Seite - 335 - in Biodiversity and Health in the Face of Climate Change

335 (2015) proposes One Health as an overarching framework for integrated efforts, while also recognising and relating to other relevant approaches such as EcoHealth. Earlier a tripartite collaboration between FAO, OIE and WHO (2010) proposed a similar integrated effort also labeled ‘One Health’. Wallace et  al. (2015) extended the perspective of One Health to include the socio-economic perspective more clearly, in what they term ‘Structural One Health’. They criticize the earlier One Health concept for omitting to address fundamental structural political and economic causes underlying collapsing health ecologies. Consequently, a One Health approach to address global health challenges such as malnutrition, disease emergence and biodiversity loss should accept that complex issues require a participatory and interdisciplinary process. The Network for Evaluation of One Health (NEOH) was an international network funded by the European Cooperation for Science and Technology (COST) from 2014 to 2018  with the aim  to enable quantitative and qualitative evaluations of One Health activities and to further the evidence base by developing and applying a science-based evaluation protocol in a community of experts. While several One Health initiatives have been implemented across Europe, so far there has been no standardized methodology for the systematic evaluation of One Health activities and, more specifically, there have been only a few studies that measured the added value of One Health. The NEOH addressed  this gap. 15.2.2.2 Main Activities The Network’s driving activity was the production of a handbook for evaluation of One Health and the validation of its content by applying it to a suite of international case studies. The full  handbook is available as open access here:  https://www. wageningenacademic.com/doi/book/10.3920/978-90-8686-875-9 and most case studies are published in a special issue in Frontiers journal entitle “Concepts and experiences in framing, integration and evaluation of One Health and EcoHealth”:  https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/5479/concepts-and- experiences-in-framing-integration-and-evaluation-of-one-health-and- ecohealth.  The case studies conducted, and other published studies, are compared in a meta-study for the purpose of international comparison and reflection on the value of One Health. Finally, NEOH considered  stakeholder engagement important to assess needs and to promote informed decision-making and resource allocation in One Health, and to facilitate training, learning and capacity building for evaluation of integrated approaches to health (e.g. training schools, workshops, short-term scientific missions and conference grants). The Network was organized into four working groups who frequently exchanged information with a wider group of experts contributing to different tasks. WG1 was responsible for the development of the overall evaluation framework and the development of the handbook. WG2 applied the evaluation framework, protocol and index developed to different One Health initiatives. WG3 conducted a meta- study of the available case studies. WG4 was in charge of dissemination and stake- holder engagement. 15 European Nature and  Health Network Initiatives