Results from an economic study confirm that the already staggering human toll
of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) will be compounded by a catastrophic hit to the global economy unless bolder and more urgent action is taken, the Global Leaders Group (GLG) on AMR said today.

AMR is already a leading cause of death globally, directly responsible for 1.27 million deaths annually, one in five of which occur in children under the age of five, mainly in low- and middle-income countries.

Uncontrolled AMR is expected to lower life expectancy and lead to unprecedented health expenditure and economic losses

The economic study shows that without a stronger response there would be an average loss of 1.8 years of life expectancy globally by 2035. The study also estimates that AMR would cost the world US$ 412 billion a year in additional healthcare costs and US$ 443 billion per year in lost workforce productivity.

The tools to tackle AMR exist, but must be dramatically scaled up

The economic study shows that if implemented globally, a package of cross-sectoral AMR interventions is expected to cost an average of US$ 46 billion per year but will bring a return of up to US$13 for every US$1 spent by 2050.

We have the tools to mitigate the AMR crisis and these data point to a devastating future if we do not
take bolder action now. That is why the Global Leaders Group is making recommendations and proposing targets to drive a robust
global response to AMR and save millions of lives.

Mia Amor Mottley, Chair of the GLG on AMR, Prime Minister of Barbados.

The Global Leaders Group calls on UN Member States to act boldly

In a new report released today, the GLG calls on political leaders to make specific commitments at the high-level meeting on AMR to be held at the United Nations General Assembly on 26 September. The GLG report, “Towards specific commitments and action in the response to antimicrobial resistance” urges UN Member States to ensure that adequate, predictable, and sustainable financing is available from domestic and external sources to address AMR, including to tackle the dwindling research and development pipeline for new antibiotics. The GLG proposes that existing financing instruments expand their scope to include AMR and increase investments to support implementation of multisectoral National Action Plans, especially in low- and middle-income countries.

The report notes how accountable, effective and functional multisectoral governance is critical to coordinate a global response to AMR and successfully implement interventions. To achieve this, the GLG proposes an independent panel be established to monitor and report on science and evidence related to AMR to inform advocacy and action and formalising the Quadripartite Joint Secretariat to facilitate collaborative and coordinated action against AMR.

The GLG stresses the need for improved quality of data on antimicrobial resistance and use through surveillance and monitoring and recommends that countries strengthen human resources and crucial infrastructure capacity. The report highlights the need for sustainable, sector-specific, and integrated surveillance systems and the use of data for action.

Because prevention is a cornerstone of the response to AMR, the GLG recommends that countries should implement strategies to prevent infections across human and animal health and food, plant and environmental ecosystems to reduce the need for antimicrobials.

Global targets are needed to drive further action on AMR

To drive global and national action on AMR, the GLG report proposes several outcome-oriented targets to accelerate progress:

• By 2030, reduce global human deaths due to AMR by 10%.
• By 2030, ACCESS¹ group antibiotics comprise at least 80% of overall human antibiotic consumption.
• By 2030, reduce the quantity of antimicrobials used in the agri-food system globally by at least 30 – 50% from the current level;
• By 2030, eliminate the use of medically important antimicrobials for human medicine in animals for non-veterinary medical purposes, or in crop production and agri-food systems for non-phytosanitary purposes.

The GLG calls for urgent consideration of these recommendations by UN Member States. World leaders have a unique opportunity at the High-level Meeting on AMR on 26 September 2024 to save lives, livelihoods and economies by taking action to address AMR across sectors.

For inquiries, please contact the Global Leaders Group secretariat at [email protected]

¹ Access group antibiotics have activity against a wide range of commonly encountered susceptible pathogens while also showing lower resistance potential than antibiotics in the other groups: WHO AwARE classification of
antibiotics for evaluation and monitoring of use, 2023.

---

Background

The Global Leaders Group (GLG) on Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) was established in 2020 following the recommendation of the Interagency Coordination Group on AMR (IACG) with the mission to advise on and advocate for political action for the mitigation of drug-resistant infections through responsible and sustainable access to and use of antimicrobials. Secretariat support for the GLG is provided by the Quadripartite Joint Secretariat (QJS) on Antimicrobial Resistance, a joint effort by the Quadripartite organisations, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH).

The GLG is chaired by Her Excellency the Prime Minister of Barbados, Ms Mia Amor Mottley; the Vice Chair is the Honourable Dr Chris Fearne, Deputy Prime Minister of Malta. GLG members include government ministers, academics, and influential figures from the private sector and civil society, as well as the principals of the Quadripartite organizations.

