Johnson and Degeling have recently enquired whether one health (OH) requires a comprehensive normative framework, concluding that such a framework, while not necessary, may be helpful. In this commentary, we provide a context for this debate, and describe how pragmatism has been predominant in the OH literature. We nevertheless argue that articulating a comprehensive normative theory to ground OH practice might clear existing vagueness and provide stronger guidance in relevant health dilemmas. A comprehensive theory will also be needed eventually to ground notions such as universal good. We, thus, call for the systematic articulation of a comprehensive, metaethical theory, concomitantly with already ongoing normative work.
- environmental ethics
- philosophical ethics
- public health ethics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Does One Health require a novel ethical framework?
- One Health: the small animal dimension
- One Health and the neglected zoonoses: turning rhetoric into reality
- Professional separation and the re-emergence of One Health
- Waves of attention: patterns and themes of international antimicrobial resistance reports, 1945–2020
- Understanding transmission pathways and integrated digital surveillance potential of antimicrobial resistance in Ethiopia in a One Health approach: a mixed-method study protocol
- Developing One Health
- Pirbright marks a century of research into infectious diseases
- ‘One health’ high on the agenda at the FVE general assembly
- Compelling arguments