One Health and Ecosystem Services in Sustainable Agriculture: Challenges, Opportunities, and Policy Imperatives – A Critical Review

One health approach, a strategy of sustainably balancing and optimizing human, animal, and ecosystem health, provides a serious platform for tackling sustainability issues in agriculture. This one health model attempts to reduce zoonotic diseases, antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and environmental degradation by increasing food security through ecosystem services, which are the benefits of natural processes (provisioning, regulating, supporting, and cultural services). To analyse synergies between One Health and ecosystem services in agrifood systems, this commentary will rely on post-2015 literature, particularly peer-reviewed studies, and reports published by international organisations, e.g., FAO, WHO, and IPBES. Observational data from sub-Saharan Africa show that the prevalence of AMR is high, with multidrug-resistant bacteria found in 62.9-87.4 percent of farming sources in Ethiopia, demonstrating the importance of combined efforts. However, a methodological limitation, including the lack of longitudinal information, hampered rigorous evaluation. Policy recommendations include multisectoral programs of action to enhance resilience, and prevention efforts may have a higher benefit-cost ratio. Agroecological surveillance and innovation may complement the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 2, 3, and 15, with inconsistent evidence on their potential to scale in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), but more research is needed in longitudinal studies.

DOI

https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.26JU00

Pages

96 - 108

Creative Commons

Copyright

© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Madras Agricultural Students' Union in Madras Agricultural Journal (MAJ). This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited by the user.

Keywords

One health Ecosystem services Sustainable agriculture SDGs Ecosystem health

Introduction

Sustainable agriculture under the threat of climate change and biodiversity loss demands trans-disciplinary responses. One Health (formally introduced by Quadripartite organizations (FAO, WHO, UNEPWOAH, 2022) is a concept that seeks to integrate human, animal, and ecosystem health into a mutually reinforcing relationship (Zhang et al., 2024). This is also applied to ecosystem services, as stipulated in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), where about 60 percent of assessed services (15 of 24) are degraded or provided unsustainably, such as freshwater and fisheries (Ahmed et al., 2022). These interdependencies between environmental and health sustainability in agrifood systems describe developments since 2015, including the SDGs and the One Health Joint Plan of Action (2022-2026) (FAO, WHO, UNEP, WOAH, 2022). About one-third of agrifood activities release anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, which cause further impacts on the climate (Ogunseitan, 2022). Additionally, six in ten emerging infectious diseases are zoonotic and animal-borne, which may have contributed up to 75 percent (Hahn et al., 2020). Hence, there is an urgent need to keep our ecosystem sustainable and also healthier. The adoption of intensive agriculture increases soil erosion rates, sometimes surpassing the natural limit of less than 2 Mg ha^-1 yr^-1, reaching 22.5 Mg ha^-1 yr^-1 in certain agricultural landscapes (Steinhoff-Knopp et al., 2021).

Combining One Health and ecosystem services enhances resilience, as was the case with pollination by animals, which adds 235-577 billion dollars of value to the world's crop production each year (IPBES, 2016). However, some implementation gaps remain, as 90.9 percent of One Health programs involve a policy and fewer ecological metrics (Milazzo et al., 2025). This critical commentary addresses these dynamics by using an evidence-to-policy lens that examines such factors in relation to sustainable evidence, constraints, policy suggestions, and future directions.

Results Discussion

The One Health Framework in Agricultural Contexts

In livestock systems with a high burden of zoonoses, One Health assists in cooperation to address risks at the interface itself. Due to the modification of agricultural habitats, zoonotic diseases are estimated to account for 60-75 percent of the infectious hazard in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) (Hahn et al., 2020). The framework can promote antimicrobial governance in settings with high rates of Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR), including 47.6 percent of Escherichia coli isolates resistant to at least three antibiotic classes in poultry in Kenya. Integrated surveillance can be illustrated by the Kenyan Zoonotic Disease Unit, which was established in 2011 but faces certain limitations in achieving particular outcome reductions (Lewnard et al., 2024). Systematic reviews show that quantitative assessments cover only 4.83% of One Health operations, with reactive measures strongly favoured after a crisis. In smallholder settings, diversification could help reduce risk, but intensive systems lead to higher AMR, and therefore, 72 percent of E. coli from ill chickens are resistant (Out et al., 2024). There are gender differences that influence effects, including women being less likely to seek healthcare assistance, which could further, underrepresent the problem in terms of agrochemical use, which hampers ecosystem health as well (Dangore et al., 2024). Sometimes, the risk of uncertainty in longitudinal research can overestimate the benefits in heterogeneous agroecologies.

Ecosystem Services as Pillars of Agricultural Sustainability

Agroecosystems dependent on ecosystem services can provide provisioning (food, fiber), regulating (pollination, pest control), supporting (nutrient cycling, soil formation), and even cultural benefits (aesthetic values) (Dinesh, 2022). In 60 percent of evaluated services, soil and water quality degradation is reported to result from unsustainable practices. There is a favoured erosion of crop lands beyond natural levels (<2 Mg ha^-1 yr^-1) that will reduce productivity and release nutrients (Steinhoff-Knopp et al., 2021).

