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 The macro-economic impact will be considerably more severe when the indirect effects of an epidemic on trade, tourism and services are added to the direct effects on the livestock sector as such, given that these sectors make a relatively large contribution to the national GDP in most economies. If potential (and extremely difficult to estimate) human pandemic costs are added, and when dynamic multiplier effects are considered (i.e. the domino effects that the decline in one sector in one country may have on all areas of economic activity and on other countries, including as remote sectors as the stock markets 83 ) the global impact on the economy may be comparable to a severe recession 84 . Table 6 Overall impact of animal disease outbreaks: selected examples Country Asia Asia Thailand Vietnam (a) Thailand Indonesia Nigeria (a) Impact The total losses in GDP accruing from the damaged poultry sector in Asia amounted to US$10 billion. (This is calculated on the basis of over 150 million poultry destroyed as the result of the 2003 and 2004 Asian HPAI outbreaks. It includes direct and indirect economic impact and trade losses for the region as a whole). (A40) According to Oxford Economic Forecasting the total GDP losses accruing from HPAI in 2004 are estimated at US$ 10–15 billion for Asia, of which US$ 1.2 billion are accounted for by losses in Thailand, and US$ 0.3 billion in Vietnam. These estimates are based on an assumed quarter-year loss of income for poultry farms, and include Asia-wide multiplier effects from the farm losses. The scaling up of health-risk impacts, e.g. from AI in birds to a more generalised problem for livestock and a drop in tourism, could create annual economic losses of as much as US$ 50–60 billion, even if human cases of disease were to remain limited. Escalation of the latter would have yet more serious implications. Significant trade losses for a country that used to be the world’s fifth largest poultry exporter before the HPAI outbreak, the cost of animal disease surveillance and control, and livelihood losses to poultry keeping households are estimated to have resulted in 1.5% national GDP loss (A76). In April 2005, the Thai PM stated that avian flu had cost his country some US$1.1 billion. In Indonesia, the value of birds lost as such to HPAI is estimated at US$16-32 million, the total direct loss to the broiler and layer breeders and producers at US$ 171 million and, when indirect losses are added, the total loss goes up to US$ 387 million or a factor of two. (Data source: Indonesian Poultry Information Centre). These estimates do not account for the loss incurred by village/ backyard farmers, estimated at 30 million households keeping 200 million chickens. (A76, A91) On the whole, the total economic cost due to the HPAI crisis including direct and indirect losses is 83 See for example IMF analysis on the global impact of avian flu on financial markets (A77). 84 See for example, the estimated macro-economic effects on the Australian economy, based on the Treasury macro econometric model (TRYM). The model incorporates 6 steps and accumulates the impact in each step (in order: global demand shocks, deaths, labour market, effects on consumption, business climate and investment). When all steps are added, the total effect to the economy is a 5% fall of the GDP. This is about half the level of the recession in the Australian economy caused by the Great Depression. As discussed elsewhere, these results should be treated with caution as they are very dependent on the underlying assumptions and scenarios. (A179) Civic Consulting • Agra CEAS Consulting 68
Prevention and control of animal diseases worldwide Part I: Economic analysis: prevention versus outbreak costs Country Impact estimated by the UNDP Nigeria at about N1 billion (US$7.9 million). (A293) UK In Britain, as a result of the 2001 FMD epidemic, four million susceptible animals on 10,157 premises were slaughtered (of which only 2,026 premises were actually declared infected) and a further 2.5 million animals were slaughtered for reasons of welfare, such as overcrowding and compromised nutrition; when the total number of still-suckling lambs, calves and pigs that were slaughtered is included, the total could be as high as ten million. The financial cost of the FMD epidemic, based on the slaughter of the four million susceptible animals only, was estimated at over £5.8-6.3 billion (depending on the assumption made for the spill-over impact). This includes £3.1 billion losses for the agriculture and food chain and £2.7-3.2 billion in losses sustained by the leisure and tourist industry. The social cost – evidenced in the loss of public confidence by the many newspaper reports and submissions to the various inquiries conducted after the epidemic – can not be quantified. Despite the magnitude of the losses, in relative terms, the effect of the outbreak was estimated to be less than 0.2% of the national GDP for 2001, which appears to be modest in comparison to normal economic fluctuations. (A228, A166). Italy Ireland NL Canada (a) In 1999–2000, the outbreak of H7N1 HPAI in Italy resulted in US$122 million in compensation for destroyed birds, and it was estimated that indirect costs exceeded US$400 million, bringing the total cost to over US$512 million. (A144) The 2001 FMD outbreak in Ireland cost around US$ 5 billion in the space of 4 months, with indirect costs representing more than 95% of the total cost. (A253) A model applied to the 1997/1998 CSF outbreak in the Netherlands (in which over ten million pigs were slaughtered), estimates the total financial consequences of the outbreak at US $2.3 billion. Consequential losses for farmers are US $423 million (18% of the total) and losses for related industries are US $596 million (26% of the total). Budgetary consequences for the government include less than 50% of the total losses calculated by the model. (A143) In a 2002 study of the economic impact of a potential outbreak of FMD in Canada, the total Net Economic Impact (NEI) was found to vary from a low of $13.7 billion, assuming optimistic conditions under a small-scale outbreak, to $45.9 billion for a large-scale outbreak. Impacts associated with the large-scale outbreak included: trade loss of approximately $19.6 billion (or 5% of Canada’s total export sales from all sectors in 2001); $26.4 billion cost to the industry, representing 80% of the 2001 Canadian primary agriculture sectors’ market cash receipts; significant loss in the tourism and other non agricultural sectors of the economy ($6-$7 billion), an amount exceeding the direct costs of the outbreak to the primary sector. (A112) More extensive information on these countries can be found in the case studies Source: compiled by Agra CEAS Consulting Civic Consulting • Agra CEAS Consulting 69
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 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32: Prevention and control of animal di
Page 81: Prevention and control of animal di
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?