 So, Siobhan Moore, as you've heard, I'm a reader in One Health at the University of Liverpool in the UK. But I've been based at Illry, Ethiopia, since 2018. And I'm a principal scientist there and the country coordinator for Ethiopia and also for Somalia in the Kuhessa project. But today I'm going to talk to you about the HEAL project, which I would usually say is one of the very rare examples of bottom-up approaches to One Health that is very applied and about operationalizing One Health. But actually in this session, you're seeing some really great examples of just that. So hopefully this will take in a new direction. So for us, we're situated in the Horn of Africa. So much of the challenges that we are hearing about with Rangelands exist in that particular setting as well. You'll be familiar with the livestock dependent livelihood strategy of pastoralists in this region. And the environmental degradation that occurs due to climate change, due to heavy rotational grazing or disorganized grazing. And the particular area where we're focusing on as a project is in the lower right-hand side. So there's poor access to services. So these are pastoralists who access Rangelands that are in very remote areas. And what that tends to mean is that they don't have quality services that they can access, be they human or livestock or natural resource management areas. And so that's where HEAL has set its heart to try to improve that particular situation using a One Health approach. So our aim, as I say, is really around trying to improve access to quality human and veterinary services and sustainable natural rangeland management practices. We're operating in pastoralist areas of Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia. And it's a really One Health project by design. It's led by VSF Swiss, which is a veterinary NGO. So they are the animal health lead. We have a public health NGO, AMREF, who is the human health lead. And then we have us, Ilri, who is the rangeland health lead as well as the teaching and training and research lead. So here is the point where I tell you I'm the PI at Ilri, but I am a vet by background. And my subsequent life was as a public health practitioner. I did my PhD on childhood diarrhea. And here I am leading a project where our main component is on the rangeland health side. And so really my role in this project is to help to be a knowledge intermediary and think about how can we apply this disciplinary way of thinking around rangeland health and incorporate that into an initiative that's really around the integration of human, animal, natural resource management services. So how are we doing this? Our main model is to establish what we call one health units. So what we're trying to do there is to promote the integration of services across sectors between human, animal health and environmental health sectors. And you can see on the figure what that constitutes. So we would have different frontline service providers as well as community-based sectors, community-based actors representing the different sectors. And then depending on the context, and this is something that's largely determined by the communities themselves, our one health units might be mobile, meaning that they move alongside their livestock roots together as a multi-sectoral team. And they would do that according to an agreed schedule with the communities themselves. Or they might work from a common point. That might be a common water source or it might actually be a common clinic where the human, animal and environment sectors are working together. I want to really stress that these are still government employed practitioners who we are as a project supporting to mobilize together. So our role is to really help facilitate that integration of those disciplinary ways of providing services. The entire model is then overseen by communities and the government themselves. So on the right-hand side we have the MSIPs. So these are multi-stakeholder innovation platforms which are effectively a way to mobilize communities to discuss human, animal, environment problems. Think about the kinds of solutions that they would be able to support. And then that information would be shared with the government, the One Health Task Force at the county level. And together they're providing oversight over then the mobilization of these One Health units. So it's a very integrated model. And then we have our partners. So our NGO partners who are out in the fields and will be helping to mobilize these different platforms at the government, community and service provider levels. But our aim of course is that at some point the NGO partners will not be there and that we will have set up a framework and a way of working at the community level, at the service provider level and at the government level that ensures that they continue to mobilize themselves in this more integrated way to provide services. So I've used this word services many times and I think most of the people in the room, or usually most of the people in the room in One Health Congress are still veterinarian by background, maybe public health subsequently. And I think we can all really easily conceptualize what we mean by human and animal services, right? Vaccinations, treatments, those sorts of things. It's quite easy to articulate. The environment on the other hand, trying to think about the kinds of services to provide in that space are a little bit harder to articulate. And we've had to do a lot of work as a project to think about what that can actually look like. And so for us, the environment shows up in three ways. We've got rangeland health on the left side, which I'm going to come back to, environmental health, which I'm going to come back to. And then down at the bottom, what we call the CBON. And I won't talk too much about that, but just to say that that's the community-based observation network, which is really around trying to support communities to collect weather information and incorporate that and interpret that in light of their traditional knowledge as well. And they've got different types of ways to make decisions about the types of activities that they pursue. Starting with the first presentation today, there were some definitions presented. And we've talked a lot about different definitions. I think I'm the first person to put up a definition of environmental health, strangely, given the nature of the conference. And we were really careful to do this because environmental health as a term is understood so differently by different disciplines. Actually, the Oxford Dictionary defines it as a branch of public health and very much concerned with monitoring and mitigating factors in the environment that affect human health and disease, which isn't a very one-health perspective at all. So what we do is expand that definition in our SOP to say that it's also considering the impacts of the environment on animal health. And I've got some examples there. And that's quite different to the concept of rangeland health, which we also need to understand, which is around the degree to which the soil, vegetation, water and air and these ecological processes are intact and balanced and sustained. So in many ways, environmental health and ecosystem health are somewhat opposite of each other. One is looking at the environment impact on humans and animals. The other one is very much thinking about what does the environment provide for humans and then thinking about the consequences of the humans back onto that ecosystem sort of approach. And so for us, it also very much registers that the rangeland is fundamental