In fact, pollination by animals (especially insects) boosts crop yields worth 235-577 billion dollars annually worldwide, with 35% of crops made up at the national level (IPBES, 2016). Regulating services such as biological pest control or carbon sequestration are critical; an example is perennial grassland, which offers nutrient cycling and erosion control, thereby limiting degradation (Jothieswaran and Vidhyavathi, 2025). These services also increase through agroecological measures, such as intercropping (Kokkini et al. 2025). Cover cropping provides important ecosystem services, such as adaptability across various situations, which significantly improve soil quality and biodiversity (Yousefi et al., 2024).

Ecosystem value is emphasized in economic terms, although considerable disparities exist in the methods used to value ecosystem services in LMICs, which have inevitably under-evaluated cultural services and over-valued regulating services. Sustainable agricultural practices and biodiversity conservation practices like Agroforestry, Regenerative Farming, Zero Budget Natural Farming (ZBNF), Permaculture, Conservation Agriculture, Integrated Farming System (IFS), Biodynamic Farming, Silvopasture, Low External Input Sustainable Agriculture (LEISA), Organic Farming, and Natural Farming, and ultimately results in improved quality and health of soil (Diyaolu et al., 2024). Conservation farming provides many ecosystem services, which could raise productivity and reduce environmental impacts (Gangadaran et al., 2026).

Synergies and Integration: A Pathway Forward

Enhancing and interlinking One Health with ecosystem services in agriculture need to be done to increase the sustainability of the systems (Mwangi, 2022). Synergies can be harnessed through holistic management, linking soil health to reduced zoonotic risks and boosting productivity. It is possible to consider soil microbiomes as a point of convergence, as sustainable practices to scale down AMR spread and enhance nutrient cycling (Hou, 2023). Suppose, as per the estimates, 3 billion USD can be spent on investment in prevention through One Health, with the potential to save up to USD 37 billion each year through zoonotic disease prevention.

The sense of integration increases resilience in agroecological systems, where biodiversity enhances pollination and pest control, resulting in food security. These dimensions, through the Food Systems (Balaji et al., 2025), One Health, and Resilience (FOR) approach, will be able to solve multidimensional problems by considering food system perspectives (Kandpal., 2024). Operationalization is achieved through shared actions, although only one in ten programs with an eventual policy emphasis has ecological integration (Nitzan et al., 2023).

Future research should focus on microbiome engineering and subsequent AI-driven surveillance to anticipate risks and perhaps optimize delivery. Irrespective of such uncertainties, transdisciplinary measurement is necessary to quantify synergies and facilitate interdisciplinary integration between health and the environment to achieve net-zero agriculture (Pepin et al., 2024).

Empirical Evidence from Case Studies

The advantages of integration are shown in the following case studies. In Tanzania, the HALI Project (2006 to present) uses One Health to control zoonoses in pastoral systems, which includes the surveillance, livelihoods, and effects on the ecosystem, although quantified reductions in pathogens are not described in primary reports; the project builds capacity and approaches interdisciplinary (Mazet et al., 2009). More case studies and real-world examples that integrate One Health and Ecosystem Services are mentioned in Table 1.

Table 1: Initiatives Integrating One Health & Ecosystem Services in Sustainable Agriculture

