Background The emergence and transmission of zoonotic diseases are driven by complex interactions between health, environmental, and socio-political systems. Human movement is considered a significant and increasing factor in these processes, yet forced migration remains an understudied area of zoonotic research–due in part to the complexity of conducting interdisciplinary research in these settings. Objectives We conducted a systematic review to identify and analyze theoretical frameworks and approaches used to study linkages between forced migration and zoonotic diseases. Methods We searched within eight electronic databases: ProQuest, SCOPUS, Web of Science, PubMed, PLoSOne, Science Direct, JSTOR, and Google Scholar, to identify a) research articles focusing on zoonoses considering forced migrants in their study populations, and b) forced migration literature which engaged with zoonotic disease. Both authors conducted a full-text review, evaluating the quality of literature reviews and primary data using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) model, while theoretical papers were evaluated for quality using a theory synthesis adapted from Bonell et al. (2013). Qualitative data were synthesized thematically according to the method suggested by Noblit and Hare (1988). Results Analyses of the 23 included articles showed the increasing use of interdisciplinary frameworks and approaches over time, the majority of which stemmed from political ecology. Approaches such as EcoHealth and One Health were increasingly popular, but were more often linked to program implementation and development than broader contextual research. The majority of research failed to acknowledge the heterogeneity of migrant populations, lacked contextual depth, and insufficient acknowledgments of migrant agency in responding to zoonotic threats. Conclusions Addressing the emergence and spread of zoonoses in forced migration contexts requires more careful consideration and use of interdisciplinary research to integrate the contributions of social and natural science approaches. Robust interdisciplinary theoretical frameworks are an important step for better understanding the complex health, environment, and socio-political drivers of zoonotic diseases in forced migration. Lessons can be learned from the application of these approaches in other hard-to-reach or seldom-heard populations.

No abstract

Participatory epidemiology programmes aim to collect data by engaging local communities in knowledge sharing around livestock health. Critics of participatory approaches often cite the extractive nature of data collection and unequal power relations between researcher and researched as at odds with the original vision of participatory programming. This paper starts from the position that rural livestock owners are situated within multiple overlapping webs of relationships through which they exchange disease information and access resources. Participatory programmes are suggested as weaving new threads into these wider networks in a process that may be accepted or rejected by indigenous actors. Qualitative interviews were used to gather empirical data on the exchange of information around livestock health knowledge through indigenous relationships and a Participatory Disease Surveillance (PDS) programme within a Gabra pastoralist community in Northern Kenya. Subsequent analysis identified four pathway typologies; this paper provides a qualitative comparative analysis of each to explore the nature of participation within the study population. The paper concludes that social science approaches have a key role to play in understanding how relationships within and between indigenous and development actors can influence participation in development projects.

Projected increases in human and animal displacement driven by climate change, disasters and related environmental degradation will have significant implications to global health. Pathways for infectious disease transmission including zoonoses, diseases transmitted between animals and humans, are complex and non-linear. While forced migration is considered an important driver for the spread of zoonoses, actual disease dynamics remain under researched. This paper presents the findings of a case study investigating how disaster displacement affected zoonotic disease transmission risk following the 2010 ‘superfloods’ in Sindh province, Pakistan. We interviewed 30 key informants and 17 household members across 6 rural communities between March and November 2019, supported by observational studies and a review of secondary data. Results were analysed using the ecosocial theoretical framework. Buffalo, cattle and goats were often the only moveable asset, therefore livestock was an important consideration in determining displacement modality and destination location, and crowded locations were avoided to protect human and animal health. Meanwhile however, livestock was rarely included in the humanitarian response, resulting in communities and households fragmenting according to the availability of livestock provisions. We found that rather than a driver for disease, displacement acted as a process affecting community, household and individual zoonotic disease risk dynamics, based on available resources and social networks before, during and after displacement, rooted in the historical, political and socio-economic context. We conclude that in rural Sindh, disaster displaced populations’ risk of zoonoses is the result of changes in dynamics rooted in pre-existing structural and chronic inequalities, making people more or less vulnerable to disease through multiple interlinked pathways. Our findings have implications for policy makers and humanitarian responders assisting displaced populations dependent on livestock, with a call to integrate livestock support in humanitarian policies and responses for health, survival and recovery.

