Suchergebnisse

Towards One Health Intelligence surveillance systems
The increase in global diseases and other health threats in recent decades has necessitated the importance of strengthening our surveillance systems towards early detection and monitoring of drivers. The recent COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the vulnerability of countries to such global health threats, which requires collective actions beyond individual organisations and countries (Agenda 2024, 2020). There was a global call to strengthen health surveillance systems (WHO, 2007; FAO, OIE and WHO, 2010), and countries deliberated to depart from traditional reactive surveillance to novel proactive approaches, including integration of the systems (Shuai et al., 2006; Wahl et al., 2012; Lwin et al., 2014).

Animal health surveillance plays a vital role in ensuring public health, animal welfare, and sustainable food production by monitoring disease trends, early detecting (new) hazards, facilitating disease control and infection, and providing data for risk analysis. Good stakeholder collaboration across the sector can lead to better communication, better science and decision-making and more effective surveillance and response. An understanding of relevant stakeholders, their interests and their power can facilitate such collaboration. While information on key stakeholders in animal health surveillance is available at the national level in Tanzania, it is missing at the subnational level. The study aimed to explore the existing stakeholders' collaborations and influences at the subnational level through stakeholder mapping and to determine potential leverage points for improving the national animal health surveillance system. A qualitative design was used, involving consultative workshops with government animal health practitioners in Sumbawanga, Sikonge and Kilombero districts of Tanzania from December 2020 to January 2021. Data were collected using an adapted USAID stakeholder collaboration mapping tool with the following steps: (i) Define the objective (ii) Identify all stakeholders (iii) Take stock of the current relationships (iv) Determine resource-based influence (v) Determine non-resource based influence and (vi) Review and revise the collaboration map. Forty-five stakeholders were identified in all three districts and grouped into four categories: private sector and non-government organizations (n = 16), government (n = 16), community (n = 9) and political leaders (n = 4). Animal health practitioners had a stronger relationship with community stakeholders as compared to other categories. The results also showed that most of the stakeholders have non-resource-based influence compared to resource-based influence. The private sector and non-government organizations have a relatively higher number of ...