Sustainability Science

, Volume 14, Issue 6, pp 1729–1738 | Cite as

The good, the bad and the ugly: framing debates on nature in a One Health community

  • Nicolas Antoine-MoussiauxEmail author
  • Luc Janssens de Bisthoven
  • Stéphane Leyens
  • Timo Assmuth
  • Hans Keune
  • Zinsstag Jakob
  • Jean Hugé
  • Maarten P. M. Vanhove
Overview Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Concepts, Methodology, and Knowledge Management for Sustainability Science


Originating in medical and veterinary spheres, the One Health concept stands as an open call for collaboration also between these disciplines or professions and those of environmental and social science. However, the communities of practice in question show uneasy or under-developed collaborations, due to a variety of factors. We argue that an important factor is the way issues are raised and questions are formulated, i.e., their framing. Based on complementary perspectives on health and knowledge, this overview provides an inter- and trans-disciplinary analysis of the role of the framing of « nature » in One Health discourses as a barrier or a facilitator to collaboration, as revealed by the scientific literature. We find that the lack of reflection by scientists about the framing under which they operate appears as a major factor of misunderstanding between disciplines, and a barrier for inter- and trans-disciplinary solutions to improve management of health risks and benefits. Hence, to build such solutions, framing will have to be a conscious and repeated step in the process, acknowledging and explaining the diversity of viewpoints and values. The interdisciplinary dialogues inherent in this process promote translation between scientific domains, policy-makers and citizens, with a critical but pluralistic recourse to various framings of health risks and benefits associated with nature, and a deep awareness of their practical and ethical consequences.


Discourse Health risks and benefits Epistemology Interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity Science–policy–society interface Decision-making Positional objectivity 



The authors would like to acknowledge Séverine Thys (Institute of Tropical Medicine of Antwerp, Belgium), Marc Vandenheede (University of Liège, Belgium), and Sergei Khomenko (UN-FAO) for their insightful comments on this paper’s idea and writing. LJdB and MPMV are supported by the Belgian Directorate-General for Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid [CEBioS program].

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no financial competing interests.


