A financial cost-benefit analysis of eradicating virulent footrot

被引:4
|
作者
Asheim, Leif Jarle [1 ]
Hopp, Petter [2 ]
Groneng, Gry M. [2 ,4 ]
Nafstad, Ola [3 ]
Hegrenes, Agnar [1 ]
Vatn, Synnove [3 ]
机构
[1] Norwegian Inst Bioecon Res, POB 115, NO-1431 As, Norway
[2] Norwegian Vet Inst, POB 750 Sentrum, NO-0106 Oslo, Norway
[3] Norwegian Meat & Poultry Res Ctr, Animalia, POB 396 Okern, NO-0513 Oslo, Norway
[4] Norwegian Inst Publ Hlth, POB 4404, NO-0403 Oslo, Norway
关键词
Dichelobacter nodosus; Economy; Footrot; Net present value; Norway; Sheep; DICHELOBACTER-NODOSUS; OVINE FOOTROT; SHEEP; ELIMINATION; PREVALENCE; WELFARE; PAIN;
D O I
10.1016/j.prevetmed.2017.07.017
中图分类号
S85 [动物医学(兽医学)];
学科分类号
0906 ;
摘要
In 2008, virulent footrot was detected in sheep in south-west Norway. Footrot is caused by Dichelobacter nodosus, and the outbreak was linked to live sheep imported from Denmark in 2005. A large-scale program for eradicating the disease was implemented as a joint industry and governmental driven eradication project in the years 2008-2014, and continued with surveillance and control measures by the Norwegian Food Safety Authority from 2015. The cost of the eradication program including surveillance and control measures until 2032 was assumed to reach approximately (sic)10.8 million (NOR 90 million). A financial cost-benefit analysis, comparing costs in the eradication program with costs in two simulated scenarios, was carried out. In the scenarios, designated ModerateSpread (baseline) and SlowSpread, it was assumed that the sheep farmers would undertake some voluntary measures on their own that would slow the spread of the disease. The program obtained a positive NPV after approximately 12 years. In a stochastic analysis, the probabilities of a positive NPV were estimated to 1.000 and to 0.648 after 15 years and to 0.378 and 0.016 after ten years, for the ModerateSpread and SlowSpread scenarios respectively. A rapid start-up of the program soon after the detection of the disease was considered crucial for the economic success as the disease would have become more widespread and probably raised the costs considerably at a later start-up.
引用
收藏
页码:86 / 93
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Enhanced possibilities for eradicating virulent footrot
    Vatn, Synnove
    VETERINARY JOURNAL, 2016, 217 : 1 - 2
  • [2] Cost-benefit analysis of management practices for ewes lame with footrot
    Winter, Joanne R.
    Green, Laura E.
    VETERINARY JOURNAL, 2017, 220 : 1 - 6
  • [3] Challenges for Cost-Benefit Analysis of Financial Regulation
    Cochrane, John H.
    JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES, 2014, 43 : S63 - S105
  • [4] The Futility of Cost-Benefit Analysis in Financial Disclosure Regulation
    Ben-Shahar, Omri
    Schneider, Carl E.
    JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES, 2014, 43 : S253 - S271
  • [5] Cost-Benefit Analysis of Financial Regulation An Institutional Perspective
    Revesz, Richard L.
    ADMINISTRATIVE LAW FROM THE INSIDE OUT: ESSAYS ON THEMES IN THE WORK OF JERRY L. MASHAW, 2017, : 212 - 235
  • [6] INTEGRATION OF COST-BENEFIT AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS IN PROJECT EVALUATION
    HARLOW, KC
    WINDSOR, D
    PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW, 1988, 48 (05) : 918 - 928
  • [7] Cost-Benefit Associations and Financial Behavior
    Kamleitner, Bernadette
    Hoelzl, Erik
    APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY-AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW-PSYCHOLOGIE APPLIQUEE-REVUE INTERNATIONALE, 2009, 58 (03): : 435 - 452
  • [8] Cost-Benefit Analysis of Financial Regulation: Case Studies and Implications
    Coates, John C.
    YALE LAW JOURNAL, 2015, 124 (04): : 882 - 1011
  • [9] The Norwegian Healthier Goats programme - A financial cost-benefit analysis
    Nagel-Alne, G. Elise
    Asheim, Leif J.
    Hardaker, J. Brian
    Solverod, Liv
    Lindheim, Dag
    Valle, Paul S.
    PREVENTIVE VETERINARY MEDICINE, 2014, 114 (02) : 96 - 105
  • [10] Cost-benefit analysis
    Miura, Grant
    NATURE CHEMICAL BIOLOGY, 2018, 14 (10) : 903 - 903