Social representations of animal diseases: anthropological approaches to pathogens crossing species barriers

Keck, Frédéric; Lainé, Nicolas; Morvan, Arnaud; Ruhlmann, Sandrine

doi:10.1051/parasite/2021032

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Autochthon knowledge, even when developed by animals, such as auto-medication, can also lead to functional rationale, practices and types of relationships between humans, animals and the environment, that can call in to question the relevance of some public policy. In the same way, by taking the examples of the different rationales of three contrasting societies managing diseases and their circulation in Australia, Laos and Mongolia, F. Keck, N. Lainé, A. Morvan and S. Ruhlmann [ 8 ] show in their article how cultural practices can act as a mediation tool, and even control the infectious diseases emerging from animal reservoirs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

One Health: A social science discussion of a global agenda

Estébanez

Boireau

2022

Parasite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article introduces the Parasite issue dedicated to part of the research in social sciences supported by the Domaine d’Intérêt Majeur de la Région Île-de-France (DIM) One Health [2016–2022]. We show how the four papers of this special issue are related. Jérôme Michalon recalls the genealogy of One Health and analyzes it as an “epistemic watchword”. Using antibiotic resistance as a case study, Estera Badau demonstrates how “One Health” results from a series of formulas and the bringing together of a plurality of fields and actors. Nicolas Lainé and Serge Morand show how One Health fits in with attempts already initiated in the colonial period and context. They highlight the need to (re)legitimize local and non-human knowledge, in order to truly decolonize One Health and better prevent epidemic emergence. Finally, Frédéric Keck, Nicolas Lainé, Arnaud Morvan and Sandrine Ruhlmann show how zoonotic reservoir and cultural practices are linked in the context of three specific societies. This paper highlights two main contributions of social sciences: 1) To think about One Health genealogy, how the question is framed and by which actors. The questions of practices, social representations but also of the environment are less present than the issues of human and animal medicine. The Anthropocene, the Capitalocene, even some of its variations such as the “domesticoscene” thus appear to be key elements. 2) To propose methods and tools that make One Health operational, advocating a less asymmetrical view of types of knowledge (scientific, local, non-human) and more contextualized global health recommendations.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

One Health: A social science discussion of a global agenda

Estébanez

Boireau

2022

Parasite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Structural Drivers of Vulnerability at the Human-Rodent Interface in the Limpopo National Park, Mozambique

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This socio-anthropological study investigates the relations between humans and rodents in an area adjacent to the Limpopo National Park in Mozambique. Designed as part of the larger researcher on mammarenaviruses, it explores the social dimensions of the rodent-human interface, considering its spatial and temporal variability. Its results contribute to our understanding of the socio-ecological context in which new pathogens or new routes of pathogen transmission could arise and potentially spread diseases. A vulnerability-based approach was used to assess human exposure, sensibility and capacity to adapt to rodents. This study revealed: (i) Local knowledge of the dynamic of rodent populations over the last few decades, with new invasive rodents displacing native species; (ii) the social-ecological factors thought to be behind this invasion: climate change, new infrastructure (e.g., construction of a dam), new agricultural practices (e.g., cultivation of sunflowers) and policies (human resettlement); (iii) the significant impact associated with new invasive rodents (e.g., crop losses, damage to belongings), the limited capacity for individual and collective interventions to mitigate damage, and the little concern shown for rodent-related diseases; (iv) women and girls’ high vulnerability to potential rodent-borne diseases due to frequent direct and indirect contact with rodents in the domestic space; and (v) the added-value of using a vulnerability-based methodology, over the more commonly used Knowledge-Attitudes-Practices (KAP) methodology, to map the structural factors shaping the human-rodent interface and its dynamic. Our findings suggest that the vulnerability-based approach could offer an opportunity to better respond to the One Health ambition by integrating social dimensions of health and grasping the complexity of the social and material context in which new pathogens could emerge and spread. One Health Statement The present socio-anthropological study of the human-rodent interface comes in complement to a previous eco-epidemiological survey focusing on the rodent-virus interface. It explores the cultural and social dimensions of the interactions between rodent-human, considering spatial and temporal variability. In doing so, it contributes to the understanding of the socio-ecological dynamic, in which new viral transmission can occur and disease spread. It exemplifies, based on local knowledge, how socio-ecological changes can create new routes for the emerging virus and highlights the vulnerability of the exposed human population to address the potential related health risks. This multidisciplinary and dynamic approach of how humans and rodents interact, and how these interactions are shaped by their changing environment is a contribution to a systemic approach to health, in line with the One health paradigm.

show abstract

The challenges of One Health. Accessing and networking with different forms of knowledge and epistemologies

Lainé¹

2023

CABI One Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite its recent growth in popularity since the COVID-19 pandemic, One Heath can be traced back to the colonial period when it was used to control the health of local communities and their animals while exploiting natural resources. At present, it is necessary to move away from this asymmetrical colonialist view and develop more inclusive perspectives. Local communities have their own knowledge with a holistic vision of health involving humans, animals and the environment. Their viewpoint is nevertheless rarely taken into consideration within the scientific approach to health. To fill this gap, the humanities and social sciences can be used to revive this local knowledge and to initiate a dialogue with scientific knowledge. More crucially, to effectively put One Health into practice, researchers must call into question their own practices, reflect on what constitutes science and rethink the way of producing knowledge, all the while acknowledging the different ways of understanding the world and diseases. This means opening up to other forms of knowledge and epistemologies and networking them.

show abstract

Social representations of animal diseases: anthropological approaches to pathogens crossing species barriers

Cited by 5 publications

References 45 publications

One Health: A social science discussion of a global agenda

One Health: A social science discussion of a global agenda

Structural Drivers of Vulnerability at the Human-Rodent Interface in the Limpopo National Park, Mozambique

The challenges of One Health. Accessing and networking with different forms of knowledge and epistemologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About