Operationalizing the One Health approach: the global governance challenges
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While there has been wide-ranging commitment to the One Health approach, its operationalisation has so far proven challenging. One Health calls upon the human, animal and environmental health sectors to cross professional, disciplinary and institutional boundaries, and to work in a more integrated fashion. At the global level, this paper argues that this vision is hindered by dysfunctions characterising current forms of global health governance (GHG), namely institutional proliferation, fragmentation, competition for scarce resources, lack of an overarching authority, and donor-driven vertical programmes. This has contributed, in part, to shortcomings in how One Health has been articulated to date. An agreed operational definition of One Health among key global institutions, efforts to build One Health institutions from the ground up, comparative case studies of what works or does not work institutionally, and high-level global support for research, training and career opportunities would all help to enable One Health to help remedy, and not be subsumed by, existing dysfunctions in GHG.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it