Economic impact assessment of rinderpest control in Africa.

The authors assess the economic impact of the Pan-African Rinderpest Campaign (PARC). The PARC programme commenced in 1986 with the objective to control and ultimately eradicate rinderpest from Africa. From among the thirty-five countries that participated in PARC, ten countries were selected for the analysis, based on data availability. The three following key socio-economic issues were addressed: cost-effectiveness, returns to investment and the welfare gains of the intervention. The standard cost-benefit approach based on a computer spreadsheet model was used to assess the economic impact of rinderpest control. Benefits of the intervention consisted of increased revenue due to avoided production losses. Estimates of the value of production losses were obtained under both 'with PARC' and 'without PARC' scenarios and the incremental benefits were derived as the difference between the two scenarios. In addition, an economic surplus model was used to assess the distribution of welfare effects generated by the intervention. Analysis of funding for the national campaigns showed roughly equal commitment to the programme by national governments and the principal donor, the European Union. Examination of the implementation costs in the ten countries indicated that with the exception of one country, PARC was implemented in a cost-effective manner with average costs appearing within a relatively narrow range. The figures obtained in ECU (European currency units) were between ECU0.27 and ECU0.60 per head of cattle vaccinated. The estimated average return from the ten countries (ECU1.8 for each ECU invested in the campaign) demonstrates that based on the sample of countries, rinderpest control in Africa has been economically profitable. In each of the ten countries, estimated benefits at least covered the value of the investment in PARC. The programme has provided a total net present value of ECU29 million for the ten countries, suggesting that the implementation of PARC has been a wise public investment decision. Analysis of the distribution of the welfare gains from PARC revealed that producers derived the greater share of the ECU58 million in net value of production losses avoided due to rinderpest control in the ten countries. Consumer gains accounted for approximately one-fifth of the total, due to lower prices from increased supplies.

An assessment of the economic impact of heartwater (Cowdria ruminantium infection) and its control in Zimbabwe.

Heartwater, caused by the rickettsial organism Cowdria ruminantium, is a serious constraint to livestock development in much of sub-Saharan Africa. Traditionally, the disease has been controlled by the use of chemical acaricides to control the vector tick. The University of Florida/USAID-supported heartwater research project (based in Zimbabwe) is developing a new inactivated vaccine to control the disease. In order that the vaccine is used effectively, the project has been studying the epidemiology of the disease in different livestock production systems of Zimbabwe, and evaluating the economic impact of the disease and of its future control using a vaccine such as the one under development. Initially, field studies were conducted to characterise the communal and commercial livestock-productions systems at risk from heartwater and to understand the epidemiology of the disease. The data from these studies were then applied to an infection-dynamics model of heartwater, which was used to provide estimates of disease incidence and impact under various scenarios over a period of 10 yr. Two principal outputs of the epidemiological model (cumulative annual heartwater incidence and infection-fatality proportion) were key inputs into an economics model. The estimated total annual national losses amount to Z$ 61.3 million (US$ 5.6 million) in discounted value terms over 10 yr. Annual economic losses per animal in the commercial production system (Z$ 56 discounted values) are 25 times greater than the losses in the communal system (Z$ 2.2). The greatest component of economic loss is acaricide cost (76%), followed by milk loss (18%) and treatment cost (5%). Losses in outputs other than milk (beef, traction and manure) appear to be minimal. A new vaccine has the promise of a benefit: cost ratio of about 2.4:1 in the communal and 7.6:1 in the commercial system. A control strategy based on a new vaccine would yield additional non-financial benefits to farmers and the government resulting from reductions in the use of chemical acaricides.

The control of heartwater on large-scale commercial and smallholder farms in Zimbabwe.

As part of a series of studies associated with the development of improved vaccines for heartwater (a tick-borne disease of ruminant livestock caused by Cowdria ruminantium), field surveys were carried out to assess losses associated with the disease and the costs associated with controlling it in the two main agro-ecological zones of Zimbabwe (lowveld and highveld) where heartwater is believed to be endemic and epidemic, respectively. In each zone, a cross-sectional study was performed in the main farming systems (smallholder (SH) and large-scale commercial (LSC) beef and dairy), followed by longitudinal studies in the same sectors to improve data accuracy for some parameters. Suspected heartwater-specific mortality in cattle was similar in all LSC sectors (p = 0.72) accounting for a median 1% mortality risk. Heartwater-specific mortality in SH areas was not assessed due to poor diagnostic ability of the farmers. Few LSC farms and SH households kept sheep; suspected heartwater-specific mortality in LSC sheep was 0.8% in the lowveld and 2.4% in the highveld. Goats were a major enterprise in SH areas but not on LSC farms. Suspected heartwater mortality in LSC goats was 0.8% at one site in the highveld and 17.5% on a farm in the lowveld. Application of acaricides was the major control method for heartwater and other tick-borne diseases on both SH and LSC farms. On LSC farms, plunge dipping was used most frequently and the number of acaricide applications ranged widely between 3 and 52 per year. The total cost of acaricides per head per annum was higher in highveld dairies than in highveld and lowveld beef enterprises (p = 0.03). In SH areas, cattle plunge dipping was conducted by the government with an average frequency of 8 +/- 2 (sd) immersions per annum in both the lowveld and highveld. The type of tick control on sheep and goats in all production systems was highly variable (ranging from none to hand removal or intensive acaricide treatment). Suspected heartwater cases on LSC farms were treated with tetracyclines; treatment was not reported in SH areas. Reported treatment costs were high (median Z$ 120) and highly variable (range Z$-833). Vaccination against heartwater with the live, blood-based vaccine was reported on only one LSC farm. LSC farms applying acaricide 30 or more times per year reported higher morbidity (p < 0.0001) and mortality (p < 0.0001) than farms applying acaricides less than 30 times a year. This finding supports the use of reduced tick control in the management of heartwater in Zimbabwe.

