A financial cost-benefit analysis of eradicating virulent footrot

• Published in: Preventive veterinary medicine Vol. 146; pp. 86 - 93
• Main Authors: Asheim, Leif Jarle, Hopp, Petter, Grøneng, Gry M., Nafstad, Ola, Hegrenes, Agnar, Vatn, Synnøve
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands Elsevier B.V 01-10-2017
• Subjects: Animals; Communicable Disease Control - economics; Communicable Disease Control - methods; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Denmark; Dichelobacter nodosus; Dichelobacter nodosus - isolation & purification; Disease Outbreaks - economics; Disease Outbreaks - prevention & control; Economy; Foot Rot - economics; Foot Rot - prevention & control; Foot Rot - transmission; Footrot; Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections - economics; Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections - prevention & control; Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections - transmission; Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections - veterinary; Insurance - economics; Models, Econometric; Net present value; Norway; Sentinel Surveillance - veterinary; Sheep; Sheep Diseases - economics; Sheep Diseases - prevention & control; Sheep Diseases - transmission; Stochastic Processes; Dichelobacter nodosus; Footrot; Sheep; Economy; Net present value; Norway
• ISSN: 0167-5877; 1873-1716
• DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2017.07.017

In 2008, virulent footrot was detected in sheep in south-west Norway. Footrot is caused by Dichelobacter nodosus, and the outbreak was linked to live sheep imported from Denmark in 2005. A large-scale program for eradicating the disease was implemented as a joint industry and governmental driven eradication project in the years 2008–2014, and continued with surveillance and control measures by the Norwegian Food Safety Authority from 2015. The cost of the eradication program including surveillance and control measures until 2032 was assumed to reach approximately €10.8 million (NOK 90 million). A financial cost-benefit analysis, comparing costs in the eradication program with costs in two simulated scenarios, was carried out. In the scenarios, designated ModerateSpread (baseline) and SlowSpread, it was assumed that the sheep farmers would undertake some voluntary measures on their own that would slow the spread of the disease. The program obtained a positive NPV after approximately 12 years. In a stochastic analysis, the probabilities of a positive NPV were estimated to 1.000 and to 0.648 after 15 years and to 0.378 and 0.016 after ten years, for the ModerateSpread and SlowSpread scenarios respectively. A rapid start-up of the program soon after the detection of the disease was considered crucial for the economic success as the disease would have become more widespread and probably raised the costs considerably at a later start-up.