Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has been clearly identified as a major global health challenge. It is a leading cause of human deaths and also has a toll on animals, plants, and the environment. Despite the considerable socio-economic impacts, the level of awareness of the problem remains woefully inadequate, and antimicrobials are not generally recognized as a global common good, one that everyone has a role and responsibility to conserve. It is imperative for antimicrobial stewardship to be more widely implemented to achieve better control of the AMR phenomenon. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations plays an important role in promoting and facilitating antimicrobial stewardship. The specific needs to be addressed and barriers to be overcome, in particular, in low- and middle-income countries in order to implement antimicrobial stewardship practices in agrifood systems are being identified. As a global community, it is essential that we now move beyond discussing the AMR problem and focus on implementing solutions. Thus, FAO provides multi-pronged support for nations to improve antimicrobial stewardship through programs to strengthen governance, increase awareness, develop and enhance AMR surveillance, and implement best practices related to antimicrobial resistance in agrifood systems. For example, FAO is developing a platform to collect data on AMR in animals and antimicrobial use (AMU) in plants (InFARM), working on a campaign to reduce the need to use antimicrobials, studying the use of alternatives to the use of antimicrobials (especially those used for growth promotion) and actively promoting the implementation of the Codex Alimentarius AMR standards. Together, these will contribute to the control of AMR and also bring us closer to the achievement of multiple sustainable development goals.

One Health is an integrative approach that emphasizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health, advocating for collaborative, multidisciplinary efforts to address health challenges, particularly amid globalization and emerging threats. This paper examines the integration of One Health principles into global health education, highlighting the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and innovative pedagogical approaches. It evaluates various teaching methods, including problem-based learning (PBL), team-based learning (TBL), simulation-based education (SBE), case-based learning (CBL), interdisciplinary workshops and seminars (IWS), and service-learning (SL), analyzing their strengths and weaknesses in fostering interdisciplinary understanding and practical application of One Health concepts. While these methods enhance learning by promoting critical thinking, collaboration, and real-world application, they also face challenges such as resource constraints, variability in group dynamics, and the complexity of assessing long-term learning outcomes. The paper also discusses the role of global partnerships, such as the Global One Health Research Partnership (GOHRP), in advancing One Health education through collaborative research and educational initiatives. Addressing challenges in curriculum integration and interdisciplinary collaboration is crucial for the effective implementation of One Health education, ensuring that future health professionals are equipped to tackle complex global health challenges.

The agriculture and food (agrifood) sectors play key roles in the emergence, spread, and containment of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Pakistan’s first National Action Plan (NAP) on AMR was developed to guide One Health interventions to combat AMR through 2017–2022. To improve subsequent iterations, we assessed the implementation of Pakistan’s NAP in the agrifood sectors (NAPag) in October 2022, using the Progressive Management Pathway on AMR tool developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The assessment tool addressed four crucial focus areas of the NAPag: governance, awareness, evidence, and practices. Each focus area contains multiple topics, which involve four sequential stages of activities to progressively achieve systematic management of AMR risk in the agrifood sectors. High-level representatives of the NAPag stakeholders provided information for the assessment through pre-event documentary review and workshop discussions. The assessment results showed that Pakistan’s NAPag had an overall moderate coverage (59%) of the anticipated activities. Gaps were particularly notable in strengthening governance, good practices, and interventions in non-livestock sectors. Furthermore, only 12% of the evaluated activities were fully executed and documented, consistently remaining at the planning and piloting stages in the livestock sector across all the examined topics. Insufficient attention to non-livestock sectors, inadequate regulation and enforcement capacity, and resource constraints have hindered scalable and sustainable interventions under the current plan. This assessment provides valuable insights to strengthen the inclusiveness and contribution of the agrifood sectors in the next NAP iteration. In the short-to-medium term, strategic prioritization is necessary to optimize the use of limited resources and target the most critical gaps, such as improving awareness among key stakeholders and fortifying regulations for prudent antimicrobial use. In the long term, integration of AMR into the country’s broader health, development, and agricultural transformation agendas will be needed to generate sustainable benefits.