  1. Andhra Pradesh State Biodiversity Board (2006) Religion and biodiversity. Guntur, Andra PradeshGoogle Scholar
  2. Andreoni J (1995) Warm-glow versus cold-prickle: the effects of positive and negative framing on cooperation in experiments. Q J Econ 110:1–21. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. ANSES (2015) Mesures de maîtrise de la brucellose chez les bouquetins du Bargy. Rapport d’expertise collective. Accessed 19 April 2017
  4. Assmuth T (2011) Policy and science implications of the framing and qualities of uncertainty in risks: toxic and beneficial fish from the Baltic Sea. Ambio 40:158–169. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Assmuth T, Lyytimäki J (2015) Co-constructing inclusive knowledge in converging fields: environmental and health care. Environ Sci Policy 51:338–351. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Assmuth T, Hildén M, Benighaus C (2010) Integrated risk assessment and risk governance as socio-political phenomena: a synthetic view of the challenges. Sci Total Environ 408:3943–3953. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bakari M (2014) Sustainability and contemporary man-nature divide: aspects of conflict and alienation. Consilience J Sustain Dev 13:195–216. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Binot A, Duboz R, Promburom P, Phimpraphai W, Cappelle J, Lajaunie C, Goutard FL, Pinyopummintr T, Figuié M, Roger FL (2015) A framework to promote collective action within the One Health community of practice: using participatory modelling to enable interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral and multi-level integration. One Health 1:44–48. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bolls PD, Lang A, Potter RF (2001) The effects of message valence and listener arousal on attention, memory, and facial muscular responses to radio advertisements. Communic Res 28:627–651. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bresalier M, Cassidy A, Woods A (2015) One Health in history. In: Zinsstag J, Schelling E, Waltner-Toews D, Whittaker M, Tanner M (eds) One Health: the theory and practice of integrated health approaches. CAB International, Oxfordshire, pp 1–15Google Scholar
  11. Brunstad RJ, Gaasland I, Vårdal E (2008) Multifunctionality in agriculture: evaluating the degree of jointness, policy implications. OECD Publishing, Paris. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Caley P, Hickling GJ, Cowan PE, Pfeiffer DU (1999) Effects of sustained control of brushtail possums on levels of Mycobacterium bovis infection in cattle and brushtail possum populations from Hohotaka, New Zealand. N Z Vet J 47:133–142. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Choi BC, Pak AW (2006) Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clin Invest Med 29:351–364Google Scholar
  14. Christensen J (2012) Telling stories: exploring research storytelling as a meaningful approach to knowledge mobilization with Indigenous research collaborators and diverse audiences in community-based participatory research. Can Geogr 56:1541–1564. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cilliers P (2005) Complexity, deconstruction and relativism. Theory Cult Soc 22:255–267. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cilliers P, Biggs HC, Blignaut S, Choles AG, Hofmeyr JS, Jewitt GPW, Roux DJ (2013) Complexity, modeling, and natural resource management. Ecol Soc 18:1. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. De Fries R, Nagendra H (2017) Ecosystem management as a wicked problem. Science 356:265–270. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. De Vos A, Cumming GS, Cumming DHM, Ament JM, Baum J, Clements HS, Grewar JD, Maciejewski K, Moore C (2016) Pathogens, disease, and the social-ecological resilience of protected areas. Ecol Soc 21:20. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Degeling C, Johnson J, Kerridge I, Wilson A, Ward M, Stewart C, Gilbert G (2015) Implementing a One Health approach to emerging infectious disease: reflections on the socio-political, ethical and legal dimensions. BMC Public Health 15:1307. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Destoumieux-Garzón D, Mavingui P, Boetsch G, Boissier J, Darriet F, Duboz P, Fritsch C, Giraudoux P, Le Roux F, Morand S, Paillard C, Pontier D, Sueur C, Voituron Y (2018) The One Health Concept: 10 Years Old and a Long Road Ahead. Front Vet Sci 5:14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dietz S, Neumayer E (2007) Weak and strong sustainability in the SEEA: concepts and measurement. Ecol Econ 61:617–626. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Donohoe H, Pennington-Gray L, Omodior O (2015) Lyme disease: current issues, implications, and recommendations for tourism management. Tour Manag 46:408–418. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Epstein PR, Chivian E, Frith K (2003) Emerging diseases threaten conservation. Environ Health Perspect 111(10):A506–A507. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. FAO-OIE-WHO (2010) The FAO-OIE-WHO Collaboration—sharing responsibilities and coordinating global activities to address health risks at the animal–human–ecosystems interfaces. A tripartite concept note. Accessed 19 April 2017
  25. Ferreira P, Rita P, Morais D, Rosa PJ, Oliveira J, Gamito P, Santos N, Soares F, Sottomayor C (2011) Grabbing attention while reading website pages: the influence of verbal emotional cues in advertising. J Eye Track Vis Cogn Emot 1:64–68Google Scholar
