Market impact of Foot-and-Mouth Disease control strategies: a UK case study

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorFeng, Siyi
dc.contributor.authorPatton, Myles
dc.contributor.authorDavis, John
dc.date.accessioned2021-07-26T14:18:11Z
dc.date.available2021-07-26T14:18:11Z
dc.date.issued2017-09-01
dc.descriptionPublication history: Accepted - 26 July 2017; Published - 01 September 2017.en_US
dc.description.abstractFoot-and-mouth disease (FMD) poses a serious threat to the agricultural sector due to its highly contagious nature. Outbreaks of FMD can lead to substantial disruptions to livestock markets due to loss of production and access to international markets. In a previously FMD-free country, the use of vaccination to augment control of an FMD outbreak is increasingly being recognized as an alternative control strategy to direct slaughtering [stamping-out (SO)]. The choice of control strategy has implications on production, trade, and hence prices of the sector. Specific choice of eradication strategies depends on their costs and benefits. Economic impact assessments are often based on benefit–cost framework, which provide detailed information on the changes in profit for a farm or budget implications for a government (1). However, this framework cannot capture price effects caused by changes in production due to culling of animals; access to international markets; and consumers’ reaction. These three impacts combine to affect equilibrium within commodity markets (2). This paper provides assessment of sectoral level impacts of the eradication choices of FMD outbreaks, which are typically not available from benefit–cost framework, in the context of the UK. The FAPRI-UK model, a partial equilibrium model of the agricultural sector, is utilized to investigate market outcomes of different control strategies (namely SO and vaccinate-to-die) in the case of FMD outbreaks. The outputs from the simulations of the EXODIS epidemiological model (number of animals culled/vaccinated and duration of outbreak) are used as inputs within the economic model to capture the overall price impact of the animal destruction, export ban, and consumers’ response.en_US
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12518/326
dc.identifier.citationFeng, S., Patton, M. and Davis, J. (2017) ‘Market Impact of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Control Strategies: A UK Case Study’, Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 4. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2017.00129.en_US
dc.identifier.issn2297-1769 (electronic)
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2017.00129
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherFrontiers Mediaen_US
dc.rightsCopyright © 2017 Feng, Patton and Davis. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.en_US
dc.subjectfoot-and-mouth diseaseen_US
dc.subjectpartial equilibrium modelen_US
dc.subjectdisease control strategyen_US
dc.subjectmarket impacten_US
dc.subjecteconomicsen_US
dc.titleMarket impact of Foot-and-Mouth Disease control strategies: a UK case studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Market impact of Foot-and-Mouth Disease control strategies-a UK case study.pdf
Size:
649.9 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Final published version
Download

Collections

Journal Articles