The GLG is implementing its rolling action plan across six priority areas: 1) Sustained political action on AMR; 2) Transforming human health, animal health, food, plant and environmental ecosystems with a focus on infection prevention and control and responsible use; 3) Advocacy for improved surveillance and monitoring of antimicrobial use and resistance across sectors, including to guide target-setting and interventions and assess their impacts; 4) Increased mobilization of internal and external fiancial resources, especially for national action plan implementation in low and middle-income countries (LMICs); 5) Innovation across sectors to secure a sustainable pipeline of antimicrobials (particularly antibiotics), vaccines, diagnostics, waste management tools, and safe and effective alternatives to antimicrobials, and ensure equitable access to these products; and 6) Advocating for evidence-based action to address environmental apsects of AMR.

In March 2022, WOAH, alongside the World Health Organization (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), and UNEP, solidified its commitment to advancing One Health principles by establishing the Quadripartite Collaboration on One Health. This collaboration aims to address the intricate interconnections between animal health, human health, and the environment, leveraging joint expertise to tackle emerging diseases, zoonotic infections, foodborne illnesses, and environmental challenges. 

During the Second Quadripartite Executive Annual Meeting at the United Nations Office in Nairobi from 29 February to 6 March 2024, WOAH formally assumed its role as forthcoming chair of the Quadripartite Secretariat, reinforcing its dedication to combating zoonotic animal diseases such as rabies or vector-borne diseases through a holistic approach. 

We stand prepared to move forward with our strategic priorities centred around implementing the One Health Joint Plan of Actions, resource mobilisation, capacity building, engagement in political forums and One Health governance, and taking action against important neglected zoonotic diseases.

Monique Eloit, Director General of the World Organisation for Animal Health. 

At the forefront of WOAH’s leadership lies our robust commitment to combatting rabies, a preventable yet deadly disease that still affects vulnerable communities worldwide. Overall, through strategic priorities outlined for the term, the Organisation aims to drive impactful initiatives that resonate across national, regional, and global levels: 

As WOAH assumes the chair of the Quadripartite Secretariat, it reaffirms its commitment to advancing One Health principles and their operational implementation to ensure a safer and healthier future for all. 

The ongoing spread of high pathogenicity avian influenza (HPAI) has now reached an unprecedented milestone with reports of its recent detection on Antarctica’s mainland. Originally surfacing in Europe in 2021, the virus has traversed continents, reaching North America in the same year and South America by 2022. Most recently, it has extended its reach to Antarctic islands in 2023. However, the gravity of the situation intensifies as it infiltrates the northern tip of Antarctica’s mainland, as reported through the World Animal Health Information System (WAHIS).

The discovery came through the identification of the virus in a South Polar skua collected by Argentinian scientists near Argentina’s Antarctic research base, Primavera. Skuas, large seabirds breeding in sub-Antarctic and Antarctic zones, pose a concerning vector as they migrate farther north when not breeding.  

Once considered primarily a threat to poultry, HPAI has ushered in a “new normal” whereby HPAI is moving from wild birds to wild mammals with impacts beyond anything previously seen. Estimates vary, but at the latest count, there have been 485 species from over 25 avian orders affected and 37 new mammal species infected since 2021. Only Pacific Islands, Australia and New Zealand remain free of the disease, but the situation is changing rapidly.

HPAI outbreaks have resulted in marked declines in wildlife populations, including marine mammals in South America. Despite the challenges, there are strategies to better protect wildlife in the short and long term. These include  preventing further spillover events to and from poultry through improved biosecurity, implementing improved surveillance systems to both inform virus epidemiology and benefit wildlife, and responding to outbreaks in wildlife using a coordinated, interagency-multisectoral approach. For example, WOAH’s Working Group on Wildlife has produced new guidelines on the emergency vaccination of wild birds of high conservation importance against HPAI and the management of HPAI in marine mammals. 

The loss of wildlife at the current scale presents an unprecedented risk of wildlife population collapse, creating an ecological crisis. WOAH encourages Members to quickly and thoroughly respond to outbreaks of HPAI in wildlife, emphasising the incorporation of wildlife health into animal health surveillance, reporting, preparedness, and response systems. These efforts require not merely viewing wildlife as a potential risk to production animal and human health, but as beings warranting protection in their own right. WOAH underscores the importance of robust interagency coordination and inclusion of diverse expertise to ensure transparency, equity and mutual benefit of decisions. 

The World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) is proud to announce the launch of the Observatory’s first thematic study, with a focus on the international standard of zoning.  

