Abstract
Clinicians are familiar with assessing the needs of their patients in a systematic way.
Examinations are divided into body systems, and treatment is approached based on the animal’s needs. The overarching goal is to resolve the need and restore the patient to health. Only a few decades ago, health was defined as the absence of disease. The definition of health has expanded to a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being. Human medicine and public health have well-developed frameworks for evaluating health of a person and a community. The social determinants of health include the conditions around a person that affect their health. Health needs assessments are ways to systematically describe health problems in a population, identify inequalities, and determine priorities for the most effective use of resources.2
Partner organizations within IAAAM are involved with abundant programs focused on individual animal health. Veterinarians prioritize the concept of One Health, recognizing the interconnection between people, animals, plants, and their shared environment. Conservation seeks to protect these animals, plants, and resources. But there is a gap. There is not currently a way to measure the health of wildlife medicine and conservation programs, and health is suffering as a result.
Success in wildlife medicine and conservation is often measured by the number of animals successfully treated. Yet there is a lack of a common language and metrics about how health is actually measured, particularly around the health of our structures and systems.
We spend an estimated $76 billion globally per year to preserve endangered species and their habitats.3 Yet less than half of posted marine science positions currently offer compensation, with 30% being unpaid and 20% requiring a fee to work.4 If programs rely solely on unpaid positions, that’s not a healthy system. It is not healthy for scientists to parachute onto coastlines and neither include nor support local scientists on the ground. Ignoring social equity needs in conservation can hinder its effectiveness by undermining local support.5 If the health of an animal is prioritized over a community’s ability to feed itself, the system is unhealthy. Failure to understand and incorporate the needs of communities inevitably leads to poor long-term conservation outcomes.6
It’s time to bring an established health framework to aquatic animal conservation and beyond. We need to describe the determinants of healthy conservation. We need health assessments to determine the needs and priorities for wildlife around the world. We need a health index, building on existing indices like the Ocean Health Index by adding true health metrics so that organizations internationally have common tools and language at their fingertips.7 Every organization deserves the tools to create healthy programs that maximize their impact, just as much as each seal deserves a good doctor looking after their health. We know health. Let’s bring health to conservation so we can prioritize a healthier world.
Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges those individuals and organizations that have expressed interest in participating in the development of this conservation health model, and to all those who are involved with protecting and improving marine mammal health.
Literature Cited
1. [WHO] World Health Organization. 2020. Basic documents: forty-ninth edition (including amendments adopted up to 31 May 2019). Geneva: World Health Organization. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
2. McCarthy DP, Donald PF, Scharleman JPW, et al. 2012. Financial costs of meeting global biodiversity conservation targets: Current spending and unmet needs. Science 338(6109): 946–949.
3. Wright J, Williams R, Wilkinson JR. 1998. Development and importance of health needs assessment. Brit Med J 316(7140): 1310–1313.
4. Osiecka AN, Quer S, Wróbel, et al. 2021. Unpaid work in marine science: A snapshot of the early-career job market. Front Mar Sci, 1143.
5. Bennett NJ, Katz L, Yadao-Evans W, et al. 2021. Advancing social equity in and through marine conservation. Front Mar Sci, 994.
6. Nelms SE, Alfaro-Shigueto J, Arnould JPY, et al. 2021. Marine mammal conservation: over the horizon. Endang Species Res 44: 291–325.
7. Halpern BS, Longo C, Hardy D, et al. 2012. An index to assess the health and benefits of the global ocean. Nature 488(7413): 615–620.