One Health, an integrated health concept, is now an integral part of health research and development. One Health overlaps with other integrated approaches to health such as EcoHealth or Planetary Health, which not only consider the patient or population groups but include them in the social-ecological context. One Health has gained the widest foothold politically, institutionally, and in operational implementation. Increasingly, One Health is becoming part of reporting under the International Health Legislation (IHR 2005). The Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (Swiss TPH) has played a part in these developments with one of the first mentions of One Health in the biomedical literature. Here, we summarise the history of ideas and processes that led to the development of One Health research and development at the Swiss TPH, clarify its theoretical and methodological foundations, and explore its larger societal potential as an integrated approach to thinking. The history of ideas and processes leading to the development of One Health research at the Swiss TPH were inspired by far-sighted and open ideas of the directors and heads of departments, without exerting too much influence. They followed the progressing work and supported it with further ideas. These in turn were taken up and further developed by a growing number of individual scientists. These ideas were related to other strands of knowledge from economics, molecular biology, anthropology, sociology, theology, and linguistics. We endeavour to relate Western biomedical forms of knowledge generation with other forms, such as Mayan medicine. One Health, in its present form, has been influenced by African mobile pastoralists’ integrated thinking that have been taken up into Western epistemologies. The intercultural nature of global and regional One Health approaches will inevitably undergo further scrutiny of successful ways fostering inter-epistemic interaction. Now theoretically well grounded, the One Health approach of seeking benefits for all through better and more equitable cooperation can clearly be applied to engagement in solving major societal problems such as social inequality, animal protection and welfare, environmental protection, climate change mitigation, biodiversity conservation, and conflict transformation.

Background: Since the end of 2019, COVID-19 has had a significant impact on people around the globe. As governments institute more restrictive measures, public adherence could decrease and discontent may grow. Providing high-quality information and countering fake news are important. However, we also need feedback loops so that government officials can refine preventive measures and communication strategies. Policy makers need information—preferably based on real-time data—on people’s cognitive, emotional, and behavioral reactions to public health messages and restrictive measures. PubliCo aims to foster effective and tailored risk and crisis communication as well as provide an assessment of the risks and benefits of prevention and control measures, since their effectiveness depends on public trust and cooperation. Objective: Our project aims to develop a tool that helps tackle the COVID-19 infodemic, with a focus on enabling a nuanced and in-depth understanding of public perception. The project adopts a transdisciplinary multistakeholder approach, including participatory citizen science. Methods: We aim to combine a literature and media review and analysis as well as empirical research using mixed methods, including an online survey and diary-based research, both of which are ongoing and continuously updated. Building on real-time data and continuous data collection, our research results will be highly adaptable to the evolving situation. Results: As of September 2021, two-thirds of the proposed tool is operational. The current development cycles are focusing on analytics, user experience, and interface refinement. We have collected a total of 473 responses through PubliCo Survey and 22 diaries through PubliCo Diaries. Conclusions: Pilot data show that PubliCo is a promising and efficient concept for bidirectional risk and crisis communication in the context of public health crises. Further data are needed to assess its function at a larger scale or in the context of an issue other than COVID-19. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/33653

Low uptake of genetic services among members of families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) suggests limitations of proband-mediated communication of genetic risk. This study explored how genetic information proceeds from healthcare providers to probands and from probands to relatives, from the probands’ perspectives. Using a grounded-theory approach, we analyzed narrative data collected with individual interviews and focus groups from a sample of 48 women identified as carriers of HBOC-associated pathogenic variants from three linguistic regions of Switzerland. The findings describe the “communication chain”, confirming the difficulties of proband-mediated communication. Provider–proband communication is impacted by a three-level complexity in the way information about family communication is approached by providers, received by probands, and followed-up by the healthcare system. Probands’ decisions regarding disclosure of genetic risk are governed by dynamic and often contradictory logics of action, interconnected with individual and family characteristics, eventually compelling probands to engage in an arbitrating process. The findings highlight the relevance of probands’ involvement in the communication of genetic risk to relatives, suggesting the need to support them in navigating the complexity of family communication rather than replacing them in this process. Concrete actions at the clinical and health system levels are needed to improve proband-mediated communication.

The health of humans and animals is strongly influenced by nature and socio-cultural variables resulting from co-existence between humans and animals. By including natural, social and humanities scientists with an interdisciplinary approach from the beginning in research planning, these socio-cultural influences are adequately considered. In our One Health projects, we establish and maintain research partnerships with local institutes and universities in developing and transition countries. Developing health care cannot be limited to the academic field but must include local communities and authorities in co-production of implementation knowledge. Although many participants in such processes have no formal training, they are experts who bring experiential local knowledge often hidden from purely academic approaches. Using repeated participatory stakeholder meetings, effective and sustainable health care in a highly targeted manner can be implemented to address priorities of populations in an acceptable way that is feasible for the authorities.

Survivors of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) are often hindered in their quest to access quality healthcare. This has a significant effect towards the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal SDG Target 3.7. to ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive healthcare services. This study is focused on identifying some of the demand side barriers in accessing health care services, particularly among young girls who are survivors of SGBV within intimate relationships in poor urban areas in Nigeria. The study used an ethnographic approach to solicit information from health providers, adolescents, and young women (AYW) in 10 low-income communities in two major cities in Nigeria, Ibadan and Lagos. Findings showed that there are structural limitations within the primary health care (PHC) system that posed a great challenge for survivors of SGBV to access services. Some of these include non-existing counseling services, a lack of rehabilitation centers, poor referral, and a lack of training for health providers in handling survivors of SGBV. There is also a lack of skills among health service providers that have negative influence on support services to survivors of SGBV. On the demand side, poor knowledge of possible health seeking pathways, a lack of education, and social support are barriers to accessing appropriate services among adolescent and young SGBV survivors. The study concluded that integrated services at the PHC level should include adequate and timely treatment for survivors of SGBV and targeted intervention to upscale skills and knowledge of health care providers.

One Health has gained global prominence in recent years. Alongside its emergence, there have been extensive social science critiques. In this contribution, we make the case for the value of recent theoretical discussions in the field of anthropology – sometimes referred to as an ‘ontological turn’. We argue that taking theory seriously benefits One Health as an integrated approach that has interdisciplinary collaborations at its heart, but which encounters challenges when conversations based on different epistemological and ontological positions result in voices talking past each other. In this contribution, we offer two examples of what One Health specialists can gain from anthropologically-informed ontological thinking. Both require questioning ontological premises. Firstly, questioning assumptions about distinctions between animals and humans. Secondly, questioning the universality of biomedical knowledge. In the conclusion, we underline the importance of an ontological openness when it comes to the constitution and position of the actors as well as different bodies of knowledge that are involved in One Health and we show that talking to each other with awareness of different ontological positions is not impossible.