Initiative Name	Lead Organization(s)	Region	Approach	Primary Approach	Key Mechanisms	One Health Integration	Ecosystem Services	References
One Health Joint Plan of Action (OHJPA)	FAO, WOAH, WHO, UNEP (Quadripartite)	Global	Core Focus	Policy & Governance	Defines a plan of action for collaboration of various sectors to handle zoonotic diseases, AMR, and food safety, with six actions including surveillance and ecosystem health.	Human, animal, plant, and ecosystem health are deliberately and explicitly integrated as one coordinated policy and capacity building program.	Biodiversity, Disease Regulation, Food Security	FAO, UNEP, WHO, and WOAH. 2022
Agri-Ecosystem Stewardship Initiative (AESI)	Investment Agriculture Foundation (IAF) of BC	Canada (British Columbia)	Indirect	Economic Incentives (PES)	Makes available substantial funds for farmers to carry out activities such as the installation of riparian buffers and the development of pollinator habitats, thereby enhancing natural values of ecosystem and reducing environmental degradation.	Pathogen loads and chemical runoff are minimized allowing bacteria or viruses affecting animals or humans to be eliminated hence human and animal health are supported via better environmental conditions.	Water Purification, Pollination, Carbon Sequestration, Biodiversity	(McEachern et al., 2022)
Sustainable Agriculture Strategy (SAS)	Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada	Canada	Systems-Based	National Policy Framework	Sets the necessary targets for climate-smart agriculture, offers financial support for soil health and biodiversity programs, and encourages the use of nature-friendly methods to lower pollution.	On one hand, it improves the health of agri-ecosystem and on the other, One Health is indirectly supported by alleviating the environmental stress and encouraging resilience.	Soil Formation & Retention, Climate Regulation, Water Regulation	(Gemmill-Herren et al., 2024 )
National Mission on Biodiversity and Human Well-Being (NMBHWB)	Govt. of India (Proposed)	India	Explicit	Research & Implementation	Is a comprehensive program to monitor biodiversity, revitalize ecosystems, and use biodiversity as a means of sustainable agriculture and health, with nutrition and climate resilience as the major focus areas.	By linking biodiversity to nutrition security, climate resilience, and zoonotic disease control, the program extends its scope through interdisciplinary research.	Genetic Diversity, Resilience, Biodiversity, Food Security	Bawa et al., (2021)
The PREZODE Initiative	International Research Consortium	Global	Core Focus	Prevention & Research	Emphasizes the modification of agricultural practices and land-use policies to prevent zoonotic emergence, with the drivers of the environment being the core of the changes.	To be more specific, it is dealing with environmental causes that lead to the release of zoonotic viruses in nature by attending the issue thoroughly by scientific research with the help of policy regulations.	Disease Regulation, Biodiversity, Habitat Provision	Peyre et al., (2021)
Soil Health Card Scheme	Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers’ Welfare, India	India	Indirect	Precision Agronomy	Offers soil testing and nutrient management advice tailored to the needs of the client, thus encouraging the correct use of fertilizers and the practice of balanced soil remediation.	One way to achieve this goal is to limit the spread of antibiotic resistance genes in the environment by reducing the runoff of manure and chemical inputs thus the integrity of the ecosystem is maintained.	Soil Fertility, Water Quality	Reddy (2018)
Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana (PKVY)	Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers’ Welfare, India	India	Direct	Practice-Based Transition	Supports the development of organic farming through the use of cluster-based strategies and financial aid for the process of an independent organization’s certification, thus increasing chemical-free agriculture.	One of the main methods to achieve this goal is through the reduction of pesticides in farmers, consumers, and wildlife thereby ensuring the health of soil microbiomes and other organisms overall health.	Soil Health, Biodiversity, Pollination, Water Purification	Reddy (2018)
Livestock Environmental Assessment and Performance (LEAP) Partnership	FAO	Global	Indirect	Metrics & Standards	The stage is set to create a set of standardized metrics to assess livestock supply chains’ environmental impact, to use as a reference for adopting sustainable practices.	The program aims to achieve One Health through a range of data-driven improvements that can lead to a reduction in harmful environmental practices thus supporting the health of the planet and One Health principles.	Climate Regulation, Water Use Efficiency, Land Use	Boulay et al., (2021)
HALI Project in Rural Tanzania: Ecosystem Health and Zoonotic Disease Management	UC Davis One Health Institute, Sokoine University of Agriculture	Tanzania (Ruaha Ecosystem)	Transdisciplinary	Research & Surveillance	Measures pathogens in the animals of the concern, which include plague carriers, through the sampling of blood and other bodily fluids and tissues. Testing water for impurities and training locals in isolated pastoral communities to resolve the issues of infectious diseases are part of the activities.	The integration of human, animal, and ecosystem health is done in order to check the zoonotic impacts and resource limitations.	Water Purification, Biodiversity, Habitat Provision, Disease Regulation	Zadoks et al., (2017)
Zoonotic Disease Unit (ZDU) in Kenya: AMR and Agricultural Surveillance	Kenyan Government (Ministry of Health and Agriculture/Livestock)	Kenya	Cross-Sectoral	Surveillance & Coordination	Implements surveillance techniques for diseases that transfer from animals to humans and for AMR by working closely with the human, animal, and environmental health sectors and sharing information and resources among them.	One Health is made functional through the inter-ministerial collaboration which is responsible for disease response and AMR management.	Disease Regulation, Food Security, Biodiversity	Cheptoyek et al., (2024)
URBANE Peri-Urban Farming in Lagos, Nigeria: Agroecological Interventions	EU-Funded Consortium (e.g., Waziup e.V., partners in Nigeria)	Nigeria (Lagos State)	Explicit	Research & Agroecology	Includes inquiries as a farming method that has health benefits and examines the implementation of crop and livestock integration along with the dangers of zoonosis	One Health is employed to investigate and promote agroecological transitions that focus on the production of the land that is good for both nature and humans’ health risks are low.	Soil Health, Biodiversity, Pollination, Water Quality	Otu et al., (2024)
Rabies Control in Tanzania: Policy Translation from Local Research	Tanzanian Government, WHO, Partners (e.g., University of Glasgow)	Tanzania	Multi-Sectoral	Vaccination & Policy	Starts mass dog vaccination programs and surveillance activities, thus moving from research to national programs for the elimination of rabies by 2030.	The support of One Health for rabies control means the inclusion of human-animal health coordination and community engagement.	Disease Regulation, Biodiversity, Habitat Provision	Sambo et al., (2022)

