170 likes | 304 Vues
Financial-economic considerations of decision making on control and prevention of BVD in the EU . Helmut W. Saatkamp and George J. Gunn. Business Economics Chair, Wageningen University, The Netherlands; Epidemiology Unit, Scottish Agricultural College, United Kingdom. Contents of talk.
E N D
Financial-economic considerations of decision making on control and prevention of BVD in the EU Helmut W. Saatkamp and George J. Gunn. Business Economics Chair, Wageningen University, The Netherlands; Epidemiology Unit, Scottish Agricultural College, United Kingdom
Contents of talk Problem definition Aim of the presentation Qualitative comparison of two BVDV situations Discussion and conclusions
Problem definition BVD: can cause severe clinical disease (variation) large variety in occurrence between European countries differences in control approaches: (semi-)mandatory nation wide or regional voluntary farm-based
Problem definition Important question currently discussed: What shall we do with BVDV control and prevention??
Options: continuation current situation: every country/farmer decides in its/his own interest ‘upwards harmonization’: (stimulation) of aiming at freedom of BVDV within large(r) areas, e.g. the EU voluntary approaches: information, extension, persuasion, … mandatory approaches: OIE List-B status Problem definition
Problem definition Official / List B-status of BVDV to an area/country: change the decision problem: farmer >> sector (collective farmers) / country impact of losing free-status after re-introduction? financial-economic impact of re-introduction can increase: production-efficiency effects for affected producers trade effects of non-affected producers others
In short: changing the current status of BVD will affect the financial-economic impact of the disease: production disease effects also trade effects (depending on measures) or: individual farmers’ problem / production disease collective farmers’ problem / (risk of) trade disease Problem definition
Aim and method Aim: to provide food for thought when considering changing the current BVDV-situation into OIE List-B status Method: to present a way of reasoning by qualitative comparison of impact BVDV in (1) current situation and (2) OIE List-B situation
Qualitative comparison BVDV situations considered
Qualitative comparison Question: what will/can be the impact of a new case of BVD in the respective normal situations at various economic levels? affected individual producers non-affected individual producers within the area national cattle sector / collective producers agri-industry consumers national economy
Qualitative comparison Financial-economic impact of occurrence of BVDV
Discussion and conclusions Which factors should be assessed when considering changing the status of BVDV at EU level? Benefits of eradication: increase in production efficiency decrease in production costs for primary producers impact on total producers’ supply? quota system: most likely not liberal market: likely >> impact on consumer prices / surplus >> financial economic benefits for primary producers?
Discussion and conclusions Trade-economic consequences of BVDV as OIE List-B disease in case of re-occurrence: which products are affected? which areas will be affected? reactions of trade partners net-importing versus net-exporting countries
Discussion and conclusions Re-occurrence of BVDV in List-B situation: epidemiological risks country/region dependent situation in ‘contact’ countries control strategy: direct costs indirect losses (trade consequences of losing status)
Discussion and conclusions Should eradication of BVDV be given a high priority? Farmers’ perspective / preferences: farm-economic: resource competition animal health and welfare Society perspective: socio-ethical criteria (citizen) economic criteria (consumer) government involvement?
Conclusion Freedom of BVDV seems to be possible. Current situation: (Groups of) farmers are primarily affected by costs and benefits Raising the problem to (supra-)national level (e.g. List-B): the financial-economic implications: could be considerable varying per country and stakeholder should be considered thoroughly before taking such a decision