The thematic study is the latest output of the Observatory run by WOAH, a programme monitoring the implementation of its international standards. To get the data needed for the assessment, a questionnaire was sent to Members to assess the use of zoning for avian influenza, African swine fever (ASF) and foot and mouth disease (FMD). The results have been put together in a comprehensive study which notably highlights the use, major challenges, drawbacks and positive impacts of implementation, ending with a set of good practices for both the Organisation and its Members. Zoning as a standard was implemented by 70% of responding Members affected by avian influenza in poultry, 55% of Members affected by ASF, and 50% of Members affected by FMD.

Amongst Members using zoning,

WOAH International Standards provide a solid basis to improve global animal health, welfare, veterinary public health and international/regional trade facilitation if consistently incorporated into national and legislative frameworks. Zoning and compartmentalisation are two key concepts specifically designed to support Members in preventing and controlling the spread of a disease, while also contributing to the safe trade of animals and related commodities. However, Members may face challenges as they attempt to implement zoning and compartmentalisation standards. At times, their capacity to meet and adhere to them can also be limited, as shown by previous work of the Organisation. 

Setting standards is central to WOAH’s mission. In that context, the Organisation also looks at how Standards are used by Members. It is with this goal in mind that the Observatory was created. A data-driven programme, the Observatory monitors the implementation of WOAH International Standards and has a twofold purpose. First, it is meant to help the Organisation better support its Members by identifying where the services and processes proposed by WOAH could be better adjusted respond to Members’ needs. Second, by highlighting barriers to the implementation of these standards, and by developing tailored capacity-building activities, the programme ensures that the standards remain relevant, fit-for-purpose, and are well understood. 

For an entire century, WOAH has been at the forefront of controlling infectious animal diseases using innovation as a driving force. Reliable data supports national authorities and the international community in making evidence-based decisions that improve global health security and strengthen health systems.  In 2022, WOAH set off on a momentous journey with the innovation brought on by the Observatory, and is now spearheading the effort to make data related to animal health accessible for everyone.  

The section of the thematic study dedicated to compartmentalisation will follow in 2024-2025. The data collected on zoning are being currently further analysed to explore the factors that may influence the acceptance of zones by trading partners. These findings will be shared later in 2024. 

For more information, you can consult the thematic study on Use, challenges and impact of zoning and compartmentalisation and a short factsheet, offering a visual glimpse into the results. 

Established in 1924, WOAH was founded when 28 nations united to combat Rinderpest, one of the deadliest animal diseases of its time. This initiative, addressing the challenges posed by rising international trade of animals and their products, laid the foundation for WOAH’s leading role in international animal health and welfare. In 2011, Rinderpest became the first ever animal disease to be declared globally eradicated. Today, the 28 signatory countries of the 1924 International Agreement have grown to 183 Members. In May 2023, the Organisation, formerly known as OIE (Office International des Epizooties), underwent a comprehensive branding exercise and aligned its acronym with its common name, the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). 

Scientific rigour and transparency have been our guiding principles from our inception to date. Over the past century, the world has witnessed dramatic changes, from the spread of communicable diseases to climate-related disasters and growing inequalities. Today’s emerging challenges have fundamentally reshaped the notion of animal health and welfare. This has called for a constant evolution of our mandate, our collaborations, health governance, and new fields, such as addressing animal health in emergencies.

Driven by the COVID-19 pandemic, the One Health approach has gained strong impetus leading to the formation of the Quadripartite partnership with FAO, UNEP and WHO to ensure that human health, animal health and environmental health are more closely integrated.  By monitoring and disseminating knowledge on animal diseases, we have strived to limit their adverse effects on society. For an entire century, we have been at the forefront of controlling infectious animal diseases using innovation as our driving force. 

Solidarity and close collaboration with our Members have been at the heart of our success. These close ties have been key to sourcing accurate and timely information, and building tools that aid in controlling disease outbreaks and resolving other animal-health related issues. Overtime, we have further brought animal health into the larger discussion on everyone’s health. Our purpose has been to promote the nuanced understanding that animal health is not an isolated universe and that partnerships, programmatic interventions, shared expertise as well as communication and public advocacy can contribute to a safer and more sustainable world.  

While our founding values remind us of our driving purpose, celebrating this centenary offers a critical opportunity to look to the future and see how emerging trends will impact animal health and welfare. For this reason, our Organisation has embarked on an in-depth foresight exercise to coincide with the anniversary to start framing responses for future scenarios in a fast-paced world. 

We are proud of our rich history and dynamic present as the global authority on animal health and welfare. Encouraged by this centenary, we are more determined than ever to navigate new challenges defining our future path ahead with the collective expertise and conviction of our staff and entire network of partners.

WOAH Director General Dr Monique Eloit.