  26. Fish R, Saratsi E, Reed M, Keune H (2016) Stakeholder participation in ecosystem service decision-making. In: Potschin M, Haines-Young R, Fish R, Kerry Turner R (eds) Routledge Handbook of Ecosystem Services. Routledge, Oxfordshire, pp 256–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Francis (2015) Encyclical letter laudato sit of the Holy Father Francis on care for our common home. Accessed 19 April 2017
  28. Gibbs EPJ (2014) The evolution of One Health: a decade of progress and challenges for the future. Vet Rec 174:85–91. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gilmore AB, Fooks G (2012) Global Fund needs to address conflict of interest. Bull World Health Org 90:71–72. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Godfroid J, Al Dahouk S, Pappas G, Roth F, Matope G, Muma J, Marcotty T, Pfeiffer D, Skjerve E (2013) A “One Health” surveillance and control of brucellosis in developing countries: moving away from improvisation. Comp Immunol Microbiol Inf Dis 36:241–248. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Guarner F, Bourdet-Sicard R, Brandtzaeg P, Gill HS, McGuirk P, van Eden W, Versalovic J, Weinstock JV, Rook GAW (2006) Mechanisms of disease: the hygiene hypothesis revisited. Nat Rev Gastro Hepat 3:275–284. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hall P (2005) Interprofessional teamwork: professional cultures as barriers. J Interprof Care 19(suppl 1):188–196. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hanski I, von Hertzen L, Fyhrquist N, Koskinen K, Torppa K, Laatikainen T, Karisola P, Auvinen P, Paulin L, Mäkelä MJ, Vartiainen E, Kosunen TU, Alenius H, Haahtela T (2012) Environmental biodiversity, human microbiota, and allergy are interrelated. PNAS 109(21):8334–8339. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Harrison A, Newey S, Gilbert L, Haydon DT, Thirgood S (2010) Culling wildlife hosts to control disease: mountain hares, red grouse and louping ill virus. J Appl Ecol 47:926–930. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hartig T, Mitchell R, de Vries S, Frumkin H (2014) Nature and health. Annu Rev Public Health 35:207–228. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hatcher MJ, Dick JT, Dunn AM (2012) Diverse effects of parasites in ecosystems: linking interdependent processes. Front Ecol Environ 10:186–194. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hinyard LJ, Kreuter MW (2007) Using narrative communication as a tool for health behavior change: a conceptual, theoretical, and empirical overview. Health Educ Behav 34:777–794. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Houle KLF, Cooke KT (2015) Toward a healthy concept of health. In: Zinsstag J, Schelling E, Waltner-Toews D, Whittaker M, Tanner M (eds) One Health: the theory and practice of integrated health approaches. CAB International, Oxfordshire, pp 397–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hugé J, Rochette AJ, Janssens de Bisthoven L, Dahdouh-Guebas F, Koedam N, Vanhove M (2017) Utilitarian framings of biodiversity shape environmental impact assessment in development cooperation. Environ Sci Policy 75:91–102. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jenkins HE, Woodroffe R, Donnelly CA (2010) The duration of the effects of repeated widespread badger culling on cattle TB following the cessation of culling. PLoS One 5:e9090. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jones KE, Patel NG, Levy MA, Storeygard A, Balk D, Gittleman JL, Daszak P (2008) Global trends in emerging infectious diseases. Nature 451:990. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kelly MP, Stewart E, Morgan A, Killoran A, Fischer A, Threlfall A, Bonnefoy J (2009) A conceptual framework for public health: nICE’s emerging approach. Public Health 123:e14–e20. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kelly TR, Karesh WB, Creuder Johnson K, Gilardi KV, Anthony SJ, Goldstein T, Olson SH, Machalaba C, Mazet JAK, Predict Consortium (2017) One Health proof of concept: bringing a transdisciplinary approach to surveillance for zoonotic viruses at the human–wild animal interface. Prev Vet Med 137:112–118. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Keune H (2012) Critical complexity in environmental health practice: simplify and complexify. Environ Health 11:S19. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Keune H, Assmuth T (2018) Framing complexity in environment and human health. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Environmental Science. Oxford University Press, New York. 10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.013.350Google Scholar
  47. Keune H, Kretsch C, De Blust G, Gilbert M, Flandroy L, Van den Berge K, Versteirt V, Hartig T, De Keersmaecker L, Eggermont H, Brosens D, Dessein J, Vanwambeke S, Prieur-Richard AH, Wittmer H, Van Herzele A, Linard C, Martens P, Mathijs E, Simoens I, Van Damme P, Volckaert F, Heyman P, Bauler T (2013a) Science–policy challenges for biodiversity, public health and urbanization: examples from Belgium. Environ Res Letters. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Keune H, Springael J, De Keyser W (2013b) Negotiated complexity: framing multi-criteria decision support in environmental health practice. Am J Oper Res 3:153–166. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Keune H, Flandroy L, Thys S, De Regge N, Mori M, Antoine-Moussiaux N, Vanhove MPM, Rebolledo J, Van Gucht S, Deblauwe I, Hiemstra W, Häsler B, Binot A, Savic S, Ruegg S, De Vries S, Garnier J, van den Berg T (2017) The need for European OneHealth/EcoHealth networks. Arch Public Health 75:64. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Khan MS, Rothman-Ostrow P, Spencer J, Hasan N, Sabirovic M, Rahman-Shepherd A, Shaikh N, Heymann DL, Dar O (2018) The growth and strategic functioning of One Health networks: a systematic analysis. Lancet Planet Health 2:e264–e273. