Implementation | PANORAMA

Multi-sectoral network building for monitoring wildlife diseases for One Health

Co-development meetings for wildlife health national strategy in Lao PDR

WCS

- WildHealthBuild: Building partnerships and breaking down silos across the human health, animal health, and environment/ wildlife sectors is an essential first step in planning and implementing wildlife surveillance for One Health intelligence, improving coordinated result sharing and response and the likelihood that networks and sustainable and used to guide science-based policy and disease control mechanisms going forward.

- Long-term funding from international donors

- Support and buy-in from national government actors at local, provincial, and national levels

- Support and buy-in from central government across human health, animal health, and wildlife/ environmental sectors

Convening regular multi-sectoral meetings for open discourse on the challenges and opportunities to monitoring and management of disease at the wildlife-human-livestock interface, and improving communications and trust between and across sectors, is critical in the joint development of functional, long-term wildlife surveillance networks for One Health intelligence, and adoption of associated policies. This takes considerable time and a sustained effort, often, unfortunately, outside of the normal funding cycles of donor agencies.

Documentation and dissemination of results

Local Capacity Building for Safe Sampling and Testing of Wildlife Carcasses

With limited funding for wildlife surveillance and veterinary medicine in the country, and limited access for subsistence communities to adequate health care, increasing awareness of the importance of wildlife health as it pertains to human and livestock health at local, provincial, and central levels is essential. Introducing preventative approaches and building local capacity for wildlife surveillance is key to reducing human health risks from contact with wildlife. Bringing diagnostic capacity from other nations into the country itself and ultimately to the carcass side enables better local engagement and rapid response and mitigation efforts in the case of detection of a pathogen of concern

- Long-term external financial support for the development of the wildlife health sector including surveillance and diagnostics

- Long-term funding to develop the capacity of communities to engage in preventative approaches, participatory surveillance and wildlife sampling

- The interest of the host government to develop wildlife health capacity and designation of time and personnel availability to be trained

Enhancing local understanding of the importance of wildlife health for human and livestock health and developing local capacity to conduct effective wildlife surveillance is critical to achieving sustained One Health benefits

Documentation and dissemination of results

Creating sustainable networks for reporting and response to wildlife mortality

Taking the time to develop effective systems for reporting from remote areas (e.g. local human networks or cell-phone based if available) and ensuring a centralized team that responds to reports and communicates findings to communities is vital for the long-term success of such wildlife mortality monitoring networks

- Good relationships and networks from local to district to the provincial and central levels

- Good coordination across multiple sectors from local to national levels

- Financial and human capacity to respond effectively and in a timely manner to mortality reports

- Access to communication tools e.g. cell phones

If communities don't see effective response or communication with them on findings, they are unlikely to continue to participate in surveillance efforts. Taking the time to build efficient, sustainable multi-sectoral networks with key stakeholders is essential

Documentation and dissemination of results

Building Trust with Local Communities

Community engagement on Ebola

WCS Republic of Congo

Building partnerships and trust with local subsistence communities is essential to ensure successful uptake of public health messaging and community engagement in participatory surveillance, especially given that traditional superstitions and beliefs may contrast significantly with modern scientific knowledge and medicine

Time, long-term funding, and the human capacity for repeat visits to spend adequate time with communities to build long-standing relationships of trust over a period of years

In order for participatory surveillance networks with remote communities to be successful, long-term investment is needed, often longer than the duration of short funding streams from foreign entities. Repeat visits and support over many years and consistent, effective communication and rapid result sharing with the communities are essential

Documentation and dissemination of results

Entirety

Local

Training program

Training topic samples

Based on the management effectiveness and capacity assessment, a training program was developed and delivered to assist in filling knowledge and capacity gaps.

The program included:

- protected area management global standards

- flora and fauna ID and monitoring

- improving protected area visitor experience

- media and communications training

- GIS and mapping

- restoration of specific natural habitats

- Management planning and standards

- Climate change threats and adaptation

- sustainable fishing

Some equipment was provided, mostly to help with visibility, monitoring and mobility in the protected landscape.

Additionally, Montenegrin authorities were invited to sessions to share knowledge and promote cross-border cooperation, and we arranged a study tour in Spain for Albanian staff to visit an experienced yet comparable protected area in Europe to learn and share practical knowledge between teams.

1. Funding

2. Capable and knwledgeable trainers

3. Resources to convert skills and knowledge into change on the ground

It is important to create a blend of sessions that the staff request and those that are assessed as technically most important for successful management.

A mix of practical and theoretical is also important.

Implementation

Local

Implementation of Effective Control Strategies for Disease Spillover From Livestock to Wildlife

Multi-sectoral coordination, and communication and coordination with local communities, are essential to clearly and simply share findings of surveillance and why specific management strategies have been developed and are recommended for implementation. This would include, for example, vaccination of domestic livestock for PPR in areas where their range overlaps with that of significant wildlife populations, protecting livestock health, and reducing the risk of spillover to wild ungulates.