Financial analysis of dipping strategies for indigenous cattle under ranch conditions in Uganda.

A financial analysis was performed to assess the performance of three acaricide-treatment groups of indigenous breeds (Zebu and Nganda) of cattle on a ranch in Luwero District, Uganda. The treatments were based on different frequencies: twice-a-week dipping, once-a-month dipping and no tick control. The objective was to evaluate the economic justification for intensive acaricide application for tick and tick-borne disease control in Uganda. Data were collected by monitoring cattle performance over a period of 34 months. Biological data collected included the number of cows at the beginning and end of the study, net starting liveweight, number of calves born, number of animals dying due to tick-borne diseases and other causes, number of animals sold or slaughtered and milk yield. Records of variable costs (acaricides, drugs, labour, etc.) and output prices were assembled and calculated by treatment group. Gross margin and marginal analysis were used in the financial analysis. The exchange rate in 1990-1993 was one US$ to 1200 Uganda shillings. The gross benefits obtained from animal sales, herd value and milk yield were Uganda shillings 1175, 1389 and 1311 per kg of net starting liveweight for animals dipped twice-a-week, once-a-month and not dipped, respectively. The variable costs were Ug. shs. 424, 390 and 360 per kg of net starting liveweight, respectively. Consequently, the gross margins were Ug. shs. 751, 999 and 951 per kg of net starting liveweight. Furthermore, the marginal rate of return (MRR) in changing from no tick control to once-a-month dipping was 160%, while changing from no tick control to twice-a-week dipping was negative (-313%). The above results showed that the value of increased gains in production obtained from twice-a-week dipping strategy does not offset the costs of inputs for intensive dipping. Once-a-month dipping (strategic) therefore appears to be the most-profitable tick-control strategy for the farmer. The need to conduct further studies in different livestock- production systems and to rationalise future tick control policies is discussed.

Assessing the economic impact of immunisation against East Coast fever: a case study in coast province, Kenya.

The cost of immunising cattle against East Coast fever by the infection and treatment method has been calculated for a pilot scheme in Kaloleni Division of the Coast Province of Kenya by using a spreadsheet model. The cost was calculated to be KSh 544 (US$25) per animal (in 1990 values). If a farmer were to bear all this cost, immunisation would be financially profitable in grade cattle, but the benefits of immunisation would not be sufficient to justify the immunisation of zebu cattle. For these animals, the cost of immunisation would have to be in the range of KSh 230 to KSh 415 per animal, or the farm-gate price of milk would have to increase by at least 80 per cent from KSh 7.50 to 13.50/litre, or the government would have to subsidise the cost either partially or fully. The first two possibilities are realistic, because the costs of routine immunisation are likely to be lower than for the pilot scheme, and because the increasing demand for milk is likely to push up prices in the liberalised markets. If both the grade and zebu cattle in Kaloleni Division were targets for immunisation, it is estimated that there would be 14,500 head for immunisation annually, costing an estimated KSh 8 million. The spreadsheet model used to assess the economics of immunisation in the Kaloleni Division could be applied to determine the government or private veterinary service charges for immunisation that would be financially profitable to farmers in a defined cattle production system in any division, district or country. The model could also be used to estimate the annual total number of cattle for immunisation in a target cattle production system and thus help with the financial planning for the exercise.

Financial analysis of East Coast fever control strategies on beef production under farm conditions.

This study provides a financial analysis of an East Coast fever immunisation trial conducted on a farm in the Coast Province of Kenya. The objective of the trial was to assess the effects of immunisation by the infection and treatment method, under different acaricidal treatments, on the productivity of beef cattle. Eighty beef cattle were immunised and an equal number acted as controls. The immunised and unimmunised groups were divided into four subgroups of 20 animals. Two subgroups, one from the immunised and one from the unimmunised group, were sprayed with acaricide twice a week; a second pair of subgroups was sprayed once every three weeks; a third pair had prolonged release acaricide-impregnated ear-tags inserted into each ear; and a fourth pair had no tick control treatment. Financial analysis revealed that the immunised subgroups were more profitable, owing to lower mortality and higher weight gains than the unimmunised subgroups. Of the immunised subgroups, the best was that sprayed with acaricide twice a week; it yielded a marginal rate of return of 244 per cent and maximised financial benefits to the farmer in this trial. However, further trials under different production circumstances would be required before the method could be recommended for widespread adoption.