to the livelihoods and feed base of pastoralist systems. So why do we need rangeland expertise in one health? And I think that's the whole question around this session. So I wanted to put that question to you. I want you to identify which rangeland is healthy. So raise your hand if you think A is healthy. Raise your hand if you think B is healthy. Raise your hand if you think C is healthy. Okay, so that proved my point that we are very poor at being able to assess rangeland ecosystem health. Because in fact, these are all healthy rangelands. They're taken in different sites in semi-arid conditions. It might be in the drier season as opposed to the wet season. It might be after fire management. But as, you know, veterinary professionals, as public health professionals, we think about diagnosing problems and we can't actually diagnose a problem here because this is a healthy situation. Which prompted me then to dig more around what my rangeland colleagues, how they diagnose problems, and what are the problems that they see in the context of rangelands? When can they identify it's not healthy? And so we heard earlier about this idea of forage and the balance between shrubs and grass. And really in a healthy ecosystem that would be in a good balance. So just as an example, 70% grass species, 30% shrub species. And when those sorts of things start to become imbalanced, you can start to see unhealthy ecosystems. For bush encroachment on the left, I think that's a very familiar picture. You can definitely, even driving out here, I can now identify bush encroachment. Because you're seeing so much more shrubbery than might otherwise be expected. We've got invasive precipice in the middle, which creates problems for livestock. You can see here it's creating problems for accessing to water, but it's also toxic species. And on the right we've got an example of severe erosion and gullies. So I think again, we probably have some sense for these sorts of problems. But then for us as veterinarians, public health professionals, where do you start to solve these sorts of problems? The good news is also that rangeland health specialists have tools for dealing with these problems. So in our project we are using an approach called participatory rangeland management that really helps to guide communities through a process of investigating problems, planning and implementing sustainable resource management within their local context. Very much about their local context and about community capacity to improve the way that they manage their land. So different tools that they might have at their disposal, things like seasonal grazing and spelling. But more importantly, trying to support communities to maybe introduce things like bylaws, which could then help the way in which they can regulate the use of the land in that way. Alternatively, there might be rangeland restoration techniques. So things like invasive species control, bush thinning and prescribed fire, just being examples of the ways in which we might try to rehabilitate landscapes in these areas on a small scale. But it has really not been easy and I think that's really important to stress that when we talk about these disciplines, of course I think we all recognize soil, plant health, all of these things are important for health. But it's a lot harder to then think about how do we operationalize that knowledge and integrate this. So this is spoken from the healer perspective, but I suspect it will resonate for a lot of other projects as well. So why do we struggle with this? Human and animal services, I mean we design them like this. They're designed around local government area and administrative boundary. Landscapes ignore those boundaries. They transcend boundaries they might cross into new areas where you're not working necessarily. So if you're trying to influence the integrity of the ecosystem itself, you need to be operating at a larger scale. When we talk about human and animal governance, it's pretty identifiable. We have ministries, we have service providers and community-based actors on the human and animal side that we can quite easily identify for each of those different sectors. When it comes to the environment, there might be multiple ministries who have some say about the environment. In Ethiopia alone, we've got the Environmental Protection Authority, we've got the Ministry of Irrigation and Lowlands, we've got the Ministry of Water and Energy. So all of those things have a say in this space of environmental governance. Service providers in this environmental health space, again a little bit hard to identify. More often they might be development agents with NRM expertise sitting in the Ministry of Agriculture or they might be environmental health officers sitting in the Ministry of Health. And we don't really have the community equivalent of a community animal health worker or a community health worker. Community members themselves, when we try to engage community members again, defining community is another whole other session. But again, when we're talking about range land ecosystems, we need to think about those communities that are operating across that ecosystem and mobile and integrating across and engaging the traditional knowledge that exists at community level in range land management institutions across those environments. So we don't have really good spatial and temporal overlap between human, animal and environmental health in these kinds of settings. We have very different governance structures and therefore we have different entry points about who we might try to engage in these kinds of interventions. And really I think when we talk about the different sectors, we all have very different frameworks for thinking about how we would integrate the environment into our initiatives. Last slide. So what are we doing to address this in Heal? As I said, we really placed a strong emphasis on an SOP which helps everyone understand what we're doing, how we work together. And that helps to bring everyone onto the same page with definitions on environmental health, integration, what do we mean by integrated services and so forth. We are also piloting the idea of community range land workers. So they might have various roles. Some of the early ones we've identified are things like invasive species removal and really raising community awareness around invasive and toxic species. And of course when you introduce these new ideas, sustainability is always a question. But the idea will be that they're also supported to set up a community nursery which would then help to support their income. We started to move away a little bit from participatory range land management which is a really long term process and try to come up with something like invasive species removal at a local level because that better meets this idea of vaccines or curative treatment which is a very short term kind of intervention. So we needed that shift into a shorter term kind of way of thinking. And the final point I really want to make is that this is really opening my eyes to understanding the pressures we put on the environment sector to somehow improve the conditions of what we I think widely recognize as a deteriorating environmental condition. So when we design one health projects, I think we all need to really think about the fact that it has taken decades and decades of damage to reach this point and we can't expect that that kind of damage can be undone just as simply as we might do by giving an antibiotic treatment to a child with a specific infection. So it's a very different approach. Okay, thank you.