Financial support for vaccination or other management strategies; good coordination and communication between sectors; good communication and relationships with local communities of herders; access to vaccines and appropriate storage capability; human capacity to implement effective vaccination campaign.

Open lines of communication between relevant government sectors and between government and communities as well as and their understanding of the disease epidemiology is essential to implement effective disease control strategies that address the concerns of all stakeholders involved.

Documentation and dissemination of results

Local Capacity Building for Management of Disease at the Wildlife-Livestock Interface

Many nations have limited funding for wildlife health surveillance so developing this capacity and the knowledge of wildlife health and disease epidemiology as it pertains to the wildlife-livestock interface at the local, provincial and central levels is vital for sustained surveillance and for the true value of this surveillance to be realized including its use to implement wildlife-friendly interventions that also support improved livestock health.

External and governmental financial support for development of wildlife health sector including surveillance and diagnostics; interest of host government to develop wildlife health capacity; time and personnel availability to be trained

Developing local capacity for wildlife health surveillance is critical for sustainability of such efforts and sustained One Health benefits

Documentation and dissemination of results

Collection of baseline wildlife health data

Conducting monitoring and surveillance in wildlife (both healthy populations and those showing signs of disease) and routine serological testing for exposure to pathogens frequently shared with livestock as well as more in depth diagnostics e.g. PCR/ NGS on sick/ dead animals support comprehensive understanding of the circulation of pathogens in these populations, geographic and temporal distributions and time-lines of exposure and non-exposure of different populations. Integration of this data with livestock surveillance data contributes to understanding of the epidemiology of diseases and the dynamics of disease outbreaks, including the potential source, to implement effective science-based control strategies.

Financial support for surveillance; human capacity for surveillance, and data management and analysis; access to sites to conduct surveillance; cold chain/ sample storage capacity; capacity for accurate field and/ or laboratory based diagnostics; good coordination between environment/ wildlife and livestock health sectors; openness for result sharing by host government

Coordination and support from the government is essential from the beginning to ensure support for surveillance, understanding of what is being implemented and the goals/ outcomes, good coordination between sectors, engagement to build local capacity and export samples for testing where necessary, host government willingness to be open about diagnostic findings and motivation to amend disease control strategies based on findings. Wildlife health is under-funded in all countries compared with livestock and human health sectors and external donor support is almost certainly required for success of such programs in LMICs and MICs. It takes considerable time and patience to develop truly functional, localized wildlife health surveillance networks, integrated with other national surveillance networks

Documentation and dissemination of results

1. Multi-sectoral coordination for monitoring diseases at the wildlife-livestock interface

Building partnerships across the emergency management, animal health and environment/ wildlife sectors is an important first step for planning and implementation of wildlife surveillance to ensure results are used to guide science-based policy and disease control mechanisms. Convening multi-sectoral meetings to open discourse and share information on the challenges and opportunities to monitoring and management of disease at the wildlife-livestock interface, and to develop smooth communications and trust between and across sectors as well as multi-sectoral surveillance and response networks is critical.

Financial support for coordination meetings; openness of host government to coordination between environment/ wildlife and livestock health sectors; time and patience

Documentation and dissemination of results

Defining priority and corrective actions to strengthen the intervention

During the implementation of the intervention, the project team conducted the self-assessment that helps determine whether an intervention is in adherence with the IUCN Global Standard for Nature-based Solutionsᵀᴹ. The assessment provided information about the intervention’s strengths and weaknesses and helped derive concrete recommendations and corrective actions for future interventions. Two criteria were deemed insufficient. Criterion 3 (biodiversity net-gain) fell short, because the analysis of the biodiversity benefits achieved through this intervention were largely based on a desk review of existing literature and information rather than a specific assessment, monitoring framework or thorough and collective effort with key informants and stakeholders. Criterion 6 (balancing of trade-offs) was also deemed insufficiently addressed. While there was a reported willingness from the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar to consider relevant trade-offs, the limits of these trade-offs and associated safeguards were not clarified. In addition, while provisions on the rights, usage of and access to marine and coastal resources for mariculture are in place, further information on how this is applied in practice is required.

The assessment was supported by IUCN expert reviewers, who supported the team with the completion of the self-assessment and provided clarification on specific criteria and indicators. Several rounds of discussions revealed that the criteria were sometimes understood and interpreted differently by different people, impacting the assigned rating. This demonstrated the complexities associated with assessing whether an intervention can be considered a Nature-based Solution and the need for thorough and guided consideration of each indicator.

The IUCN Global Standard for Nature-based Solutionsᵀᴹ served as an important tool to reflect on design, implementation and monitoring challenges related to aquaculture and seaweed farming approaches applied in the IUCN AquaCoCo Project. It provided insights into areas that require corrective action, the collection of additional evidence and means of verification and involvement of local stakeholders, in particular women. In this manner, the self-assessment results will inform future work on aquaculture and seaweed farming in Zanzibar (and elsewhere) and help improve intervention design, implementation and monitoring frameworks.

Implementation

Monitoring

Documentation and dissemination of results

Review phase

Local

Subnational