A study of the commercial growing of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) cotton in India, compares the performance of over 9,000 Bt and non-Bt cotton farm plots in Maharashtra over the 2002 and 2003 seasons. Results show that since their commercial release in 2002, Bt cotton varieties have had a significant positive impact on average yields and on the economic performance of cotton growers. Regional variation showed that, in a very few areas, not all farmers had benefited from increased performance of Bt varieties.
This Note outlines the further development of a system of models for the estimation of the costs of livestock diseases first presented by Bennett (2003). The models have been developed to provide updated and improved estimates of the costs associated with 34 endemic diseases of livestock in Great Britain, using border prices and including assessments of the impact of diseases on human health and animal welfare. Results show that, of the diseases studied, mastitis has the highest costs for cattle diseases, enzootic abortion for sheep diseases, swine influenza for pig diseases and salmonellosis for poultry diseases.
The ‘direct costs’attributable to 30 different endemic diseases of farm animals in Great Britain are estimated using a standardised method to construct a simple model for each disease that includes consideration of disease prevention and treatment costs. The models so far developed provide a basis for further analyses including cost‐benefit analyses for the economic assessment of disease control options. The approach used reflects the inherent livestock disease information constraints, which limit the application of other economic analytical methods. It is a practical and transparent approach that is relatively easily communicated to veterinary scientists and policy makers. The next step is to develop the approach by incorporating wider economic considerations into the analyses in a way that will demonstrate to policy makers and others the importance of an economic perspective to livestock disease issues.
Development policies in the pastoral areas of Africa assume that pastoralists are poor. Using the Afar pastoralists of Ethiopia as the focus of research this article challenges this depiction of pastoralism by exploring pastoral livelihood goals and traditional strategies for managing risk. Investment in social institutions to minimise the risk of outright destitution, sometimes at the cost of increased poverty, and significant manipulation of local markets enable the Afar to exploit a highly uncertain and marginal environment. Improved development assistance and enhanced targeting of the truly vulnerable within pastoral societies demands an acceptance that pastoral poverty is neither uniform nor universal.
Policy makers in the European Union are envisioning the introduction of a community farm animal welfare label which would allow consumers to align their consumption habits with their farm animal welfare preferences. For welfare labelling to be viable the market for livestock products produced to higher welfare standards has to be sufficiently segmented with consumers having sufficiently distinct and behaviourally consistent preferences. The present study investigates consumers' preferences for meat produced to different welfare standards using a hypothetical welfare score. Data is obtained from a contingent valuation study carried out in Britain. The ordered probit model was estimated using Bayesian inference to obtain mean willingness to pay. We find decreasing marginal WTP as animal welfare levels increase and that people's preferences for different levels of farm animal welfare are sufficiently differentiated making the introduction of a labelling scheme in the form of a certified rating system appear feasible.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.