOH handbook for further details, also regarding Element (4) (http://neoh.onehealthglobal.net). The presented approach helps researchers, practitioners, and evaluators to conceptualise and conduct evaluations of integrated approaches to health and facilitates comparison and learning across different OH activities thereby facilitating decisions on resource allocation. The application of the framework has been described in eight case studies in the same Frontiers research topic and provides first data on OH-index and OH-ratio, which is an important step towards their validation and the creation of a dataset for future benchmarking, and to demonstrate under which circumstances OH initiatives provide added value compared to disciplinary or conventional health initiatives.

One Health (OH) positions health professionals as agents for change and provides a platform to manage determinants of health that are often not comprehensively captured in medicine or public health alone. However, due to the organisation of societies and disciplines, and the sectoral allocation of resources, the development of transdisciplinary approaches requires effort and perseverance. Therefore, there is a need to provide evidence on the added value of OH for governments, researchers, funding bodies and stakeholders. This paper outlines a conceptual framework of what OH approaches can encompass and the added values they can provide. The framework was developed during a workshop conducted by the “Network for Evaluation of One Health”, an Action funded by the European Cooperation in Science and Technology. By systematically describing the various aspects of OH we provide the basis for measuring and monitoring the integration of disciplines, sectors and stakeholders in health initiatives. The framework identifies the social, economic and environmental drivers leading to integrated approaches to health, and illustrates how these evoke characteristic OH operations, i.e. thinking, planning and working, and require supporting infrastructures to allow learning, sharing and systemic organisation. It also describes the OH outcomes (i.e. sustainability, health and welfare, interspecies equity and stewardship, effectiveness and efficiency), which are not possible to obtain through sectoral approaches alone, and their alignment with aspects of sustainable development based on society, environment and economy.

The One Health concept covers the interrelationship between human, animal and environmental health and requires multistakeholder collaboration across many cultural, disciplinary, institutional and sectoral boundaries. Yet, the implementation of the One Health approach appears hampered by shortcomings in the global framework for health governance. Knowledge integration approaches, at all stages of policy development, could help to address these shortcomings. The identification of key objectives, the resolving of trade-offs and the creation of a common vision and a common direction can be supported by multicriteria analyses. Evidence-based decision-making and transformation of observations into narratives detailing how situations emerge and might unfold in the future can be achieved by systems thinking. Finally, transdisciplinary approaches can be used both to improve the effectiveness of existing systems and to develop novel networks for collective action. To strengthen One Health governance, we propose that knowledge integration becomes a key feature of all stages in the development of related policies. We suggest several ways in which such integration could be promoted.

One Health recognises the interdependence between the health of humans, animals, plants and the environment. With the increasing inclusion of One Health in multiple global health strategies, the One Health workforce must be prepared to protect and sustain the health and well-being of life on the planet. In this paper, a review of past and currently accepted One Health core competencies was conducted, with competence gaps identified. Here, the Network for Ecohealth and One Health (NEOH) propose updated core competencies designed to simplify what can be a complex area, grouping competencies into three main areas of: Skills; Values and Attitudes; and Knowledge and Awareness; with several layers underlying each. These are intentionally applicable to stakeholders from various sectors and across all levels to support capacity-building efforts within the One Health workforce. The updated competencies from NEOH can be used to evaluate and enhance current curricula, create new ones, or inform professional training programs at all levels, including students, university teaching staff, or government officials as well as continual professional development for frontline health practitioners and policy makers. The competencies are aligned with the new definition of One Health developed by the One Health High-Level Expert Panel (OHHLEP), and when supported by subjectspecific expertise, will deliver the transformation needed to prevent and respond to complex global challenges. One Health Impact Statement: Within a rapidly changing global environment, the need for practitioners competent in integrated approaches to health has increased substantially. Narrow approaches may not only limit opportunities for global and local solutions but, initiatives that do not consider other disciplines or social, economic and cultural contexts, may result in unforeseen and detrimental consequences. In keeping with principles of One Health, the Network for Ecohealth and One Health (NEOH) competencies entail a collaborative effort between multiple disciplines and sectors. They focus on enabling practitioners, from any background, at any level or scale of involvement, to promote and support a transformation to integrated health approaches. The updated competencies can be layered with existing disciplinary competencies and used to evaluate and enhance current education curricula, create new ones, or inform professional training programs at all levels-including for students, teachers and government officials as well as continual professional development for frontline health practitioners and policymakers. The competencies outlined here are applicable to all professionals and disciplines who may contribute to One Health, and are complimentary to, not a replacement for, any discipline-specific competencies. We believe the NEOH competencies meet the need outlined by the Quadripartite’s (Food and Agriculture Organisation, United Nations Environment Programme, World Health Organisation, World Organisation for Animal Health) Joint Plan of Action on One Health which calls for cross-sectoral competencies.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is currently regarded by the World Health Organization (WHO) as one of the most significant risks to global public health. The most critical causes of AMR infections in humans are the misuse and overuse of antimicrobials in humans and farmed animals. The rising global demand for food of animal origin encourages the increase of animal production worldwide, especially in developing countries. Simultaneously, current farming practices often extensively use antimicrobials on animals, influencing bacterial AMR incidence. This study aims to evaluate the correlation between antimicrobial use (AMU) in farmed animals and the detection of AMR infections in humans, the effects of enforcing laws in animal farming in a country on AMR situation in the neighbors, and the potential of AMR to spread from one country to another. Using data from 30 largest animal-producing countries in different regions of the world, between 2010 and 2020, and a Spatial Durbin Model (SDM), we found that AMU in farmed animals increases AMR in humans and there is a spatial dependence between countries regarding AMR spreading. Such findings indicate that a globally coordinated strategy regulating AMU on farmed animals may reduce AMR emergence and worldwide spreading.