Background: The development of modern agriculture has significantly contributed to improving global food security and safety, alleviating poverty, and enhancing human health and livelihoods. However, the rapid advancement of modern agriculture has also brought about various challenges that limit its sustainable development. This commentary aims to discuss these issues through the One Health lens, and provide valuable insights for balancing modern agricultural activities with the need to protect and promote the health of all the sectors. Main text: This commentary explores the multifaceted impacts of modern agriculture on social development, as well as the associated various health challenges and environmental impacts within the One Health framework. Key issues include ecosystem degradation, increased risk of interspecies disease transmission like zoonoses, reverse zoonoses, and vector-borne diseases, and the escalated threat of antimicrobial resistance due to intensified agricultural production and increased antimicrobial use. To address these challenges, this commentary outlines potential solutions anchored in the development and implementation of modern technologies and good agricultural practices, such as precision farming, integrated pest management, biosecurity measures, vaccination programs, as well as surveillance and early detection of health risks. Conclusions: Good agricultural practices supported by scientific and technological advancements are essential for aligning productivity with the One Health vision, ensuring the health and resilience of all the sectors. Enhancing stakeholder education, strengthening regulatory frameworks, and providing supportive policies and infrastructure for farmers to adopt sustainable practices are crucial for the long-term viability of agrifood systems. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations plays a pivotal role in guiding this sustainable transformation through the One Health approach.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a major global health threat, yet the effectiveness of national action plans (NAPs) remains uncertain. Here we developed a multidimensional One Health governance index through a structured Delphi expert consultation to evaluate AMR governance across 193 countries (2017-2022), integrating 269 policy documents, expert-weighted indicators and multinational survey and surveillance datasets. Difference-in-differences and joinpoint regression analyses were used to link governance to antimicrobial use, AMR prevalence and AMR-related mortality. Global governance scores improved from 30.7 to 44.5/100, although implementation and monitoring lagged behind policy design, particularly in animal and environmental sectors. A significant increase in AMR prevalence scores was observed only 5 years after NAP adoption (two-stage difference-in-differences, β = 2.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-3.85, P < 0.05), underscoring the delayed impact of policy. Multisector engagement (early-adopting countries, β = 0.05, 95% CI 0.02-0.08, P < 0.01) and antimicrobial use surveillance system (early-adopting countries, β = 0.05, 95% CI 0.03-0.07, P < 0.01) showed the strongest associations with improvement in AMR outcomes. As the 2026 Global Action Plan update approaches, sustained financing and integrated One Health surveillance, with stronger environmental and agricultural engagement, are essential for translating NAPs into sustained reductions in resistance.

Here, we present the results of an online international survey concerning the adoption of good beekeeping practices and proper biosecurity measures for the management of varroosis in Apis mellifera. The survey was designed as a risk assessment tool by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Federation of Beekeepers’ Association (Apimondia), the Center for Analytics Research & Education (CARE) at Appalachian State University, and Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale Lazio e Toscana (IZSLT). The data collected investigated the beekeeping techniques, treatments, and training beekeepers adopt concerning the varroa mite. The idea was to validate a tool able to collect and compare, in the different areas of the world, the management measures adopted by beekeepers to face this major parasitic disease of honey bees. The survey was disseminated online for a period of 14 months (January 2019–March 2020) through the FAO website. A total of 861 responses were received, most of them from the Americas (20.9%) and Europe (74.7%). Concerning the control measures useful in combating varroa, the results showed an overall awareness of the usefulness of biosecurity measures in beekeeping (BMBs), which we compare across regions. The majority of the beekeepers (89.9% in the Americas and 82.8% in Europe) were interested in additional bee health training and, at the same time, were willing to connect themselves with veterinary experts specialized in bees. This is an indication that beekeepers recognize the importance of training and experts’ advice. This study revealed the efficacy of the survey adopted as a useful assessment tool that will be further disseminated, even in geographic regions heretofore not investigated, to provide useful information on the status of the beekeeping sector.