Connecting standards for a stronger One Health Approach

Almost two thousand years ago, Marcus Aurelius counselled that we should “constantly regard the universe as one living being”. Today, that idea is at the heart of the One Health approach, which recognizes that the health of people, animals, plants and the environment cannot be considered in isolation, but form an interconnected “web of life”.

Consider, for instance, the purchase of an imported apple. At the outset of its journey, the producer must safeguard the crop by managing plant pests and other threats. This may involve applying pesticides as part of a wider approach to crop protection. However, while such products can help protect the crop, their overuse or misuse may pose risks to human health and the environment.

The farmer therefore bears a dual responsibility: to ensure the fruit is safe for consumption and to comply with phytosanitary requirements for trade. In that single piece of fruit, considerations relating to plant health, food safety, human health and environmental protection converge across the agrifood chain.    

The distinct yet interconnected risks to human, plant and animal health are addressed through the application of international standards that are science-based and consensus-driven. These standards provide the foundation for harmonized, rules-based trade in food, plant and animal products under the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement).

Under this agreement, benchmark standards are set by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), collectively known as the “three sisters”. Each standard-setting body has a different mandate, and international standards often explicitly recognize how their work intersects.

As flagship FAO programmes, Codex and the IPPC show how One Health works in practice: distinct mandates, connected systems and shared action to protect food security, public health and safe trade

Our shared responsibility for risk prevention means ensuring that the systems behind them are interconnected enough to be part of the response. ©FAO/Hashim Azizi

Antimicrobial resistance, or AMR, is a clear example. Antimicrobials are used across human and animal health and, in certain contexts, in plant production, while resistant microorganisms and resistance determinants can circulate through agrifood systems.

The Codex Code of practice to minimize and contain foodborne antimicrobial resistance recommends application of a One Health approach to foodborne AMR risk management. Where plant health considerations are relevant, it specifies that applicable IPPC standards should be considered. Its definition of One Health also recognizes the interconnection between humans, animals, plants or crops and their shared environment.

This is significant because an adopted international food safety text already recognizes One Health and that addressing a risk within one mandate may require awareness of standards and expertise associated with another.

This international, interconnected system works only when standards are effectively implemented. And implementation only comes with national capacity. Countries require strong institutions, appropriate legislation, laboratories, surveillance systems, trained personnel and sustainable resources.

The IPPC’s Phytosanitary Capacity Evaluation supports countries in assessing gaps across their national phytosanitary systems and identifying priorities for strengthening them. The FAO/WHO Food Control System Assessment Tool similarly supports countries in assessing and strengthening their national food control systems. Both tools adopt a systemic, cross-sectoral approach, enabling countries to identify gaps, engage relevant stakeholders and agree on strategic priorities. 

Authorities must be able to determine when information held within one system is relevant to another. A signal detected through plant health surveillance may have implications beyond that sector. By monitoring early signs of emerging threats, we can identify developments relevant to more than one sector. Laboratories and surveillance networks can establish information-sharing routes. Capacity assessments can reveal common weaknesses. When measures adopted to address one risk have implications for another authority, those implications must be made visible.

The principle is simple: connect systems where risks intersect. We have international standards. We have national competent authorities. We have systems for surveillance, risk analysis, certification, early warning, digital exchange and capacity development.

The One Health approach provides the framework to make better use of this existing architecture.

Our shared responsibility for prevention means ensuring that these systems are sufficiently robust to fulfil their respective mandates—and sufficiently connected to recognize when another part of the system must contribute to the response.

Learn more

• Codex Alimentarius Commission
• International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC)
• World Organisation for Animal Health
• One Health in agrifood systems: interview with Sarah Cahill
• One Health in agrifood systems: interview with Enrico Perotti

Sarah Cahill is the Secretary of the Codex Alimentarius Commission

Enrico Perotti is the Secretary of the International Plant Protection Convention