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kongsak T (2012) A spiritual dimension and environmental education: buddhism and environmental crisis. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 46:5063–5068. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kotani K, Tanaka K, Managi S (2014) Cooperative choice and its framing effect under threshold uncertainty in a provision point mechanism. Econ Gov 15:329–353. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kreuter MW, Lukwago SN, Bucholtz DC, Clark EM, Sanders-Thompson V (2003) Achieving cultural appropriateness in health promotion programs: targeted and tailored approaches. Health Educ Behav 30:133–146. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lapinski MK, Funk JA, Moccia LT (2015) Recommendations for the role of social science research in One Health. Soc Sci Med 129:51–60. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lederman Z (2016) One Health and culling as a public health measure. Public Health Eth-UK 9:5–23. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lerner H, Berg C (2017) A comparison of three holistic approaches to health: one health, ecohealth, and planetary health. Front Vet Sci 4:163. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lerner JS, Li Y, Valdesolo P, Kassam KS (2015) Emotion and decision making. Annu Rev Psychol 66:33.1–33.25. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lyytimäki J, Assmuth T, Hildén M (2011) Unrecognized, concealed, or forgotten—the case of absent information in risk communication. J Risk Res 14:757–773. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mace GM (2014) Whose conservation? Science 345:1558–1560. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. MacGregor H, Waldman L (2017) Views from many worlds: unsettling categories in interdisciplinary research on endemic zoonotic diseases. Philos T R Soc B 372:20160170. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Machalaba CC, Salerno RH, Barton Behravesh C, Benigno S, Berthe FCJ, Chungong S, Duale S, Echalar R, Karesh WB, Ormel HJ, Pelican K, Rahman M, Rasmuson M, Scribner S, Stratton J, Suryantoro L, Wannous C (2018) Institutionalizing One Health: from assessment to action. Health Secur 16:S37–S43. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Negi CS (2010) Religion and biodiversity conservation: not a mere analogy. Int J Biodiv Sci Manag 1:85–96. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Nicks B, Vandenheede M (2014) Animal health and welfare: equivalent or complementary? Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz 33:97–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Nyborg K, Anderies JM, Dannenberg A, Lindahl T, Schill C, Schlüter M, Adger WN, Arrow KJ, Barrett S, Carpenter S, Chapin FS III, Crépin A-S, Daily G, Ehrlich P, Folke C, Jager W, Kautsky N, Levin SA, Madsen OJ, Polasky S, Scheffer M, Walker B, Weber EU, Wilen J, Xepapadeas A, de Zeeuw A (2016) Social norms as solutions. Science 354:42–43. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Okello AL, Gibbs EPJ, Vandersmissen A, Welburn SC (2011) One health and the neglected zoonoses: turning rhetoric into reality. Vet Rec 169:281–285. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ostrom E (2007) A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 104:15181–15187. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pascual U, Balvanera P, Díaz S, Pataki G, Roth E, Stenseke M, Watson RT, Dessane EB, Islar M, Kelemen E, Maris V, Quaas M, Subramanian SM, Wittmer H, Adlan A, Ahn SE, Al-Hafedh YS, Amankwah E, Asah ST, Berry P, Bilgin A, Breslow SJ, Bullock C, Cáceres D, Daly-Hassen H, Figueroa E, Golden CD, Gómez-Baggethun E, González-Jiménez D, Houdet J, Keune H, Kumar R, Ma K, May PH, Mead A, O’Farrell P, Pandit R, Pengue W, Pichis-Madruga R, Popa F, Preston S, Pacheco-Balanza D, Saarikoski H, Strassburg BB, van den Belt M, Verma M, Wickson F, Yagi N (2017) Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES approach. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 26–27:7–16. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Phillips N, Lawrence TB, Hardy C (2004) Discourse and institutions. Acad Manag Rev 29:635–652. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Putnam H (2002) The collapse of the fact/value dichotomy and other essays. Harvard University Press, Cambridge LondonGoogle Scholar
  70. Rabinowitz PM, Odofin L, Dein FJ (2008) From “us vs. them” to “shared risk”: can animals help link environmental factors to human health? EcoHealth 5:224–229. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rapport D, Böhm G, Buckinghamn D, Cairns J, Costanza R, Karr JR, De Kruijf HAM, Levins R, McMichael AJ, Nielsen NO, Whitford WG (1999) Ecosystem health: the concept, the ISEH, and the important tasks ahead. Ecosyst Health 5:82–90. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rock MJ, Degeling C (2015) Public health ethics and more-than-human solidarity. Soc Sci Med 129:61–67. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Rook GA (2009) Review series on helminths, immune modulation and the hygiene hypothesis: the broader implications of the hygiene hypothesis. Immunology 126:3–11. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Rothman AJ, Salovey P, Antone C, Keough K, Martin CD (1993) The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. J Exp Soc Psychol 29:408–433. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Samuelson P (1937) A note on measurement of utility. Rev Econ Studies 4:155–161. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Sarrazin F, Lecomte J (2016) Evolution in the Anthropocene. Science 351:922–923. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Schelling E, Wyss K, Diguimbaye C, Bechir M, Taleb MO, Bonfoh B, Tanner M, Zinsstag J (2007) Toward integrated and adapted health services for nomadic pastoralists and their animals: a North-South partnership. In: Hirsch Hadorn G, Hoffmann-Reim H, Biber-Klemm S, Grossenbacher W, Joye D, Pohl C, Wiesmann U, Zemp E (eds) Handbook of transdisciplinary research. A proposition by the Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 277–291Google Scholar
