Re-thinking public health: Towards a new scientific logic of routine animal health care in European industrial farming

The paper begins by highlighting the increased frequency of public health crises linked to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and zoonotic diseases due to factors like urbanization, industrialization, and globalization. It emphasizes the role of industrial farming, with its high animal density and short production cycles, in increasing the risk of pathogen emergence and transmission. While research exists on the links between public health and industrial farming, and between industrial farming and chronic animal diseases, the connection between public health and the science of CADM remains under-explored. This article aims to address this gap by investigating the potential of the One Health approach to provide a more holistic perspective on health and well-being that transcends species boundaries. The authors argue that the prevailing social regime underpinning CADM research in Europe prioritizes economic factors over animal and human health, hindering innovation and perpetuating a productivist model that contributes to the persistence of chronic animal diseases. They aim to analyze the norms and values shaping scientific knowledge on CADM and explore possibilities for a new scientific logic that fosters 'more-than-human solidarity' in public health.

The paper reviews existing literature highlighting the historical role of animal health scientists (AHS) in European food policies, focusing primarily on highly contagious and zoonotic diseases. It notes that research on chronic, non-zoonotic diseases has been largely relegated to the private sector. The authors discuss the limitations of the current One Health approach, which, while acknowledging the link between animal and human health, often fails to adequately address chronic animal diseases and their underlying causes rooted in intensive farming practices and consumerism. The review highlights criticisms of the human-centered vision of One Health, arguing for a more inclusive approach that considers the well-being of animals alongside human health. The need for a new scientific approach is emphasized, one that promotes more-than-human solidarity and moves beyond the anthropocentrism of existing models.

The study employed inductive, constructive grounded theory methods. It comprised two stages: a bibliometric analysis and in-depth interviews. The bibliometric search used Web of Science and Scopus databases to identify publications on CADM in the broiler, cattle, and pig sectors in Europe. The search focused on common chronic digestive and respiratory diseases and included publications in English, French, German, Italian, and Spanish. A total of 118 publications were selected for analysis. The second stage involved in-depth interviews with 18 farm animal health practitioners (11 AHS, 4 veterinary surgeons, 3 policymakers) involved in CADM research or decision-making in Europe. Participants were recruited from a larger European project. The interviews explored the logics and institutional circumstances of knowledge production in CADM. Both the publications and interview transcripts were analyzed qualitatively using descriptive, reflexive, and iterative coding and thematic analysis. The researchers contextualized the analysis using their own knowledge and experience in farmed animal health science.

The analysis revealed three core findings: (1) The scientific research on CADM is primarily driven by economic considerations rather than public health concerns. Publications and interviews indicated a strong focus on preventing financial losses for the food industry, with animal welfare often treated as a secondary concern. (2) The science of CADM is shaped by market forces and industrial logics, favoring quick, tangible solutions (e.g., drugs, vaccines) over addressing the underlying causes of chronic diseases related to intensive farming practices. Research prioritizes easily observable diseases and pathogens over more complex, systemic issues. (3) There exist tensions between scientific ideals, policy, and veterinary practices. Practitioners expressed ethical concerns about the productivist model but faced challenges in challenging the dominant economic forces shaping CADM research and practice. The study found a lack of collaboration across scientific disciplines and a general lack of public attention to chronic animal diseases, leading to insufficient funding and research on the subject. The number of publications on chronic diseases has increased since the 1980s but remain largely focused on economic implications for the food industry rather than public health concerns.

The findings demonstrate how the existing scientific logic of routine animal health care in industrial farming is largely shaped by capitalist motivations and a human-centered perspective. This contributes to the persistence of chronic diseases and increases the risk of public health crises like AMR and pandemics. The lack of emphasis on holistic approaches, coupled with compartmentalized research practices, hinders the development of innovative solutions. The study's findings support the argument that the science of CADM is "under siege" from economic pressures, hindering efforts to prioritize animal welfare and public health. While some practitioners express ethical concerns, the dominant economic logic impedes meaningful change. The study highlights the necessity of re-orienting research practices to promote more-than-human solidarity and address the systemic issues driving chronic animal diseases.

This study offers novel empirical insights into the social construction of routine animal health care in industrial farming and its implications for public health. The findings highlight the dominance of human interests in the science of CADM, leaving the door open to significant public health risks. The study emphasizes the need for new strategies to develop the science of CADM, demonstrating the importance of everyday farmed animal health and well-being for public health. A paradigm shift towards a less human-centered view of health and agriculture is crucial to build resilience against future disease outbreaks. This includes valuing the health of animals intrinsically, fostering dialogue across disciplinary boundaries, and acknowledging the interconnectedness of human and animal lives.

The study's geographical scope is primarily Europe, limiting the generalizability of its findings to other regions. The reliance on a specific set of chronic diseases may not fully capture the complexity of all animal health issues within industrial farming. The study primarily focuses on the perspectives of animal health practitioners, potentially overlooking the views of other relevant stakeholders (farmers, consumers, policymakers).