2294 part 1 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Prevention and control of animal diseases worldwide Part I: Economic analysis: prevention versus outbreak costs is classified as a de facto public good on both grounds; the broad objectives of economic stability and growth and development potential are also listed under the same heading (A35c). Furthermore, the publicness of the response is an important factor for classifying a public good (A35a). This concept has been applied in the case of communicable diseases (A35c, A35d 15 ). Actions to address international health challenges are seen as efforts to enhance the publicness of responses. Indeed, looking at international cooperation on public health since the 1950s, it can be concluded that problems tend to persist when the publicness of the response is limited (A35d). Given the transboundary nature of some of the most challenging animal diseases, the OIE, along with key donor organisations including the World Bank (WB) and other international/national donors 16 , have advocated that the objectives which the core functions of Veterinary Services seek to achieve are a “Global Public Good’’ 17 . The control and eradication of communicable diseases is classified as a global public good on the grounds that, with increasing globalisation and cross-border economic activity resulting in the increase in global systemic risks, this good has become indivisible across borders or transnational (A35, A39, A59, A35d, A94). Some of the other objectives sought by improvements in animal health in developing/transition countries, notably poverty alleviation and promoting food security, are also classified under the same heading. The main argument followed by the literature is that, given that they are serving Global Public Goods, the available key prevention and control tools to respond to global animal diseases (good governance of Veterinary Services, animal health legislation and policies, disease information, the implementation of international standards, research and development) should be provided and funded in all countries. For reasons of negative externality 18 , a special effort should be made by the international community to boost the capacities of developing countries and countries in transition. This takes into account both the interdependence of countries in combating global diseases and the disparities that exist in the capacities, 15 Three inputs are considered crucial for controlling disease: available and accessible medical knowledge, a national public health infrastructure, and private spending on complementary goods and services (A35d). 16 See for example, UK Joint Industry position (DEFRA, A22). 17 Global public goods are public goods whose benefits extend to all countries, people and generations. A less strict but more meaningful definition would be when the good benefits more than one group of countries and does not discriminate against any population group or generation (A35). This definition is applicable in the case of some regional communicable diseases such as AI, i.e. in cases where a worldwide epidemic may occur actions to monitor and isolate a regional outbreak clearly constitute global public goods (A39, A59, A94). Even in the case of regional non-communicable diseases, inadequate healthcare responses in any region can have global spill-overs (A59, A35d). Moreover, the public goods associated with communicable diseases provide intergenerational spill-overs of benefits. Once a disease is cured or a virus is isolated, benefits are conferred on the present and future generations (A59). 18 An externality exists where an action – or inaction – by an individual or country imposes a cost (negative externality) or creates a benefit (positive externality) for others, without this being taken into consideration by the individual or country responsible). This argument has often been used in the case of infectious diseases (e.g. A22, A68). Civic Consulting • Agra CEAS Consulting 24
Prevention and control of animal diseases worldwide Part I: Economic analysis: prevention versus outbreak costs or willingness, of countries to participate in combating them. This logical framework has been followed inter alia by the WB in its international activities in this area 19 . A global framework for the progressive control of transboundary animal diseases (GF-TADs) was developed by the OIE and the FAO in May 2004, to serve as a facilitating mechanism to provide for capacity building and to assist in establishing programmes for the specific control of certain TADs based on regional priorities (A41). One of the OIE’s main objectives, in its Fourth Strategic Plan, is to strengthen the capacity building of the national Veterinary Services, encouraging the improvement of legislation and resources, in order to assist member countries to comply with the (OIE) international standards and guidelines for animal health (including zoonoses) and for safe international trade in animals and animal products. The necessity to strengthen Veterinary Services was also been reaffirmed at the G8 Summit held in St. Petersburg on July 16, 2006 20 . In recent years, the need to ensure a greater transparency and preparedness to deal with emerging and reemerging diseases, in accordance with the rules and obligations of the WTO SPS Agreement provisions, has been a primary driver in the reorganisation of the role of VS in the developing world 21 . This has involved, at the top level, the clearer delineation of responsibilities between those parts of government concerned with public health and consumer protection and those dealing with the economic issues of meat production and trade. At a lower level, it has necessitated improved surveillance mechanisms, enhanced research and a better prioritisation in the use of the available resources. Recommendations to this effect have been made by the OIE (Table 1). However, it is recognised that developing countries may lack the necessary financial and human resources to implement these recommendations and this being a global public good, international organisations and donors need to step in to help promote the required reforms (A139, A134). Thus a global good governance programme for the improvement of VS in developing countries involving cooperation of the main international organisations and donors (A57) has been set. The programme centres on the concepts of improved transparency, early detection and rapid response to animal disease outbreaks. Early detection of animal diseases in particular relies on good cooperation between the main actors involved in the system: livestock owners, private veterinarians and animal health services, the public veterinary administration, and the wider food chain 22 . This systemic approach is inherent in the definition of the VS according to the OIE Terrestrial Code 3 . The effective collaboration of these private and public components is in fact a key criterion in evaluating a country’s VS using the OIE PVS instrument (A79). In 19 For example the WB Development Grant Facility (DGF). The DGF was established in 1997 to integrate the overall strategy, allocations, and management of Bank grant-making activities funded from the Administrative Budget under a single umbrella mechanism. 20 http://en.g8russia.ru/docs/10.html: Conclusion 13. in “Fight against infectious diseases” 21 It is noted that, under the WTO SPS, developing countries were given a longer deadline, to the vear 2000, to conform to the Agreement. 22 Further discussion on the respective contribution of the different sectors can be found in section 3.5. For a more extended reading on this see, for example, A57, A66 and A82. Civic Consulting • Agra CEAS Consulting 25
Page 1 and 2: The World Organisation for Animal H
Page 3 and 4: Expert Team Agra CEAS Consulting: M
Page 5 and 6: Prevention and control of animal di
Page 37: Prevention and control of animal di
Page 89 and 90:
Prevention and control of animal di
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Annexes Prevention and control of a
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Country Title Date Programme durati
Page 225 and 226:
Country Title Date Programme durati
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251:
show all

2294 part 1 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?