We are addressing interconnected challenges – based on collaboration, innovation and inclusivity. As we embark on the next century, we will continue to evolve, adapt and collaborate with our Members, the scientific community and the veterinary workforce alike. We aim to further engage policymakers who play a role in building the future architecture of global animal health and welfare.  

From the threat posed by avian influenza and antimicrobial resistance to zoonotic diseases and the sustainability of animal production, several challenges lie ahead. Cross-sectoral collaboration and multilateralism will remain a centrepiece of our action, recognising that global issues with cascading implications cannot be solved by single actors.   

This centenary provides a fitting opportunity to express our immense gratitude to all our Members, stakeholders, partners, supporters and employees for their invaluable support. We are looking forward to our continued journey towards a stronger, better and more resilient animal health, for everyone’s health. 

Join us as we mark our 100^th anniversary and do not miss our activities throughout the year to be part of our celebrations.

The successful conclusion of the sixth annual meeting of the Peste des petits ruminants (PPR) Global Research and Expertise Network (PPR-GREN) marks a significant step forward in the ongoing efforts to eradicate PPR. Held in Bengaluru, India from 28 to 30 November 2023, the event provided a platform for leading researchers, experts and stakeholders engaged in the fight against PPR to exchange cutting-edge research, experiences and insights, all aimed at supporting the PPR eradication program. 

This meeting showcased the latest results and experiences from research and activities undertaken by network participants, with keynote speakers enriching discussions on critical topics. A call for abstracts allowed network members to share their latest work across various themes, including new technologies, epidemiology, surveillance, diagnostics, vaccination, and other control methods. 

The Bengaluru meeting produced main recommendations for research priorities in support of PPR eradication. These include the definition and mapping of episystems based on socio-economics, epidemiological, and molecular factors in domestic and wild animals. Research priorities also encompass sheep and goat virus transmission, atypical hosts like camels and pigs, validation of antibody and antigen serological tests, vaccination strategies, socio-economic evaluations as well as the implementation of One Health approaches at the community level. 

Amid ongoing global efforts to combat PPR, the findings from the 6^th Annual Meeting of PPR-GREN emphasize the crucial role of collaborative research and expertise exchange in realizing the ambitious aim of eradicating this devastating animal disease by 2030. These updates and ensuing discussions are anticipated to play a substantial role in advancing the implementation of the third phase of the PPR Global Eradication Programme (PPR GEP), guiding priorities for additional research in the ongoing battle against PPR. 

PPR, a highly contagious and devastating animal disease affecting domestic small ruminants and wild artiodactyls, poses a significant threat in 68 countries. Recognizing its impact on sheep and goats, crucial sources of food and income for millions globally, FAO and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) launched the PPR Global Control and Eradication Strategy (PPR GCES) in 2015. Subsequently, the second and third phases of the PPR GEP, known as the “Blueprint for PPR Eradication by 2030,” were launched in November 2022. This blueprint outlines key control strategies and milestones, with the overarching goal of global PPR eradication by 2030. Considering the epidemiological situation and the transboundary nature of diseases, the blueprint emphasized the need to address PPR and other diseases at the episystem levels. 

The success of the PPR GEP Blueprint relies on innovative research, with PPR-GREN serving as a crucial forum for scientific and technical collaboration. Established in 2018, the network facilitates information-sharing, coordination, and collaboration among researchers and implementers supporting PPR eradication. 

Organized into four thematic groups focusing on atypical hosts, wildlife hosts, socioeconomics, and vaccination strategy, the network plays a pivotal role in advancing the goals established during the 2019 PPR-GREN meeting. In the spirit of the Blueprint, a 5^th thematic group (episystem) was created. A key goal in assessment of episystems is to identify the core reservoir populations and distinguish reservoir populations from incidentally infected populations. The core reservoirs in PPR episystems are populations of sheep and goats necessary and sufficient to efficiently circulate the virus indefinitely. The objectiveo of these groups include updating the network on research outputs within their respective expertise areas and advising on research priorities to bolster the PPR Global Eradication Programme (GEP). 

In the coming years, as we strive to implement the outlined strategies and milestones of the PPR GEP Blueprint, ongoing updates and discussions within the PPR-GREN community are anticipated to shape the trajectory of our efforts. The collaborative spirit exhibited in Bengaluru stands as a guiding light, emphasizing that through shared knowledge and coordinated action, we can indeed realize the vision of a world free from the scourge of Peste des Petits Ruminants by 2030. 

The ongoing spread of High Pathogenicity Avian Influenza (HPAI) in different regions of the world, alongside the recent detections of cases in cattle, is raising concerns within the international community.

