On December 30, GSL Research Fellow Prativa Baral published an article in the Canadian Journal of Law and Society/La Revue Canadienne Droit et Société. The article titled "Leçons tirées de dix pays sur la réglementation des antimicrobiens pour les animaux d’élevage" was co-authored by GSL Director Steven Hoffman and Marie Evelyne Danik and compares the approaches of regulating antimicrobial resistance in agriculture in ten different countries1.
The research team studied the three main entry points where antibiotics are introduced into the agricultural process (veterinary medicine, agricultural production, and the sale of agricultural products) and found that regulations are very dependent on the context they are made in. For example, measures that strictly regulate veterinary drugs requiring a prescription is of little use in a country where there is a shortage of veterinarians. Or if in another example antibiotics are used to overcome food shortages in a region, regulations could create non-AMR public health crises.
Baral, Danik and Hoffman acknowledge, however, that inaction would lead to even more significant challenges. Decision-makers therefore have the difficult task of identifying measures appropriate to their respective contexts, taking into account available resources, existing infrastructure and the interests which govern the relevant industries, in order to ensure their participation.
The full article can be read here. The same research team has previously collaborated on a book chapter discussing a similar subject matter for Catherine Régis, Lara Khoury, and Robert P. Kouri's "Health Law at the Frontier", available here.
1 France, Denmark, Australia, Canada, the United States, Russia, Japan, Brazil, China and India