Abstract In December 2021, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Assembly (WHA) authorised the creation of an intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) to draft and finalise a new international treaty to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response (PPPR). Early in the negotiations, a loosely formed coalition of World Health Organization (WHO) Member States formed the ‘Group of Friends of One Health’ to promote the integration of One Health as a core guiding principle. The concept of One Health, which emphasises how human, animal and environmental health are closely intertwined and interdependent, proved contentious during the negotiations because of concerns that it might lead to new obligations which low- and middle-income countries would struggle to fulfil. In April 2025, the INB concluded its work and the following month the 78th WHA adopted the Pandemic Agreement under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution. This article considers the significance of the Pandemic Agreement’s inclusion of the One Health approach to PPPR and the subsequent legal and practical implications for States Parties. The central claim of the article is that while the Pandemic Agreement ultimately encourages a One Health approach, the various caveats and qualifications inserted during the intergovernmental negotiations permit those governments that want to circumvent their obligations to do so, at least until and unless moral and political pressure is brought to bear during the Conference of the Parties (COP) meetings. The article’s findings have implications for future treaty negotiations given the importance of COP mechanisms for encouraging compliance.
Adam Kamradt‐Scott (Wed,) studied this question.