In Nigeria, one health strategy investigating the connection between farming and health found that it faces several barriers, including financial constraints and zoonotic risks such as African swine fever (Out et al., 2024). Research on AMR carried out in Ethiopia in 2023 indicates that the level of multidrug resistance in agricultural bacteria is low, and this is where gaps in surveillance arise. Legal measures exist to minimize pesticide residues, but non-adherence to safety protocols necessitates the use of protective gear in farming practices to improve the connection with the One Health perspective. These instances show that they can entail risks during the integration process, but they lack data on economic and ecological outcomes (Out et al., 2024). The broader literature on African efforts in community engagement reveals deficiencies in impact scalability. Inconsistencies in intervention efficacy highlight methodological bias that popularizes the need for and development of powerful assessment tools (Yopa et al., 2023).

Persistent Challenges, Research Gaps, and Future Directions

The integration of One Health and ecosystem services in sustainable agriculture is hindered by complex challenges that limit successful implementation, and it also faces knowledge gaps requiring new research. The presence of poor governance systems and political approaches is among the major obstacles to concerted efforts in the integration of human, animal, and environmental sectors (Yopa et al., 2023) (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Challenges in integrating One health and Ecosystem Services in the Sustainable Agriculture

This is further accelerated by the lack of adequate human, financial, and logistical capacities and is more apparent in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) where resources are constraining the implementation of multisectoral approaches. In sub-Saharan Africa, where zoonotic infections are prevalent and new emerging infectious risks are emerging, governance problems result in vulnerable agrifood systems. The inadequate quantitative assessment of One Health efforts further complicates the promotion, leading to reactive practice rather than proactive (Ogunseitan et al., 2022). It also has conflict in prioritization across sectors (Miao et al., 2022); agricultural sectors prioritize forms of food production (Kandpal, 2024), and environmental sectors prioritize the protection of biodiversity, which results in the establishment of various research agendas failing to take into consideration interdependencies within ecosystems (Ahmed et al., 2023).

The issue of regional disproportion, with the vast majority of One Health research centred on Europe and North America at the expense of efforts in Asia and Africa, where agricultural expansion is growing rapidly, may lead to habitat fragmentation and zoonotic risks (Ahmed et al., 2023). Studies indicated that top priorities should be given to One Health and an interdisciplinary approach, including zoonotic illnesses, AMR, food security, and the absence of inclusion of ecosystem services, such as soil security, composed of interrelations of the nutrient flow and health (Miao et al., 2022; Swan et al., 2024). Soil erosion in agricultural landscapes exceeds 2 Mg ha^-1 yr^-1 and demonstrates a high level of soil deterioration, with practically no longitudinal data on microbiome shifts and health outcomes (Boix-Fayos et al., 2023). Problems in plant health include insufficient surveillance of phytopathogens and their zoonotic risks, as well as incomplete knowledge of predictive and preventive approaches within the One Health concept (Morris et al., 2022). When it comes to balancing human-animal-ecosystem health, moral issues threaten the involvement of disease control rather than the ecological integrity, which ethically addresses the issue of socially responsible zoonotic management (Bovenkerk et al., 2018).

Uncertainty persists in quantifying trade-offs, such as between provisioning services (crop yields) and regulating services (pest control), with 60% of ecosystem services degraded due to intensive practices. Gaps in interdisciplinary metrics hinder assessments of biodiversity's role in maintaining complex ecological relationships essential for sustainable agriculture. Furthermore, social-ecological systems theory emphasizes reciprocal links between poverty and health challenges, but empirical studies lack depth in LMICs, where agricultural intensification amplifies zoonotic risks without adequate surveillance (Wilcox et al., 2019). There also remains uncertainty in quantifying trade-offs. The lack of interdisciplinary measures interferes with the evaluation of the contribution of biodiversity to the preservation of a complex ecological context needed in sustainable agricultural settings. In addition, social-ecological systems theory highlights the symbiotic relationships between poverty and health challenges, but at the empirical level, it is superficial in LMICs, as intensification of agriculture exacerbates threats posed by zoonotic pandemics that lack appropriate surveillance (Wilcox et al., 2019).

The One Health High-Level Expert Panel (OHHLEP) emphasizes the importance of systemic efforts. But it faces some obstacles, such as limited funding and gaps in implementation, and research priorities need to be changed to include consideration of ecosystem health at a holistic level (Mettenleiter et al., 2023). According to the Joint Plan of Action, oversights in the research agenda include demanding an annual review of priorities that demonstrate discrepancies between action in traditional and emerging interfaces between plants-animals-human (FAO, UNEP, WHO, and WOAH, 2022). Mixed-analyses on business farms in savanna systems suggest difficulties with welfare measurement in the context of commercial systems and the ability to obtain only qualitative analysis, not metrics that can be applied to a larger sample (Romero et al., 2025). In general, the mentioned challenges underscore the need for locally relevant, high-quality research to fill such gaps, while accounting for methodological biases that can overestimate intervention effects across a wide range of agroecologies.

