Perspectives on the social sciences in global animal health governance: A qualitative study of experts

Le résumé fourni par la source

A global discourse continues to emphasize the importance of integrating the social sciences into health governance and systems research, including in the global animal health sector. By comparison to human health, however, it is unclear how far this discourse has changed institutional practices in animal health and what opportunities exist to strengthen this integration. We conducted a qualitative study to address these knowledge gaps, based on 29 semi-structured key informant interviews (KII) with experts involved in the global governance of animal health and biosecurity across five regions between November 2022 and June 2023. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyse results, which were triangulated with findings from primary and secondary data sources. We divide our analysis into three sections: 1) governance landscape; 3) prioritization; and 3) the role of social science. First, we found that KII consider the global animal health governance landscape shaped by five main actor networks who operate under different institutional norms and mandates: international organizations, bilateral donors, the private sector, national governments, and regional organizations. Informants believed that bilateral donors have disproportionate levels of control and influence; national governments struggle with realistic fiscal planning; engaging the private sector remains challenging; international organizations exhibit tensions in their conflicting mandates; and regional organizations need to be more involved. Second, we found that the key priorities of the actor networks were influenced by core uncertainties and tensions. This included different narratives about risk and methods of risk assessment; conflicting values between health and economic development; and capacity scale problems between global and local networks. The field is perceived to be dominated by the global health security agenda and international trade, and disproportionately focused on pandemic threats. Third, we found that barriers to the integration of social science included disciplinary boundaries, given the dominance of the veterinary sciences; the preponderance of instrumentalized goals; and structural conditions that limited opportunities for knowledge translation. Overall, we found that while the social sciences are increasingly part of a global discourse improving global animal health governance and systems, their current application appears to be of limited range and effectiveness. Coordinated investment in truly interdisciplinary networks, with sufficient disciplinary independence, may help address these problems.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.