While HPAI primarily affects poultry and wild birds, avian influenza can occasionally be transmitted to mammals, including humans. In the last two years, an increasing number of H5N1 avian influenza cases have been reported in terrestrial and aquatic mammalians animals.

The recently reported detections of HPAI in dairy cattle in the United States of America, showing clinical signs such as decreased lactation, reduced appetite, lethargy, fever and dehydration, have raised concerns since such infections of cattle could indicate an increased risk of H5N1 viruses becoming better adapted to mammals, and potentially spilling over to humans and other livestock.  

Initial investigations so far have revealed no specific adaptation to either humans or mammals. Regardless, several studies are being carried out to further explore the virulence and transmissibility of these viruses, including among cattle, and to assess the risk of transmission to animals and humans, which is currently considered very low.  

In collaboration with its Reference Centres, OFFLU networks of experts and Members, the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) is closely monitoring the situation to assess the risks to animals and humans. Timely and transparent reporting is crucial to maintain a good understanding of the disease situation and prevent any type of misinformation or disinformation. 

WOAH reminds its 183 Members that, based on the information currently available, restrictions on the movement of healthy cattle and their products are not recommended unless justified by an import risk analysis conducted according to the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Code Chapter 2.1.  

WOAH calls on its Members to: 

• Maintain enhanced avian influenza SURVEILLANCE in domestic and wild birds.  
• MONITOR and INVESTIGATE the cases in non-avian species, including cattle and other livestock populations showing clinical signs compatible with avian influenza.  
• REPORT cases of HPAI in all species, including unusual hosts, to WOAH through its World Animal Health Information System (WAHIS). Genetic sequences of avian influenza viruses should be shared in publicly available databases. 
• PREVENT the introduction and spread of the disease by implementing strict biosecurity measures in livestock holdings and employing good production practices when handling animal products such as raw milk and meat from suspected or confirmed cases.  
• PROTECT humans in close contact with or handling sick cattle or other sick livestock and their products. Exposed humans should always take precautionary measures, including wearing personal protective equipment and implementing standard food safety measures when handling  animal products from exposed livestock.  
• AVOID implementing unjustified trade restrictions. Import risk management measures should be scientifically justified and in line with the WOAH International Standards.

WOAH is fully committed to supporting its Members to mitigate risks against the impact of avian influenza. We will continue to engage with our networks of experts as well as public and private partners, notably through the One Health Quadripartite and the Global Framework for Transboundary Animal Diseases (GF-TADs) to provide technical updates as more information becomes available. 

Since 2005, avian influenza has had a staggering toll, with over 500 million birds lost to the disease worldwide [1]. Its devastating impact extends beyond domestic and wild birds, threatening livelihoods, food security and public health. The recent shift in the disease’s ecology and epidemiology has heightened global concern as it has spread to new geographical regions. It has also caused unusual die-offs in wild birds and led to an alarming increase in mammalian cases. The rapidly evolving nature of avian influenza and changes in its patterns of spread [2] require a review of existing prevention and control strategies. To effectively contain the disease, protect the economic sustainability of the poultry sector and reduce potential pandemic risks, all available tools must be reconsidered including vaccination.

The current spread of avian influenza is a major concern for the poultry industry, public health and biodiversity. Given recent developments in its epidemiology, and the increasing circulation of high pathogenicity avian influenza (HPAI) in wild animals, stricter biosecurity measures and mass culling of poultry may no longer be sufficient to control the disease. With the seasonal north-south migration of wild birds, countries must be prepared for an increase in outbreaks and should consider complementary approaches, such as vaccination, in line with existing international animal health and welfare standards [3]. 

Key facts

•  The epidemiology of avian influenza is evolving: the disease is gradually losing its seasonal nature, and high pathogenicity strains are circulating in wild birds. 
• This intensified circulation increases the likelihood of virus evolution and spillover to new species, including mammals, posing a risk to human health. 
• All available science-based disease control tools must be considered. In certain epidemiological contexts, vaccination can be an effective complement to other control strategies. 
• If properly implemented, vaccination should not be a barrier to safe trade. 
• Wider use of vaccination stimulates research innovation, improving the quality of available vaccines. 

Considering vaccination as part of available avian influenza control measures 

Traditionally, HPAI has been of concern mainly in domestic birds, with its control envisaged at farm level. Current transmission patterns show it is now circulating in wild bird populations, driving its spread not only across different farms, but also within farms. In practice, this has made it more and more difficult to protect a farm from disease introduction, due to increased exposure, both from neighbouring poultry farms and wild birds. 

