In recent years, the concept of One Health has emerged as a transformative framework that bridges human, animal, plant, and environmental health into a unified approach. This holistic perspective acknowledges the intricate interdependencies within ecosystems and aims to optimize health outcomes by fostering interdisciplinary collaborations. A groundbreaking study published in the journal CABI One Health delivers a compelling bibliometric analysis tracing the evolution and global distribution of One Health research from 2010 through 2024. The study not only highlights the explosive growth of this research domain—particularly post-2018—but also uncovers substantial disparities in research leadership and agenda setting between high-income countries and their low- and middle-income counterparts.
One Health as a scientific and policy-driven approach reflects the urgent need to tackle complex health challenges that transcend traditional disciplinary boundaries. Research rooted in this paradigm addresses zoonotic diseases, antimicrobial resistance, environmental contamination, and ecosystem disruptions—each entwined in a delicate balance affecting global health security. The recent surge in publications marks a growing recognition of One Health’s indispensable role, with Europe, Asia, and Africa emerging as hotspots for research production. Despite this geographic diversification, the leadership and strategic decision-making within One Health research remain heavily skewed towards institutions based in economically advanced nations.
The foundational framework guiding One Health implementation on a global scale is the Joint Plan of Action (JPA) 2022–2026 developed by the One Health Quadripartite, comprised of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). The JPA delineates six critical action tracks designed to drive coordinated global efforts addressing surveillance, risk communication, capacity building, and sustainable health system strengthening. This bibliometric study uniquely maps scholarly outputs against these JPA priorities, providing a lens to assess alignment between research activities and policy-driven goals.
As detailed in the analysis, One Health research has broadened its thematic scope far beyond the initial focus on zoonoses, encompassing vector-borne diseases, antimicrobial resistance, and interdisciplinary discussions on animal and environmental health. The diversification underscores a maturation in the field and a growing appreciation for the multifaceted determinants of health that include microbial ecology, agricultural practices, and environmental exposures. Nevertheless, it is striking to note that certain critical areas such as the health impacts of pesticides and mycotoxins on food safety, as well as the effects of biodiversity loss and land-use change on ecosystem integrity and zoonotic spillovers, are comparatively under-researched, lagging by orders of magnitude behind more conventional topics.
Despite the presence of numerous collaborative ventures and multinational networks, this study reveals entrenched power imbalances in global One Health research dynamics. Most research concerning Africa and Asia—which bear a disproportionate burden of emerging infectious diseases and environmental health challenges—is predominantly led and published by institutions based in Europe and North America. This disparity raises profound concerns about agenda-setting, representation, and the equitable distribution of research resources and intellectual leadership. Institutes in high-income countries (HICs) dominate publication outputs and consequently shape the research priorities and narratives, often sidelining nuanced regional needs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
The consequences of this asymmetry are far-reaching. When LMIC researchers have a limited role in defining research priorities or leading projects, the outcomes might lack culturally relevant insights or fail to address locally pressing problems adequately. This top-down dynamic risks undermining local engagement, trust, and the effective translation of research into policy and practice. Dr. Dannie Romney, project director of CABI’s One Health Hub and a key author of the study, underscores that without equitable collaboration, the global One Health agenda risks perpetuating scientific colonialism, with research initiatives misaligned from the ground realities they intend to serve.
Empowering researchers in LMICs to dictate research directions and participate fully in knowledge production is essential for fostering ownership and buy-in. The study argues that building sustainable research capacity in these regions would enhance their ability to bridge the gap between empirical evidence and health policy formulation. This strategic capacity building includes infrastructural investments, training opportunities, mentorship programs, and equitable funding mechanisms designed to support local leadership. Such efforts could ultimately catalyze a paradigm shift towards genuinely inclusive and context-sensitive One Health research.
The implications of rebalancing power within the One Health research ecosystem extend beyond academia. Enhanced local leadership in research can contribute profoundly to global health equity by facilitating policies calibrated to the socio-ecological realities of diverse populations. Moreover, fostering local expertise is likely to improve surveillance and rapid response capabilities for emerging infectious threats, thereby reinforcing global health security. Policymakers and international agencies must heed these findings and collaborate to mitigate disparities that hamper a truly integrated One Health strategy.
CABI’s One Health Hub conducted the bibliometric analysis using advanced methodologies, including topic modeling, to categorize and evaluate the body of literature in relation to the JPA’s six action tracks and various scientific disciplines. This robust approach allows for objective identification of research trends, emerging topics, and gaps in the existing knowledge landscape. The combined use of quantitative bibliometrics and qualitative thematic mapping delivers a nuanced understanding that can guide strategic funding priorities, foster new interdisciplinary networks, and encourage collaborations more reflective of global diversity.
The study is complemented by two comprehensive evidence briefs that synthesize key findings: one tracking the evolution of One Health research and the other advocating for elevating the voice of the Global South in global health dialogues. These documents serve as invaluable resources for researchers, practitioners, and funders committed to transforming One Health from conceptual promise into effective, equitable action. Additionally, upcoming webinars hosted by CABI in partnership with FAO’s One Health Knowledge Nexus aim to disseminate these insights widely and foster conversations around future research priorities and equity considerations.
Ultimately, this landmark analysis signals a critical moment for the One Health community. The exponential growth in research outputs signals enthusiasm and recognition of the approach’s relevance, but also illuminates systemic flaws that risk entrenching inequalities. Addressing these challenges demands concerted and sustained action across sectors, funding bodies, and countries. Bridging the divide between LMICs and HICs in research leadership will not only democratize scientific discourse but also enhance the feasibility and effectiveness of One Health solutions in addressing the complex health challenges of the 21st century.
As the global health landscape becomes increasingly interconnected and vulnerable to emerging threats such as zoonotic spillovers, antimicrobial resistance, and environmental degradation, fostering an inclusive One Health research ecosystem is imperative. The findings from CABI’s comprehensive bibliometric study offer both a roadmap and a call to action to ensure that the future of One Health research transcends geopolitical boundaries and reflects a truly global partnership dedicated to safeguarding health at every interface.
Subject of Research: Not applicable
Article Title: A bibliometric analysis of One Health research, guided by the Joint Plan of Action, 2010–2024
News Publication Date: 22-Oct-2025
Web References:
One Health Quadripartite Joint Plan of Action 2022–2026: https://www.fao.org/one-health/resources/publications/joint-plan-of-action
CABI One Health Hub: https://www.cabi.org/one-health-hub/
One Health Knowledge Bank: https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/product/1k
References:
Szomszor M., Kadzamira M.A.T.J., Ishii-Adajar H., Leyland T., Schaffner U., Häsler B., Wright B., Danielsen S., Romney D. A bibliometric analysis of One Health research, guided by the Joint Plan of Action, 2010–2024. CABI One Health. 4:1, 0032 (2025). DOI: 10.1079/cabionehealth.2025.0032
Image Credits: CABI
Keywords: Agriculture
Tags: antimicrobial resistance investigationsbibliometric analysis of One Healthecosystem health and disruptionsenvironmental health research evolutionglobal health security challengeshigh-income vs low-income country researchinterdisciplinary collaboration in healthOne Health framework significanceOne Health research disparitiespolicy implications of One Health.research production hotspotszoonotic disease research trends
