Manhattan Principles

Manhattan Principles. The Manhattan Principles are a set of strategic guidelines created to foster a holistic, interdisciplinary approach to preventing epidemic and epizootic disease and for maintaining ecosystem integrity. Formally launched at a 2004 conference hosted by the Wildlife Conservation Society at Rockefeller University, the principles link human, animal, and environmental health—a concept later popularized as One Health. They call for international cooperation among governments, scientists, and organizations like the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization to address the root causes of disease emergence.

Background and origins

The principles were formulated in direct response to growing scientific concern over the accelerating emergence of novel infectious diseases with pandemic potential. High-profile outbreaks such as SARS in 2003 and the ongoing spread of avian influenza H5N1 highlighted the complex links between wildlife, domestic animals, human behavior, and disease. The seminal meeting, titled "Building Interdisciplinary Bridges to Health in a 'Globalized World'," was convened by the Wildlife Conservation Society's Field Veterinary Program. Key intellectual foundations drew from the work of individuals like William Karesh, a leader in wildlife health, and built upon earlier concepts in conservation medicine and veterinary public health. The location at Rockefeller University, an institution with a historic legacy in biomedical research, underscored the seriousness of the multidisciplinary challenge.

Key principles and objectives

The document outlines twelve core principles designed to guide policy and action. A central tenet is the recognition that the health of humans, domestic animals, and wildlife are inextricably linked within the ecosystems they share. Key objectives include urging increased investment in global wildlife disease surveillance and promoting the creation of a global early warning system for pathogen emergence. The principles advocate for integrating wildlife health considerations into international public health initiatives, such as those led by the World Organisation for Animal Health and the World Health Organization. They also call for combating the illegal wildlife trade, seen as a major conduit for disease, and for greater collaboration across disciplines like veterinary science, ecology, and public health to understand and mitigate disease risks at the human-animal-environment interface.

Signatories and endorsements

The original document was endorsed by a diverse group of 65 experts from 20 countries, representing a wide array of fields. Initial signatories included prominent figures from major institutions such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the United States Geological Survey, and the World Bank. Leading conservation and health organizations like the International Union for Conservation of Nature and the International Institute for Environment and Development also supported the principles. Notable individual endorsers included epidemiologists, veterinarians, ecologists, and representatives from agencies like the Food and Agriculture Organization. This broad coalition from sectors including academia, government agencies, and non-governmental organizations was crucial in lending the principles immediate credibility and a platform for wider advocacy within the international community.

Impact and legacy

The Manhattan Principles are widely regarded as a foundational document that catalyzed the modern One Health movement. They provided a concrete framework that helped unify disparate fields and were instrumental in shaping major international initiatives. Their influence is evident in collaborative efforts like the Global Avian Influenza Network for Surveillance and the establishment of the One Health Commission. The principles directly informed the development of the more detailed Berlin Principles in 2008 and contributed to the strategic direction of partnerships such as the One Health Initiative. Furthermore, they have been cited in policy documents by bodies like the World Health Assembly and have influenced funding priorities for organizations including the United States Agency for International Development and the European Commission, directing resources toward integrated health approaches.

Criticisms and controversies

While broadly supported, the principles have faced some critique. Some public health experts initially argued that the focus on wildlife and ecosystems could divert critical resources and attention from more immediate, proven human health infrastructure needs in developing nations. The principles' emphasis on surveillance and monitoring has also been questioned for potentially leading to disproportionate restrictions on local and indigenous communities that rely on wildlife, without adequate community engagement or benefit-sharing. Furthermore, critics from within the conservation field have noted that the document, while visionary, lacked specific, legally binding mechanisms for implementation, relying instead on voluntary cooperation among sovereign states and organizations like the World Trade Organization, which can be slow and politically fraught. The challenge of equitably balancing human economic development, animal welfare, and environmental protection, as highlighted in forums like the Convention on Biological Diversity, remains an ongoing tension in applying the principles' ideals.

Category:One Health Category:Public health Category:Environmental treaties and declarations Category:2004 in the environment