There has been a global rise in HPAI outbreaks [4] and an increase in the genetic diversity of circulating virus strains. Thus, the use of sanitary control measures alone may no longer be a sustainable solution to effectively contain the disease. One such measure is the systematic mass culling of poultry, which results in heavy economic losses for farmers, has a lasting impact on their livelihoods and raises social, animal welfare and environmental concerns. Due to its negative impact on the sustainability of production practices and the image of the poultry industry to consumers, its acceptability must be scrutinised. 

Measures such as surveillance for early detection and monitoring of avian influenza viruses, preventive health measures (biosecurity) and disease control measures (culling, movement controls, quarantine) remain at the core of any avian influenza control strategy. 

However, poultry vaccination can no longer be excluded from the available alternatives and should be considered a complementary tool. When scientifically justified, it offers several advantages: 

• Prevention and control of outbreaks in vaccinated domestic bird populations resulting in reduced virus circulation within and between flocks and lower risk of spillover to wildlife. 
• Reduced economic losses, both direct (e.g. bird deaths) and indirect (e.g. mass culling and trade disruption). When properly implemented, avian influenza vaccination is compatible with safe trade, according to WOAH international standards. 
• Lower risk of human exposure to avian influenza viruses, and thus of a potential pandemic, in line with the One Health approach [5] . 
• Minimised environmental impact by reducing the risk of spill over to wild animals. 
• Incentives for innovative research to maintain the efficacy of vaccines over time, thanks to the experience gained. This encourages manufacturers to develop and improve access to effective and up-to-date vaccines. 

In certain socioeconomic contexts, vaccination against avian influenza can contribute to the overall sustainability of the poultry industry and to the preservation of outdoor production systems. These are often a cultural heritage, even though such systems are not optimal in their biosecurity. It helps to maintain the health of domestic and wild birds, ensuring a stable supply of poultry products for consumers and preserving biodiversity. In addition, vaccination programmes with pre-established risk-based protocols enhance a country’s outbreak preparedness, both in the speed of response and preparation for the increased risk. 

Responsibilities of countries opting for poultry vaccination 

Avian influenza vaccination should be considered as part of a broader disease prevention and control strategy. This must include other provisions, such as biosecurity measures, disease surveillance for early detection, rapid response to outbreaks and a well-planned exit strategy. Vaccination can be a temporary measure to better control the disease situation. National Veterinary Authorities [6] are charged with the decision to vaccinate based on a risk-evaluation, which depends on several factors and involves varied responsibilities, including: 

• The availability of high quality and reliable registered vaccines that meet WOAH international standards [7] and remain effective against circulating strains. Vaccine composition must be under constant review to respond to changing circumstances and epidemiology. 
• Sufficient surveillance capacity to demonstrate that vaccination does not interfere with virus monitoring and early detection of outbreaks in vaccinated and unvaccinated bird populations. Robust surveillance systems are essential to monitor the potential presence of avian influenza viruses in domestic and wild birds, as well as in mammals. This determines which strains are circulating and ensures that immunisation targets are met, and appropriate control measures are implemented. However, building and maintaining this capacity is resource-intensive and not possible in all countries. 
• The commitment of poultry producers to adhere to the disease control strategy in place. 
• Data collection from producers and veterinarians on the duration of protection provided by vaccination and the time of virus shedding after vaccination if live vaccines are used. Such data will help to better define vaccination strategies. 
• The capacity to ensure the traceability of the entire process, from vaccine production to on-farm administration and post-vaccination monitoring, including the traceability of vaccinated animals and their products. 

Vaccine selection, vaccination protocols and monitoring are critical components of a successful vaccination programme. The level of flock immunity required to prevent transmission hinges on several factors. Depending on the disease epidemiology, Veterinary Authorities – in consultation with the poultry sector – may decide to vaccinate only certain species in a selection of production systems [8].

Vaccination is compatible with the pursuit of safe trade in poultry and poultry products 

To date, despite the global crisis, vaccination has been used only in a limited number of countries as a preventive, emergency or systematic measure to protect poultry or other captive bird populations from HPAI. Concerns about international trade restrictions hamper its use, although the inclusion of vaccination as a control tool has been endorsed by international standards adopted by the World Assembly of WOAH national Delegates. 