BackgroundThe emergence and transmission of zoonotic diseases are driven by complex interactions between health, environmental, and socio-political systems. Human movement is considered a significant and increasing factor in these processes, yet forced migration remains an understudied area of zoonotic research – due in part to the complexity of conducting interdisciplinary research in these settings.ObjectivesWe conducted a systematic review to identify and analyze theoretical frameworks and approaches used to study linkages between forced migration and zoonotic diseases.MethodsWe searched within eight electronic databases: ProQuest, SCOPUS, Web of Science, PubMed, PLoSOne, Science Direct, JSTOR, and Google Scholar, to identify a) research articles focusing on zoonoses considering forced migrants in their study populations, and b) forced migration literature which engaged with zoonotic disease. Both authors conducted a full-text review, evaluating the quality of literature reviews and primary data using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) model, while theoretical papers were evaluated for quality using a theory synthesis adapted from Bonell and Fletcher (2013). Qualitative data were synthesized thematically according to the method suggested by Noblit and Hare (1988).ResultsAnalyses of the 23 included articles showed the increasing use of interdisciplinary frameworks and approaches over time, the majority of which stemmed from political ecology. Approaches such as EcoHealth and One Health were increasingly popular, but were more often linked to program implementation and development than broader contextual research. The majority of research failed to acknowledge the heterogeneity of migrant populations, lacked contextual depth, and insufficient acknowledgement of migrant agency in responding to zoonotic threats.ConclusionsAddressing the emergence and spread of zoonoses in forced migration contexts requires more careful consideration and use of interdisciplinary research to integrate the contributions of social and natural science approaches. Robust interdisciplinary theoretical frameworks are an important step for better understanding the complex health, environment, and socio-political drivers of zoonotic diseases in forced migration. Lessons can be learned from the application of these approaches in other hard-to-reach or seldom-heard populations.

The complex and evolving nature of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic poses significant challenges to national and international emergency preparedness and response. Governments must navigate streams of emerging data in real time, synthesising knowledge from diverse sources to inform policy. The UK government drew on experiences from earlier pandemics to bridge perceived gaps between social science research and policy through the secondment of early-career academics as embedded scientists. In this article, we present comparative ethnographic data describing embedded social scientists’ contributions to UK COVID-19 preparedness and response. We find that the liminal position, loose identities, and high degree of autonomy of embedded scientists allowed these individuals to navigate multiple networks to strengthen and legitimise the role of social science within policy debates.

This article characterises informal knowledge creation and co-creation between development and pastoralist actors, drawing on qualitative data gathered during an in-depth case study in Northern Kenya. Using thematic analysis, this article identifies three intersecting narratives: knowledge and exchange, barriers and drivers, and risk and uncertainty. These concepts are interpreted using wider literature on knowledge dynamics and co-creation to evaluate the suitability of existing analytical frameworks for further research on pastoralist development. The study results highlight the value of cross-cultural informal knowledge co-creation for pastoralist development, and the need for more robust future research.

Increased outbreaks of zoonotic diseases with pandemic potential and the growing threat of antimicrobial resistance have stimulated the uptake and use of One Health approaches across the globe. Collaborative, multisectoral, and transdisciplinary approaches are vital to the effective response to health challenges; however, within One Health initiatives, animal and environmental health voices often remain secondary to human health. This article presents the findings of a transdisciplinary research project investigating the roles and contributions of animal health in One Health initiatives. We combined a multisite case study approach with a literature review, and conducted 22 semi-structured key informant interviews with animal health and One Health experts, with a focus on Ethiopia and Pakistan. Key themes explored were the nature of the animal health sector, animal health workforce, veterinary medicines and vaccines, and coordination and collaboration. Results were triangulated with existing primary and secondary data, reviewed by key stakeholders in Ethiopia and Pakistan, and tested with members of the Action for Animal Health (A4AH) coalition. We found that while One Health has become more interdisciplinary and inclusive at a global level, there remain significant challenges in operationalizing the approach at national and subnational levels. Gaps in governance, political will, and capacity undermine the inclusion of animal health in One Health structures. Power and resources are distributed unequally across One Health coalitions, echoing observations that acknowledge the crucial role of communities in supporting the provision of essential services, while their knowledge and experiences often remain excluded from project and policy development. We conclude that stronger multilevel linkages and engagement between animal health and other sectors are vital to support the implementation of inclusive, well-resourced, and effective One Health approaches.