Future possibilities for the use of microbiome-based approaches to reduce the use of chemicals are a move towards sustainable production and an easy way to achieve the One Health objectives. Regional disparities in research priorities also imply an emphasis on operations in Asia and Africa, where the agricultural expansion puts risks on the agenda (Ahmed et al., 2023). Lessons learnt from International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) projects indicate the need to venture into animal-human-ecosystem intersections and to reflect on adaptive approaches. Urban agriculture solutions based on nature can provide co-benefits by enabling climate-proof food system transformations with respect to sustainability (Ebenso et al., 2022). Biodiversity should be given policy priority because ecosystem services are dependent on complex relationships (Pitt and Gunn, 2024).

Policy Implications and Future Directions

Multisectoral frameworks are needed, as the policy implications of incorporating One Health and ecosystem services into sustaining agriculture require collaboration and the allocation of resources. The One Health Joint Plan of Action (2022-2026) suggests using multi-sectoral/interdisciplinary strategies to establish healthy agrifood systems, with the implementation of healthy livestock and fish sectors as a foundation of sustainability (FAO, UNEP, WHO, and WOAH, 2022). The political landscape may play a vital role, where poor governance would undermine the progress; policy needs to motivate some cross-sectoral collaboration like payment to services of the environment to prevent its deterioration (Yopa et al., 2023; Power et al., 2010) (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2 Policy priorities for integrating One health and Ecosystem Services in the Sustainable Agriculture

Economic valuations point towards advantages, where One Health preventative investments produce returns tenfold their costs, and billion dollars is possible to save per year on agrifood systems scenarios (Zhang et al., 2024). However, the incoherent evidence on cost-efficiency in LMICs leads to the development of specific rules to address ethical considerations, ensuring the socially acceptable management of zoonotic diseases (Zhang et al., 2024; van Herten et al., 2019).

Forward-thinking refers to bringing together Eco Health and One Health to increase attention to the environment and to approach pandemics through systems routes (Zinsstag, 2013). Economic incentives, including zoonotic mitigation, can help reduce the disease burden without sacrificing ecosystem services. In current farming, policies must address GHG emissions through One Health lenses to promote agrifood-resilient systems (Zhang et al., 2024). Further studies are needed to assess the added value of cross-sectoral health activities, and the evidence that indicates efficiency increases. The advocacy for sustainable food procurement in health management can make a difference to policy, particularly in the event of ecological crises. Equitable policies must be encouraged, and interdisciplinary initiatives that fund and bridge implementation gaps to achieve sustainable futures (Harvie et al., 2009).

Conclusion

One Health, as part of a complete and holistic approach that balances human, animal, and ecosystem health, is consistent with the sustainability development goals because it reduces zoonotic risks, which account for 60-75 percent of new diseases like the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and supports resilient agrifood systems. Ecosystem services in intensive agriculture have been degraded by about 60 percent, but pollination alone is estimated to be worth $235-577 billion every year. Systematic assessments provide evidence of the necessity of capacity strengthening, since One Health systems enable improved detection, prevention, and response to sudden outbreaks. Destroying natural forests and increasing agricultural land use led to an increase in zoonotic disease incidence. Hence, policies that address interdependencies are critical, particularly for preventing a public health pandemic. The maintenance of biodiversity is important because it supports complex relationships that sustain ecosystem services and alleviate threats. Interventions should be designed to maximize results across sectors, as the value of One Health lies in reducing diseases in both technical and economic terms. The agricultural ecosystems sustain the necessities, yet trade-offs require movement through complexities to human welfare. The social-ecological systems theory enables greater adoption by encouraging people to become familiar with complexity. An overview of 10 years of development shows that there is still a long way to go, and the key to interdisciplinary success lies in the destruction of those barriers. The role of modern agriculture in food security has to include One Health to reduce poverty and enhance safety. Interconnections are realized through food systems linkages that offer ways to prevent pandemics. This potential can only be realised through rigorous research and cutting-edge policy development, resulting in positive changes in sustainable agriculture.

References

Ahmed, T., Tahir, M.F., Boden, L. and Kingston, T., 2023. Future directions for One Health research: Regional and sectoral gaps. One Health, 17:100584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2023.100584

Ahmed, Z., Can, M., Sinha, A., Ahmad, M., Alvarado, R. and Rjoub, H., 2022. Investigating the role of economic complexity in sustainable development and environmental sustainability. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 29(8):771-783.

