Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Avian Dis ; 54(1 Suppl): 390-3, 2010 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20521667

ABSTRACT

This research assessed the direct economic effects of the 2005-06 HPAI outbreaks on contracted turkey producers in Turkey in 2007. The data were obtained from 71 randomly selected, contracted turkey farms (producing 23% of the national turkey meat in Turkey in 2005) from five provinces for four integrated firms, which account for 67% of the national turkey production. Each farm was visited once for an oral interview conducted by the authors in 2007, using a questionnaire survey. The financial data before and after highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 outbreak periods were obtained from available financial records. Changes in production and economics parameters before and after the HPAI H5N1 outbreak periods were compared. In the analyses, the "before the HPAI H5N1 outbreak" period was stated as October 1, 2004, to May 31, 2005, whereas the "after the HPAI H5N1 outbreak" period was stated as the 8-mo between October 1, 2005, and May 31, 2006. The research revealed that changes in the technical parameters (number of hired labor, feed conversion rate, mortality rate, and the length of fattening period) were not found to be statistically significant at P > 0.05. However, there were severe effects of the HPAI H5N1 outbreaks on the economic parameters of the turkey production. The contracted turkey producers lost on average 0.9 cycles (38%) of production, and their management fees were reduced by 9.3% in the 8 mo after the outbreaks. As a result, the production level and enterprise income declined by 36% and 39%, respectively. About 93% of the producers did not do any other supplementary work during the idle production period; 59% of the producers had to use on average 4970TL (US$3200) from their personnel saving during the HPAI H5N1 outbreaks. About 62% of the producers stated that they had been considering expanding their businesses, but suspended the idea because of the outbreak, and 80% of the producers increased the biosecurity measures after the outbreaks. The futures of the contracted turkey producers are fully dependent on those of the integrated firms. Any negative effects on the latter appear to be directly transferred to the former. However, the government neglected contracted producers in the HPAI compensation programs.


Subject(s)
Agriculture/economics , Disease Outbreaks/veterinary , Influenza A Virus, H5N1 Subtype , Influenza in Birds/epidemiology , Turkeys , Animals , Influenza in Birds/economics , Time Factors , Turkey/epidemiology
2.
Vet Parasitol ; 163(4): 330-4, 2009 Aug 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19482428

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to estimate the production losses due to cystic echinococcosis (CE) in cattle, sheep and goats in Turkey. For this purpose, official records and previously published data in the literature were used. The weighted mean prevalence rates of the disease were calculated to be 7.4% in cattle, 46.3% in sheep and 10.9% in goats. The financial losses were estimated in US$ at 2008 current prices under expected (mean value), optimistic (mean value lowered by 10%), and pessimistic (mean value increased by 10%) scenarios. The production losses in an infected ruminant were estimated as US$ 139.2 (125.3-153.2, under optimistic-pessimistic scenarios) for cattle, US$ 13.7 (12.3-15.1) for sheep, and US$ 13.9 (12.5-15.3) for goats. The nation-wide annual losses due to CE were estimated as US$ 32.4 million (26.2-39.1) for cattle, US$ 54.1 million (43.8-65.5) for sheep and US$ 2.7 million (2.2-3.3) for goats. The nation-wide production losses due to CE in Turkey in 2008 were calculated as US$ 89.2 million (72.2-107.9). The results of this study may provide information to assist decisions of the policy makers in prioritising the allocation of scarce resources in controlling animal diseases in Turkey. However, alternative disease control-eradication programmes and cost-benefit analyses of them are needed for the future studies of this kind to provide better decision support in this area.


Subject(s)
Cattle Diseases/economics , Echinococcosis/veterinary , Goat Diseases/economics , Sheep Diseases/economics , Animals , Cattle , Cattle Diseases/epidemiology , Cattle Diseases/prevention & control , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Costs and Cost Analysis , Echinococcosis/economics , Echinococcosis/epidemiology , Echinococcosis/prevention & control , Female , Goat Diseases/epidemiology , Goat Diseases/prevention & control , Goats , Male , Meat/economics , Meat/parasitology , Milk/economics , Milk/parasitology , Sheep , Sheep Diseases/epidemiology , Sheep Diseases/prevention & control , Turkey/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...