An Integrated Epidemiological‐Economic Analysis of Foot and Mouth Disease: Applications to the Southern Cone of South America

Rich, Karl M.; Winter‐Nelson, Alex

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2007.01006.x

Cited by 79 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is useful to understand both optimal public (centralised) management in response to a disease outbreak (Mahul and Gohin 1999;Mahul and Durand 2000;Kobayashi et al 2007a,b;Rich and Winter-Nelson 2007), and the decentralised behavioural and disease responses to common policy initiatives (Hennessy 2005(Hennessy , 2007Hennessy et al 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Jointly determined livestock disease dynamics and decentralised economic behaviour

Gramig¹,

Horan²

2011

Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A dynamic model of livestock disease and decentralised economic behaviour is constructed as a jointly determined system. By accounting for feedbacks between behavioural choices and disease outcomes, the model captures the endogenous nature of infection risks. Government mandated testing of livestock herds and how private biosecurity incentives are affected by the structure of disease eradication polices are considered. How well disease control policies are targeted affects their effectiveness and may result in farmers substituting government testing and disease surveillance for private biosecurity. Numerical simulation results demonstrate that failing to account for feedbacks between the disease ecology and economic systems may overestimate the effectiveness of government disease control policies.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Jointly determined livestock disease dynamics and decentralised economic behaviour

Gramig¹,

Horan²

2011

Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An increase in f reduces the revenue received per unit fine, and this is the marginal social cost of an increase in f -the deadweight loss from taxation. These marginal benefits and costs are equalized in (16). The marginal effects of an increase in y on social welfare given in (17) can be similarly explained.…”

Section: The Case Of Endogenous Nmentioning

confidence: 93%

Free-Range Farming and the Optimal Public and Private Responses to a Possible Epidemic

Lahiri

Pitafi²

2009

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We develop an optimizing model of a farm that is subject to invasion by an infectious disease such as bird flu, where the probability of invasion depends on the degree of freeranging on the farm and post-invasion rate of spread on the farm depends on the farm size, the farmer's surveillance efforts, and the degree of free-ranging. We examine optimal policies for the farm and for the government, and analyze how these policies are affected by the degree of free-ranging. We find, inter alia, that when the farm size is endogenous fining an infected farm is superior as an instrument than providing it a rebate on costs, but when the farm size is exogenous the two instruments are equivalent. We also find that optimal surveillance effort, farm size, and fines are smaller for free-range farms when costs are sensitive to the degree of free-ranging.JEL Classification: Q12, Q18, I18, H32

show abstract

“…However, a similar result can occur if policy-makers in one region cannot eradicate a disease in another region, and thus prevent the re-entrance of disease from that region, e.g. Rich and Winter-Nelson (2007).…”

Section: Potential Impact Of Fmd In Californiamentioning

confidence: 99%

A Selective Review of the Economic Analysis of Animal Health Management

Jarvis¹,

Valdes–Donoso²

2015

J Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economists and veterinarians use similar approaches to analyse animal health threats, but veterinarians are concerned primarily with providing practical guidelines to peers and/or policy-makers, while economists focus more on understanding the benefits to society as a whole and often provide only general guidelines to policy-makers and little specific direction to practicing veterinarians. Despite the benefits of working together, differences in perspective and analytical approach often cause economists and veterinarians to struggle in dialogue and to lose some of the mutual gains that could be achieved through collaboration. This article discusses the use of economics in animal health management, identifies several useful literature reviews, and analyses a number of recent studies to explore the advantages and disadvantages of different conceptual and methodological approaches.

show abstract

An Integrated Epidemiological‐Economic Analysis of Foot and Mouth Disease: Applications to the Southern Cone of South America

Cited by 79 publications

References 14 publications

Jointly determined livestock disease dynamics and decentralised economic behaviour

Jointly determined livestock disease dynamics and decentralised economic behaviour

Free-Range Farming and the Optimal Public and Private Responses to a Possible Epidemic

A Selective Review of the Economic Analysis of Animal Health Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About