Balaji, B.N., Mahendra, K.R., Sumithramma, N., Manjunatha, R. and Mulimani, V., 2025. Blossom Harmony: Investigating Peak Pollinator Visitation Patterns in Mustard, Bhendi and Maize Crops. Madras Agricultural Journal, 112(1):29-35. https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.111095

Bawa, K.S., Sengupta, A., Chavan, V., Chellam, R., Ganesan, R., Krishnaswamy, J., Mathur, V.B., Nawn, N., Olsson, S.B., Pandit, N. and Quader, S., 2021. Securing biodiversity, securing our future: A national mission on biodiversity and human well-being for India. Biological Conservation, 253 :108867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108867

Boix-Fayos, C. and De Vente, J., 2023. Challenges and potential pathways towards sustainable agriculture within the European Green Deal. Agricultural Systems, 207:103634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2023.103634

Boulay, A.M., Drastig, K., Chapagain, A., Charlon, V., Civit, B., DeCamillis, C., De Souza, M., Hess, T., Hoekstra, A.Y., Ibidhi, R. and Lathuillière, M.J., 2021. Building consensus on water use assessment of livestock production systems and supply chains: Outcome and recommendations from the FAO LEAP Partnership. Ecological Indicators, 124 :107391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107391

Cheptoyek, L., Kikuvi, G. and Gachohi, J., 2024. Utilization and associated determinants of multi-sectoral approach in zoonotic disease surveillance among animal and human healthcare workers in Nakuru County, Kenya. Open Research Europe, 4:103. https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.g1jwstqzm

Dangore, A.P., Sasidharan, P. and Agale, S.B., 2024. Climate Smart Agriculture Awareness among Farm Women in Ratnagiri District. Education, 20(8): 66-67. https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.500022

Dinesh, G.K., 2022. Quantification of ecosystem services in conservation agriculture under Maize-Wheat-Mungbean cropping system. ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India.Pp: 217 https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.15478.46407

Diyaolu, C.O. and Folarin, I.O., 2024. The role of biodiversity in agricultural resilience: protecting ecosystem services for sustainable food production. Int. J. Res. Publ. Rev, 5(10):1560-1573. https://doi.org/10.55248/gengpi.5.1024.2741.

Ebenso, B., Otu, A., Giusti, A., Cousin, P., Adetimirin, V., Razafindralambo, H., Effa, E., Gkisakis, V., Thiare, O., Levavasseur, V. and Kouhounde, S., 2022. Nature-based one health approaches to urban agriculture can deliver food and nutrition security. Frontiers in Nutrition, 9:773746.https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2022.773746

FAO, UNEP, WHO, and WOAH. 2022. One Health Joint Plan of Action (2022-2026). Working together for the health of humans, animals, plants and the environment. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc2289e.

Gangadaran, M., Elavarasi, P. and Kaushal, A., 2026. Adapting Soils to Climate Change: Conservation Strategies for a Resilient Future. Madras Agricultural Journal, 113 March (1-3): 25-34.https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.2611243

Gemmill-Herren, B., Gottwald, F.T., Batello, C., Bezner Kerr, R. and Herren, H.R., 2023. Agroecology in policy and practice. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7 :1136305. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1136305.

Hahn, I., Dyson, B., Neale, A., Gould, R., Huber, P., Biedenweg, K., Hochard, J. and Geller, A., 2020. Review of ESA 2019 SYMP 8: Integrating Human Health with Ecosystem Services–Research to Provide Practical Tools for Healthier and More Resilient Communities. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 102(1): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/bes2.1786

Harvie, J., Mikkelsen, L. and Shak, L., 2009. A new health care prevention agenda: sustainable food procurement and agricultural policy. Journal of Hunger & Environmental Nutrition, 4(3-4):409-429.https://doi.org/10.1080/19320240903329055

Hou, D., 2023. Soil health and ecosystem services. Soil use and management, 39(4):1259-1266.https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12945

IPBES (2016). The assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on pollinators, pollination and food production. S.G. Potts, V. L. Imperatriz-Fonseca, and H. T. Ngo, (eds). Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany p: 552 pages. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3402856.

Jothieswaran, V. and Vidhyavathi, A., 2025. Carbon Sequestration Potential and Co-benefits of Agroforestry Systems: A Comprehensive Review. Madras Agricultural Journal, 112(1):118-132. https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.701205.

