Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Aim The health and well-being of people worldwide are increasingly threatened by accelerating anthropogenic environmental changes, such as climate change and biodiversity loss. Various health concepts aim to address these issues to prevent or mitigate further negative effects. Yet, the distinctions and overlaps between these concepts are unclear. This study compares One Health, Planetary Health, EcoHealth, Public Health, Urban Health, and Global Health across the following analytical dimensions: definition, core topics, areas of application, core values, stakeholders and organisations, interdisciplinary nature, and geographical focus. Methods We conducted a scoping review following the PCC (Population, Concept, Context) framework. Studies on health concepts at the environment–health intersection, published in English, German, Spanish, Polish, or Russian until 2 April 2024, were included. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science, websites of relevant organisations, and reference lists. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts; data extraction was conducted by one reviewer and verified by another. Each health concept was described narratively along the above-mentioned analytical dimensions and subsequently compared across dimensions. Results We included 158 studies, with One Health as the most frequently represented concept, followed by Planetary Health and EcoHealth. Despite differing focuses, all concepts share key similarities: They highlight the interconnections between human, animal, and environmental health, though with varying emphases. All six consider political, social, and economic determinants of health, aiming to promote equity. Moreover, they emphasise the need to overcome disciplinary boundaries through interdisciplinary and intersectoral collaboration. Zoonoses and food security were central themes across most concepts. Holism and systems thinking were particularly emphasised in One Health, Planetary Health, and EcoHealth. Conclusion This scoping review identifies the distinct contributions of six health concepts in responding to environmental changes, with One Health and Planetary Health most directly addressing human–environment interactions. Integrating complementary elements of EcoHealth, while maintaining conceptual clarity, could strengthen their relevance and effectiveness in addressing complex socio-ecological health challenges.
Müller et al. (Wed,) studied this question.