Is there really such a thing as “one health”? Thinking about a more than human world from the perspective of cultural anthropology

• Microbial globalization processes are neither unidirectional nor homogenous.
• Human and microbial social worlds are mutually correlated.
• Infectious diseases are a product of both, biological and social relations.
• Anthropological studies might help to situate and contextualize this interaction.

Today's era of globalization is characterized by intensified interspecies encounters, growing ecological concerns and the (re-)emergence of infectious diseases, manifesting themselves in the interplay of medical and biological, but also social, cultural and political processes. One health approaches – which combine multidisciplinary efforts to stimulate collaborations between different health professionals such as veterinarians, medical practitioners, biologists, and public health professionals – can be understood as a response to this complex interconnectedness. Integrating a social science perspective might prove beneficial to this endeavor. This essay locates the one health discussion on disease ecologies in a more than human world within recent developments in cultural and medical anthropology that focus on the entanglements between health and a multitude of animals, plants or microbes, as they are characteristic of a globalized modernity. The paper aims to examine the social dimensions of human–animal-disease-interactions, claiming that disease is a biocultural phenomenon and that social factors generally play a crucial role in the emergence, spread and management of (infectious) disease. Consequently, it will be argued that there is a need to rethink our objects of inquiry and any given assumptions of human health, the human body or the constitution of “the global” as such. Incorporating the social sciences into one health approaches can help address topics such as consumption patterns, human–animal behavior or environmental conflicts in a novel way and on a grander scale than ever before. Yet, a greater sensitivity to context may entail some skepticism about the idea of one health – not in spite of the complex entanglements between humans, environments, animals and pathogens, but precisely because of them.