  78. Scoones I (2010) Avian influenza: Science, policy and politics. Pathways to Sustainability Series. Earthscan, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sen AK (1993) Positional objectivity. Philos Public Aff 22:126–145Google Scholar
  80. Singer P (1993) Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  81. Skollerhorn E (1998) Habermas and Nature: the theory of communicative action for studying environmental policy. J Environ Plan Manag 41:555–573. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Stewart C, Cowden J, McMenamin J, Reilly B (2005) Veterinary public health. BMJ 331:1213–1214. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Sures B (2008) Environmental parasitology. Interactions between parasites and pollutants in the aquatic environment. Parasite 15:434–438. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Taylor LH, Latham SM, Woolhouse MEJ (2001) Risk factors for human disease emergence. Philos T R Soc B 356:983–989. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Thompson RC, Lymbery AJ, Smith A (2010) Parasites, emerging disease and wildlife conservation. Int J Parasitol 40:1163–1170. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Torri MC (2012) Intercultural health practices: towards an equal recognition between indigenous medicine and biomedicine? A case study from Chile. Health Care Anal 20:31–49. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Treanor JJ (2013) Integrating ecology with management to control wildlife brucellosis. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz 32:239–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185:1124–1131. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211:453–458. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Weinstock JV, Elliott DE (2009) Helminths and the IBD hygiene hypothesis. Inflamm Bowel Dis 15:128–133. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Whittaker M (2015) The role of social sciences in One Health. In: Zinsstag J, Schelling E, Waltner-Toews D, Whittaker M, Tanner M (eds) One Health: the theory and practice of integrated health approaches. CAB International, Oxfordshire, pp 134–145Google Scholar
  92. WHO (1946) Constitution of the World Health Organization. Off Rec World Health Organ 2:100. Accessed 19 April 2017
  93. WHO-CBD (2015) Connecting global priorities: biodiversity and human health. A state of knowledge review. World Health Organization, Geneva. Accessed 19 April 2017
  94. Zinsstag J, Waltner-Toews D, Tanner M (2015a) Theoretical Issues of One Health. In: Zinsstag J, Schelling E, Waltner-Toews D, Whittaker M, Tanner M (eds) One health: the theory and practice of integrated health approaches. CAB International, Oxfordshire, pp 16–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Zinsstag J, Choudhury A, Roth F, Shaw A (2015b) One Health economics. In: Zinsstag J, Schelling E, Waltner-Toews D, Whittaker M, Tanner M (eds) One health: the theory and practice of integrated health approaches. CAB International, Oxfordshire, pp 134–145. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicolas Antoine-Moussiaux
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Luc Janssens de Bisthoven
    • 3
  • Stéphane Leyens
    • 4
  • Timo Assmuth
    • 5
  • Hans Keune
    • 6
    • 7
  • Zinsstag Jakob
    • 8
    • 9
  • Jean Hugé
    • 10
    • 11
    • 16
  • Maarten P. M. Vanhove
    • 3
    • 12
    • 13
    • 14
    • 15
  1. 1.Faculty of Veterinary MedicineUniversity of Liège (ULiège)LiègeBelgium
  2. 2.Fundamental and Applied Research for Animals and Health (FARAH)University of Liège (ULiège)LiègeBelgium
  3. 3.Capacities for Biodiversity and Sustainable Development (CEBioS), Operational Directorate Natural EnvironmentRoyal Belgian Institute of Natural SciencesBrusselsBelgium
  4. 4.Departement Sciences-Philosophies-Societies, Faculty of SciencesUniversity of NamurNamurBelgium
  5. 5.Finnish Environment InstituteHelsinkiFinland
  6. 6.Belgian Biodiversity Platform-Research Institute Nature and Forest (INBO)BrusselsBelgium
  7. 7.Department of Primary and Interdisciplinary Care Antwerp-Faculty of Medicine and Health SciencesUniversity of AntwerpWilrijkBelgium
  8. 8.Swiss Tropical and Public Health InstituteBaselSwitzerland
  9. 9.University of BaselBaselSwitzerland
  10. 10.Systems Ecology and Resource Management LabUniversité Libre de Bruxelles (ULB)BrusselsBelgium
  11. 11.Plant Biology and Nature ManagementVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB)BrusselsBelgium
  12. 12.Department of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of ScienceMasaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic
  13. 13.Laboratory of Biodiversity and Evolutionary Genomics, Department of BiologyUniversity of LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  14. 14.Research Group Zoology: Biodiversity and Toxicology, Centre for Environmental SciencesHasselt UniversityDiepenbeekBelgium
  15. 15.Zoology Unit, Finnish Museum of Natural HistoryUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  16. 16.Research Group Environmental Biology, Centre for Environmental SciencesHasselt UniversityDiepenbeekBelgium

Personalised recommendations