Kandpal, A.S., 2024. Addressing nutritional challenges: Strategies for improving health outcomes in India and global hunger concerns. Madras Agricultural Journal, 111(1):116-121. https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.001121

Kokkini, M., Gazoulis, I., Danaskos, M., Kontogeorgou, V., Kanatas, P. and Travlos, I., 2025. Enhancing ecosystem services in agriculture: the special role of legume intercropping. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 9:1547879.https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2025.1547879

Lewnard, J.A., Charani, E., Gleason, A., Hsu, L.Y., Khan, W.A., Karkey, A., Chandler, C.I., Mashe, T., Khan, E.A., Bulabula, A.N. and Donado-Godoy, P., 2024. Burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in low-income and middle-income countries avertible by existing interventions: an evidence review and modelling analysis. The Lancet, 403(10442) :2439-2454. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)00862-6

Mazet, J.A., Clifford, D.L., Coppolillo, P.B., Deolalikar, A.B., Erickson, J.D. and Kazwala, R.R., 2009. A “one health” approach to address emerging zoonoses: the HALI project in Tanzania. PLoS medicine,6(12):1000190. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000190

McEachern, L.W., Harris, S., Valaitis, R., Watson, A., Yessis, J., Zupko, B. and Hanning, R.M., 2022. Learning circles: a collaborative approach to enhance local, healthy and traditional foods for youth in the Northerly Community of Hazelton/Upper Skeena, British Columbia, Canada. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(23):15878. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192315878

Mettenleiter, T.C., Markotter, W., Charron, D.F., Adisasmito, W.B., Almuhairi, S., Behravesh, C.B., Bilivogui, P., Bukachi, S.A., Casas, N., Becerra, N.C. and Chaudhary, A., 2023. The one health high-level expert panel (OHHLEP). One Health Outlook, 5(1):18.https://doi.org/10.1186/s42522-023-00085-2

Miao, L., Li, H., Ding, W., Lu, S., Pan, S., Guo, X., Zhou, X. and Wang, D., 2022. Research priorities on One Health: a bibliometric analysis. Frontiers in public health, 10:889854. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.889854

Milazzo, A., Liu, J., Multani, P., Steele, S., Hoon, E. and Chaber, A.L., 2025. One health implementation: A systematic scoping review using the quadripartite one health joint plan of action. One Health, 20:101008.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2025.101008

Morris, C.E., Géniaux, G., Nédellec, C., Sauvion, N. and Soubeyrand, S., 2022. One Health concepts and challenges for surveillance, forecasting, and mitigation of plant disease beyond the traditional scope of crop production. Plant Pathology, 71(1): 86-97. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.13446

Mwangi, D.K., 2022. Institutional one health and animal-human health connections in Nthongoni, Eastern Kenya. Health & place, 77: 102818.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2022.102818.

Nitzan, D., Andreuzza, B.N. and Chattopadhyay, D., 2023. The Food Systems, One Health, and Resilience (FOR) Approach—Led by the FOR-Runners. Sustainability, 15(18):13889.https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813889

Ogunseitan, O.A., 2022. One health and the environment: from conceptual framework to implementation science. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 64(2):11-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.2022.2021792

Otu, A., Onwusaka, O., Meseko, C., Effa, E., Ebenso, B., Isong Abraham, I., Ijomanta, J., Omileye, A., Emelife, C., Eziechina, S. and Suleiman, K., 2024. Learning from One-Health approaches to explore links between farming practices, animal, human and ecosystem health in Nigeria. Frontiers in Nutrition, 11: 1216484.https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2024.1216484

Pepin, K.M., Carlisle, K., Anderson, D., Baker, M.G., Chipman, R.B., Benschop, J., French, N.P., Greenhalgh, S., McDougall, S., Muellner, P. and Murphy, E., 2024. Steps towards operationalizing One Health approaches. One Health, 18:100740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2024.100740

Peyre, M., Vourch, G., Lefrançois, T., Martin-Prével, Y., Soussana, J.F. and Roche, B., 2021. PREZODE: preventing zoonotic disease emergence. The Lancet, 397(10276):792-793. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736 (21)00265-8

Pitt, S.J. and Gunn, A., 2024. The one health concept. British Journal of Biomedical Science, 81:12366.https://doi.org/10.3389/bjbs.2024.12366

Power, A.G., 2010. Ecosystem services and agriculture: tradeoffs and synergies. Philosophical transactions of the royal society B: biological sciences, 365(1554):2959-2971.https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0143

Reddy, A. A. (2018). Impact study of Paramparagath Krishi Vikas Yojana (organic agriculture) scheme of India. Reddy A Amarender (2018) Impact Study of Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana, National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management (MANAGE), Hyderabad-500030 p: 210. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3249954

Romero, M.H., Gallego-Polania, S.A. and Sanchez, J.A., 2025. Natural Savanna Systems Within the “One Health and One Welfare” Approach: Part 2—Sociodemographic and Institution Factors Impacting Relationships Between Farmers and Livestock. Animals, 15(14) :2139. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15142139

Sambo, M., Ferguson, E.A., Abela-Ridder, B., Changalucha, J., Cleaveland, S., Lushasi, K., Mchau, G.J., Nanai, A., Nonga, H., Steenson, R. and Johnson, P.C., 2022. Scaling-up the delivery of dog vaccination campaigns against rabies in Tanzania. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 16(2): e0010124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0010124.

