Participation as a political arena: plural knowledges and critical cartography in One Health approach

Titolo Rivista SALUTE E SOCIETÀ
Autori/Curatori Concetta Russo, Sonia Bergamo
Anno di pubblicazione 2026 Fascicolo 2026/2
Lingua Inglese Numero pagine 11 P. 123-133 Dimensione file 330 KB
DOI 10.3280/SES2026-002012
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche.

This article critically examines participation within the One Health approach, arguing that it functions not merely as a management device but as a political process through which knowledge, authority, and responsibility are negotiated. We frame OH as a heterogeneous social field shaped by unequal relations of recognition among multiple, overlapping epistemic communities and situated local knowledges. Drawing on methodological reflection on participatory practices, we use critical cartography as an empirical and analytical lens, arguing that mapping is not merely a representational tool but a relational practice that structures whose knowledge counts, thereby enabling or constraining the co-production and redistribution of epistemic authority in health governance.

Questo articolo propone un’analisi critica dell’uso dell’approccio partecipativo nel paradigma One Health, evidenziando come esso possa configurarsi non solo come strumento gestionale, ma anche come arena politica in cui si negoziano conoscenza, autorità e responsabilità. In questa prospettiva, OH è interpretato come un campo sociale complesso, plasmato da relazioni di riconoscimento diseguali tra molteplici comunità epistemiche e forme di conoscenza situata. Attraverso una riflessione metodologica sulle pratiche partecipative, il contributo adotta la cartografia critica come dispositivo empirico e analitico, sostenendo che la mappatura non costituisca una pratica meramente descrittiva, bensì una pratica relazionale che contribuisce a definire quali conoscenze vengono legittimate, facilitando o limitando i processi di co-produzione e la redistribuzione dell’autorità epistemica nella governance della salute.

Parole chiave:One Health; Partecipazione; Autorità epistemica; Cartografia critica.

