Open Access

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic threatens global health thereby causing unprecedented social, economic, and political disruptions. One way to prevent such a pandemic is through interventions at the human-animal-environment interface by using an integrated One Health (OH) approach. This systematic literature review documented the three coronavirus outbreaks, i.e. SARS, MERS, COVID-19, to evaluate the evolution of the OH approach, including the identification of key OH actions taken for prevention, response, and control. The OH understandings identified were categorized into three distinct patterns: institutional coordination and collaboration, OH in action/implementation, and extended OH (i.e. a clear involvement of the environmental domain). Across all studies, OH was most often framed as OH in action/implementation and least often in its extended meaning. Utilizing OH as institutional coordination and collaboration and the extended OH both increased over time. OH actions were classified into twelve sub-groups and further categorized as classical OH actions (i.e. at the human-animal interface), classical OH actions with outcomes to the environment, and extended OH actions. The majority of studies focused on human-animal interaction, giving less attention to the natural and built environment. Different understandings of the OH approach in practice and several practical limitations might hinder current efforts to achieve the operationalization of OH by combining institutional coordination and collaboration with specific OH actions. The actions identified here are a valuable starting point for evaluating the stage of OH development in different settings. This study showed that by moving beyond the classical OH approach and its actions towards a more extended understanding, OH can unfold its entire capacity thereby improving preparedness and mitigating the impacts of the next outbreak.

Intersectoral collaborations are an integral component of the prevention and control of diseases in a complex health system. On the one hand, One Health (OH) is promoting the establishment of intersectoral collaborations for prevention at the human-animal-environment interface. On the other hand, operationalising OH can only be realized through intersectoral collaborations. This work contributes to broadening the knowledge of the process for operationalising OH by analysing the governance structures behind different initiatives that tackle health problems at the human-animal-environment interface. The cases taken as examples for the analysis are the control and response to rabies and avian influenza under “classical OH”, and the management of floods and droughts for insights into “extended OH”. Data from Ghana and India were collected and compared to identify the key elements that enable ISC for OH. Despite the case studies being heterogeneous in terms of their geographic, economic, social, cultural, and historical contexts, strong similarities were identified on how intersectoral collaborations in OH were initiated, managed, and taken to scale. The actions documented for rabies prevention and control were historically based on one sector being the leader and implementer of activities, while avian influenza management relied more on intersectoral collaborations with clearly defined sectoral responsibilities. The management of the impact of flood and droughts on health provided a good example of intersectoral collaborations achieved by sectoral integration; however, the human health component was only involved in the response stage in the case of Ghana, while for India, there were broader schemes of intersectoral collaborations for prevention, adaptation, and response concerning climate change and disaster.