Steinhoff-Knopp, B., Kuhn, T.K. and Burkhard, B., 2021. The impact of soil erosion on soil-related ecosystem services: Development and testing a scenario-based assessment approach. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193(1):274.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08814-0

Swan, T., McBratney, A. and Field, D., 2024. Linkages between soil security and One Health: implications for the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. Frontiers in Public Health, 12:1447663. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1447663

Van Herten, J., Bovenkerk, B. and Verweij, M., 2019. One Health as a moral dilemma: Towards a socially responsible zoonotic disease control. Zoonoses and public health, 66(1):26-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/zph.12536

Wilcox, B.A., Aguirre, A.A., De Paula, N., Siriaroonrat, B. and Echaubard, P., 2019. Operationalizing one health employing social-ecological systems theory: lessons from the greater Mekong sub-region. Frontiers in public health, 7, p.85.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2019.00085

.

Yopa, D.S., Massom, D.M., Kiki, G.M., Sophie, R.W., Fasine, S., Thiam, O., Zinaba, L. and Ngangue, P., 2023. Barriers and enablers to the implementation of one health strategies in developing countries: a systematic review. Frontiers in public health, 11:1252428.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1252428

Yousefi, M., Dray, A. and Ghazoul, J., 2024. Assessing the effectiveness of cover crops on ecosystem services: a review of the benefits, challenges, and trade-offs. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 22(1):2335106.https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2024.2335106

Zadoks, R.N., Ladbury, G., Allan, K.J., Cleaveland, S., Davis, A., de Glanville, W.A., Forde, T.L., Halliday, J.E., Haydon, D.T., Kibiki, G. and Kiwelu, I., 2017. One health research in Northern Tanzania-Challenges and progress. East African Health Research Journal, 1(1):8-18. https://doi.org/10.24248/EAHRJ-D-16-00379

Zhang, G., Qiu, Y., Boireau, P., Zhang, Y., Ma, X., Jiang, H., Xin, T., Zhang, M., Tadesse, Z., Wani, N.A. and Song, J., 2024. Modern agriculture and one health. Infectious Diseases of Poverty, 13 (05):82-86. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40249-024-01240-1

Zhang, T., Nickerson, R., Zhang, W., Peng, X., Shang, Y., Zhou, Y., Luo, Q., Wen, G. and Cheng, Z., 2024. The impacts of animal agriculture on One Health—Bacterial zoonosis, antimicrobial resistance, and beyond. One Health, 18: 100748.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2024.100748

Zinsstag, J., 2012. Convergence of ecohealth and one health. EcoHealth, 9(4):371-373.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-013-0812-

Cite This Article

APA Style

Gingraj Kamalam Dinesh, Yumkhaibam Arif, Kallemuchikkal Sukumaran Sreyass, Thannikkunnath Mithun, Rajan Bhatt, Veluswamy Venkatramanan, Archana Anokhe, Mohan Pachilakshmi, Rachana Dubey, & Cherukumalli Srinivasarao. (2026). One health and ecosystem services in sustainable agriculture: Challenges, opportunities, and policy imperatives – A critical review. Madras Agricultural Journal, 113, 96–108. https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.26JU00

ACS Style

Gingraj Kamalam Dinesh; Yumkhaibam Arif; Kallemuchikkal Sukumaran Sreyass; Thannikkunnath Mithun; Rajan Bhatt; Veluswamy Venkatramanan; Archana Anokhe; Mohan Pachilakshmi; Rachana Dubey; Cherukumalli Srinivasarao. One Health and Ecosystem Services in Sustainable Agriculture: Challenges, Opportunities, and Policy Imperatives—A Critical Review. Madras Agric. J. 2026, 113, 96–108. https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.26JU00

AMA Style

Gingraj Kamalam Dinesh, Yumkhaibam Arif, Kallemuchikkal Sukumaran Sreyass, Thannikkunnath Mithun, Rajan Bhatt, Veluswamy Venkatramanan, Archana Anokhe, Mohan Pachilakshmi, Rachana Dubey, Cherukumalli Srinivasarao. One health and ecosystem services in sustainable agriculture: challenges, opportunities, and policy imperatives – a critical review. Madras Agricultural Journal. 2026;113:96-108. doi:10.29321/MAJ.10.26JU00

Author Information

Govindaraj Kamalam Dinesh

gkdineshiari@gmail.com

One Health and Ecosystem Services in Sustainable Agriculture: Challenges, Opportunities, and Policy Imperatives – A Critical Review

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Results Discussion

Conclusion

References

Cite This Article

APA Style

ACS Style

AMA Style

Author Information

Get In Touch

Contact Us

Quick Links

Social Media

One Health and Ecosystem Services in Sustainable Agriculture: Challenges, Opportunities, and Policy Imperatives – A Critical Review

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Results Discussion

Conclusion

References

Cite This Article

APA Style

ACS Style

AMA Style

Author Information

Get In Touch

Contact Us

Quick Links

Social Media

Login

ISSN : 0024-9602

eISSN : 2582-5321

Life/Annuals Members

Admin Login