The main objective of H4DC was to reduce the sanitary and economic impact of Cryptosporidium. The project tackled a twofold approach. Firstly, their aim was to halve the number of contaminated calves in terms of prevention and consequently, in terms of economic impact. In that respect, pilot farms were to be disseminated across the 2 Seas area. Those farms were to be operational demonstrators to proof and transfer best practices and usage of a detection kit within the animal production sector. Positive results from those changes were be controlled and quantified via epidemiologic and economic studies. Secondly, they wished to accelerate the discovery of new anti-Cryptosporidium pharmaceuticals. The partnership was to propose an innovative electronic device for analysing faster potential effects of various compounds tested.
Additionally, a market exploration on the analytical tools and technology was to be conducted. This transfer strategy was focused on biotechnology and pharmaceutical corporations. Partners aimed to involve farmers throughout the process in order to co-develop pilot farms. Those farms were planned to apply new husbandry practices and test new detection kits. Being able to assess the true impact of the proposed technical practices’ changes allow partners to remain relevant in terms of the specific requirements of the 2 Seas area.

The problem of outbreaks in farms, such as those related to the Cryptosporidium parasites, could not be contained within national borders.
This was increasingly obvious with the growing trade between the various Member States, and it is increasingly important to evaluate the scale of Cryptosporidium outbreaks across a wide geographical area. Similarly, as farming practices vary in countries studied, it was vital to cross-reference the observations made within the various Member States in order to propose properly adapted zootechnical modifications for all production models. The study's restriction to the 2 Seas area guaranteed that the factors which differentiate the various farms were solely the breeding practices rather than, for example, differences in climate. The geographical proximity of the breeders included in this project was also of operational benefit when partners co-developed new farming strategies. Moreover, the number of farms and the diversity of farming practices would not have been so important if they had focused the project only in one country. In addition, in order to sustain the results over time, they had to be able to provide zootechnical innovations, which could be adapted in each country. As such, the project needed to combine the expertise of partners (Belgian, Dutch and French) concerning current breeding and farming methods, in each region, to propose infectious risk management procedures, which work in the context of their individual constraints. A collaboration between partners was continuous for all technological work packages. The development of a tool to accelerate the screening of new therapeutic molecules required the pooling of cross-border expertise. For example, the development of a drug screening device required both the Cryptosporidium culture expertise of the partners in England and the microelectronics expertise of the partners in
France.