Unjustified trade restrictions on poultry and poultry products from vaccinated flocks have a huge impact on a sector that contributes significantly to global food security and the economy. In fact, poultry meat exports account for 11% of total production, while egg exports account for 3% of production [9]. Imports of commercial genetic stocks of poultry are also essential to support meat and egg production systems of all countries. In addition, poultry meat and eggs are a low-cost, high-quality, low-fat protein food source, providing commodity redistribution and economic benefits and supporting the livelihoods of small-scale farmers. It is vital to maintain their international trade while ensuring the safety of these exchanges. This can be guaranteed in two ways: 

• Countries that vaccinate will need to provide appropriate certification to their trading partners to ensure that their measures comply with WOAH science-based international standards. They must also demonstrate their plans to carry out necessary surveillance of circulating strains once vaccination is in place, and their capacity to prove the absence of virus circulation. 
• Importing countries should make risk-based decisions and implement science-informed measures that allow for safe trade while preventing the spread of avian influenza. This is critical to avoid the closure of trade borders and the subsequent economic consequences for the poultry industry, farmers and consumers. 

In accordance with WOAH international standards, the use of vaccination does not affect the status of a country or zone as being HPAI-free if surveillance supports the absence of infection. Trade in poultry and poultry products can be conducted safely alongside vaccination. 

81% of WOAH Members (107/133 answers) did not use any sort of avian influenza vaccination in the past five years [10], whereas 112 countries and territories reported disease presence over this period [1].

Policy recommendations 

The use of vaccination in poultry against HPAI remains the decision of each national Veterinary Authority in consultation with poultry producers. It should be tailored to the specific epidemiological and socioeconomic context, and the needs and capacities of each country or region. 

Flexibility and adaptability are essential to effectively address the dynamic nature of the disease and its potential threat to domestic and wild bird populations, and to public health. Some key considerations for national policies are outlined hereafter. 

Decision-making 

As described in WOAH standards [6], the decision to vaccinate poultry must be: 

• part of a broader avian influenza control strategy with an exit plan; 
• accompanied by an solid monitoring and surveillance system for domestic and wild bird populations to guide the selection of appropriate vaccine strains; 
• based on the availability of sufficient financial, technical and human resources for disease surveillance and the maintenance of effective vaccination campaigns; 
• combined with the enforcement of relevant regulations, including licensing, quality control, and safety standards for vaccines. 

Monitoring and evaluation 

The maintenance of vaccinations should rely on the regular evaluation of vaccination programmes to gather evidence on their effectiveness and adjust them as necessary, based on surveillance data and scientific developments. 

International cooperation, including trade 

The implementation of avian influenza vaccination programmes requires a careful balance between disease control and maintenance of safe international trade. Prior to exchange, trading partners should: 

• establish mechanisms to ensure cooperation and transparent communication between relevant stakeholders, including ministries, Veterinary Authorities and producers; 
• engage in bilateral discussions to agree on certification requirements and trade protocols, and to address trade concerns, so mutual recognition can be ensured in peacetime. 

Ultimately, multilateral dialogue and adherence to WOAH standards are key to ensuring that if a country decides to introduce vaccination against avian influenza, it will be carried out appropriately, without sanitary risks and will not form an unnecessary barrier to safe trade. Efforts should be made to maintain open lines of communication, thus minimising trade disruption while protecting animal health and welfare, as well as human and environmental health. 

---

Download pdf version

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) threatens the health of humans, animals, plants and our shared environment. Too often, antimicrobials are misused or overused across sectors, creating the conditions for this phenomenon to emerge. While the majority of WOAH Members have taken strong action in recent years to reduce their use in animals, further efforts are needed as these drugs are still being inappropriately used as growth promoters in some countries.

Taking stock of the use of antimicrobials for growth promotion

In 2016, all WOAH Members committed to definitively ban the use of highest priority antimicrobials for humans, and to phase out the use of antimicrobials in animals for growth promotion purposes in the absence of a risk analysis. How has this commitment been put into practice so far?

• Almost 20% of Members still report using antimicrobials for growth promotion. Of these, it is estimated that 76% have not carried out any preliminary risk analysis.
• More worringly, no less than 11% of WOAH Members still use as growth promoters at least one of the highest priority critically important antimicrobials for human medicine such as colistin.
• At least 50% of the Members using antimicrobials as growth promoters have no regulatory framework in place.
• In some countries, the labelling of certain feed additives intended to increase productivity does not mention the presence of low doses of antimicrobials, which are then unknowingly administered to animals by veterinarians and farmers.

Such practices are not in compliance with WOAH international standards or the Global Action Plan on AMR.

Competent authorities and the livestock industry must fulfil their responsibilities to phase out the use of antimicrobials for growth promotion in animals

WOAH standards make a clear distinction between veterinary medical use of antimicrobials – which is limited to the treatment, control and, where appropriate, prevention of infectious diseases – and non-veterinary medical use. The administration of antimicrobials for growth promotion in animals is a non-veterinary medical use, and it must not be assimilated to disease prevention use, which requires animals to be at proven risk of disease if the medicine is not administered.