  1. Crampton J.W., Krygier J. (2005). An introduction to critical cartography. ACME: An International EJournal for Critical Geographies, 4(1): 1133.
  2. Adisasmito W.B., Almuhairi S., Behravesh C.B., Bilivogui P., Bukachi S.A., Casas N., Cediel Becerra N., Charron D.F., Chaudhary A., Ciacci Zanella J.R., Cunningham A.A., Dar O., Debnath N., Dungu B., Farag E., Gao G.F., Hayman D.T.S., Khaitsa M., Koopmans M.P.G., Machalaba C., Mackenzie J.S., Markotter W., Mettenleiter T.C., Morand S., Smolenskiy V., Zhou L. (2022). One Health: A new definition for a sustainable and healthy future. PLoS pathogens, 18(6): e1010537.
  3. Balduzzi G., Favretto A.R. (2023). Giving Meaning to Action and Research: Notes on the ‘One Health’Approach from a Sociological Perspective. Development, 66(3): 226232.
  4. Behravesh C.B., Cunningham A.A., Spiegel J.M., Zinsstag J. (2024). An integrated inventory of One Health tools: Mapping and analysis of globally available tools to advance One Health. CABI One Health, 3(1).
  5. Bordier M., Goutard F.L., AntoineMoussiaux N., PhamDuc P., Lailler R., Binot
  6. A. (2021). Engaging stakeholders in the design of One Health surveillance systems: A participatory approach. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 8: 646458.
  7. Bourdieu P. (1993). Sociology in question. London: Sage Publications.
  8. Burini F. (2022). Cartographie et participation à l’épreuve du topos et de la chora.
  9. In: Debarbieux B., Hirt I., eds., Politiques de la carte. London: ISTE Ltd.
  10. Crampton J.W. (2010). Mapping: A critical introduction to cartography and GIS. Malden: WileyBlackwell.
  11. Davis A., Sharp J. (2020). Rethinking One Health: Emergent human, animal and environmental assemblages. Social Science & Medicine, 258: 113093.
  12. de Almeida A.W.B., Dourado S.B., Bertolini C. (2018). Defending traditional territories by mapping in the Amazon: Projeto Nova Cartografia Social da Amazônia. In: Kollektiv Orangotango, ed., This is not an atlas: A global collection of countercartographies. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.
  13. Delaporte Y. (1989). La neutralisation de l’apparence. Ethnologie française, 130139.
  14. Devulapalli H., Jonnalagadda I. (2018). A civic mapping project in an Indian megacity: The uses and challenges of spatial data for critical research. In: Kollektiv Orangotango, ed., This is not an atlas: A global collection of countercartographies. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.
  15. Foo K., Gallagher E., Bishop I., Kim A.M. (2015). Critical landscape visualization: Introduction to LAND SI “Critical Approaches to Landscape Visualization”. Landscape and Urban Planning, 142: 8084.
  16. Gautreau P., Noucher M. (2022). Farewell to maps: Reformulating critical cartography in the digital age. In: Debarbieux B., Hirt I., eds., The politics of mapping. London: ISTEWiley.
  17. Germes M., Klaus L., Höhne S., eds. (2023). Narcotic cities: Countercartographies of drugs and spaces. Berlin: JOVIS Verlag.
  18. Giddens A. (1999). Risk and Responsibility. Modern Law Review, 62: 110. DOI: 10.1111/14682230.0018
  19. Goodchild M.F. (2007). Citizens as sensors: The world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal, 69(4): 211221.
  20. Harley J.B. (1989). Deconstructing the map. Cartographica, 26(2): 120. DOI: 10.3138/E635782717579T5
  21. Holmes D., Marcus G.E. (2008), Collaboration today and the reimagination of the classic scene of fieldwork encounter. Collaborative Anthropologies, 1: 81110. DOI: 10.1353/CLA.0.000
  22. hooks b. (2010). Teaching critical thinking: Practical wisdom. New York, NY: Routledge.
  23. Keck F. (2015). Sentinel devices: managing uncertainty in species barrier zones. In: SamimianDarash L., Rabinow P., eds. (2015), Modes of uncertainty: Anthropological cases. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  24. Kennelly J. (2018), Troubling participatory action research: Institutional constraints, neoliberal individualism, and the limits of social change in participatory filmmaking with homeless youth. In: Gallagher K., ed., The Methodological Dilemma Revisited: Creative, Critical and Collaborative Approaches to Qualitative Research for a New Era. Oxon: Routledge.
  25. Kent A.J., Specht D. (2023). Geospatial technologies in archaeology. In: Kent A.J., Specht D., eds., The Routledge handbook of geospatial technologies and society. London: Routledge.
  26. Kim A.M. (2015). Critical cartography 2.0: From “participatory mapping” to authored visualizations of power and people. Landscape and Urban Planning, 142: 215225.
  27. kollektiv orangotango+, ed. (2018). This is not an atlas: A global collection of countercartographies. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.
  28. Luhmann N. (1993). Risk: A sociological theory. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter. Marcus G.E. (2000). Parasites: A Casebook against Cynical Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  29. Marsland R. (2012). (Bio)sociality and the production of public health in Tanzania. American Ethnologist, 39(2): 316331.
  30. Nguyen V.K. (2019). An Epidemic of Suspicion Ebola and Violence in the DRC. The New England journal of medicine, 380(14): 12981299.
  31. Peluso N.L. (1995). Whose woods are these? Countermapping forest territories in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Antipode, 27(4): 383406.
  32. Perkins C. (2007). Community mapping. The Cartographic Journal, 44(2): 127137. DOI: 10.1179/000870407X21344
  33. Rabinow P. (1995). What ensued was frustrating, certainly not uplifting, but ethnographically instructive. A large, leaderless bureaucracy lurched forward, desperately. In: Marcus G.E., ed., Technoscientific imaginaries: Conversations, profiles, and memoirs. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  34. Russo C. (2023). Fare ricerca partecipativa su benessere e salute nella società sindemica. In: Moretti V., Giarelli G., Genova A., eds., Personalizzazione della cura e partecipazione dei cittadini nella società digitale sindemica. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  35. SamimianDarash L., Rabinow P., eds. (2015). Modes of uncertainty: Anthropological cases. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  36. Sodikoff G.M. (2012). Forest and labor in Madagascar: From colonial concession to global biosphere. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
  37. Spivak G.C. (1988). “Can the Subaltern Speak?” In: Nelson C., Grossberg L., eds., Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. London: Macmillan.
  38. von Hedemann N., Butterworth M.K., Robbins P., Landau K., Morin C.W. (2015). Visualizations of mosquito risk: A political ecology approach to understanding the territorialization of hazard control. Landscape and Urban Planning, 142: 159169.

Concetta Russo, Sonia Bergamo, Participation as a political arena: plural knowledges and critical cartography in One Health approach in "SALUTE E SOCIETÀ" 2/2026, pp 123-133, DOI: 10.3280/SES2026-002012