WOAH calls on its Members to restrict the use of antimicrobials solely to veterinary medical use and to actively engage in dialogue with the concerned parties to achieve a total ban on the use of antimicrobials as growth promoters, starting with those that are critically important for human health.

Competent authorities must enact relevant legislation in this regard and are invited to explore and promote alternatives to improve animal productivity, as relevant. These can include, among others, animal health programmes that focus on disease prevention (e.g., deworming and vaccination), biosecurity and good animal husbandry practices.

The misuse of antimicrobials in different sectors accelerates antimicrobial resistance. The animal health sector must play its part in curbing this global scourge that threatens animal, human and plant health and adopt sustainable practices.

---

Download pdf version

Rome – The first Plenary Assembly of the Antimicrobial Resistance Multi-Stakeholder Partnership Platform opened today at the Rome headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 

The two-day meeting, which is being held ahead of 2023 World AMR Awareness Week, brings together more than 150 stakeholders from around the globe, encompassing governments, civil society, research, academia, the private sector, financial institutions, intergovernmental organizations and specialized UN agencies. Its overarching aim is to collectively address ways of preserving antimicrobials as lifesaving medicines for humans, animals, plants and ecosystems using the One Health approach.  

This is the first time that the Plenary Assembly is meeting since the AMR Partnership Platform was launched in 2022 by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), collectively known as the Quadripartite. 

The Plenary started with opening remarks by the leaders of the four organizations, followed by a series of panel discussions focusing on the Platform’s collective governance and proposals for the action groups. The second and final day of the Plenary will see participants discuss preparations for a crucial UN General Assembly High-Level Meeting on AMR, scheduled to take place in 2024, and a joint way forward within the Platform. 

Seeking solutions 

Antimicrobials are agents used to control and treat infectious diseases in humans, animals and plants. They include antibiotics, fungicides, antiviral agents and parasiticides. Disinfectants, antiseptics, other pharmaceuticals, as well as some natural products, may also have antimicrobial properties. 

AMR occurs when bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites no longer respond to antimicrobial agents. As a result of drug resistance, antibiotics and other antimicrobial agents become ineffective and infections become difficult or impossible to treat, increasing the risk of disease spread, severe illness and death. 

The issue poses an increasingly visible, urgent and complex threat to global health and development, animal health, food safety and food security, as well as ecosystems. 

In 2019, 5 million human deaths worldwide were associated with bacterial AMR, of which 1.3 million human deaths were directly attributable to bacterial AMR. Up to 28 million could be pushed into extreme poverty if AMR is not addressed. Moreover, approximately 75 percent of antibiotics are not absorbed by the animals and are released into water and soil, which can directly contaminate and harm the surrounding environment. In humans, antimicrobial resistance takes place as a result of the misuse of antibiotics. 

There are no simple solutions. Developing a new antibiotic, for instance, can take 10-15 years and cost more than $1 billion.  

That is why all sectors across the One Health spectrum spanning human, animal, plant, and the environment must work together to ensure the responsible use of antimicrobials while taking preventive measures to decrease the incidence of infections. 

The following actions have been identified as helping reduce the need for antimicrobials and minimize the emergence of AMR: 

• strengthen infection prevention and control in health facilities, farms and food industry premises 
• ensure access to clean water, sanitation and hygiene, and vaccines 
• minimize pollution and ensure proper waste and sanitation management 
• ensure access to quality-assured healthcare for all 
• ensure access to advice from experts during animal, food and agricultural production 

What the Quadripartite leaders said: 

“Today’s Inaugural Plenary Assembly brings together the pioneers and champions of AMR, who share common concerns and shoulder collective responsibilities. The success of the Platform will depend on clear goals, an effective governance structure, visionary leadership, trust, transparency, and the sustained engagement of Members to drive change,” said FAO Director-General QU Dongyu. 

“The environment plays a key role in the development, and the transmission and spread of AMR,” said UNEP Executive Director Inger Andersen. “The global response to AMR clearly requires a close collaboration between sectors so that we can tackle AMR from the pharmaceuticals sector, from the agriculture and food sector, aquaculture, the healthcare and hospital waste management sector, and municipal wastewater management, and of course from farming waste.” 

“AMR is not a future crisis. It’s here and now. We need urgent action, based on a shared global vision and narrative, and ambitious targets to which we hold ourselves accountable. We can succeed, but only with concerted and coordinated action,” said WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. 

We are in a race against time. Urgency is the watchword. It is crucial that we mobilise our collective efforts now to address AMR comprehensively for the health of people, animals, plants and our planet, leaving no one behind.

WOAH Director General, Dr Monique Eloit