IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v102y2021ics0306919221000452.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When poultry take a sick leave: Response costs for the 2014–2015 highly pathogenic avian influenza epidemic in the USA

Author

Listed:
  • Seeger, Riley M.
  • Hagerman, Amy D.
  • Johnson, Kamina K.
  • Pendell, Dustin L.
  • Marsh, Thomas L.

Abstract

The 2014–2015 H5N2/H5N8 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) epidemic required $879 million dollars in public expenditures to eradicate the disease from poultry production, making it the most costly animal health incident in US history. Cost and resource availability are important considerations when determining optimal response plans. However, limited information was available, historically, on which to base the evaluation of response plans for large-scale HPAI events on farms in the US and across the world. Response cost data collected during the 2014–2015 HPAI outbreak by the United States Department of Agriculture – Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and associated response information such as responder type and activity were examined as a preliminary effort to enhance understanding of the cost associated with alternative response plans under real resource and labor constraints. Results indicated that differences did exist by state and poultry facility type that affected both total and incremental cost, indicating the importance of local and state policies and resources on farm level eradication cost. On-farm response activities associated with depopulation and disposal resulted in costs that were most sensitive to bird inventory size. Exploring the responder characteristics revealed that contractors hired directly by the federal government or sub-contractors that are hired by a producer, while most expensive in absolute terms, contributed the lowest incremental increase in cost for each additional bird housed on a farm when depopulating. Identifying and quantifying response activity costs for poultry assists planning efforts for local, state and federal response agencies and private firms that are faced with high consequence avian health threats. The data, while still limited in certain facets, facilitate impact assessments and cost-benefit analyses in future planning. This study illustrates the importance of collecting livestock disease outbreak cost data ex post for observing cost relationships during large-scale animal disease events in countries with commercial poultry production.

Suggested Citation

  • Seeger, Riley M. & Hagerman, Amy D. & Johnson, Kamina K. & Pendell, Dustin L. & Marsh, Thomas L., 2021. "When poultry take a sick leave: Response costs for the 2014–2015 highly pathogenic avian influenza epidemic in the USA," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:102:y:2021:i:c:s0306919221000452
    DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102068
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919221000452
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102068?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chambers,Robert G., 1988. "Applied Production Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521314275.
    2. Johnson, Kamina K. & Seeger, Riley M. & Marsh, Thomas L., 2016. "Local Economies and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(2), pages 1-9, May.
    3. Aklesso Egbendewe-Mondzozo & Levan Elbakidze & Bruce A. McCarl & Michael P. Ward & John B. Carey, 2013. "Partial equilibrium analysis of vaccination as an avian influenza control tool in the U.S. poultry sector," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(1), pages 111-123, January.
    4. Fadiga, Mohamadou L. & Katjiuongua, Hikuepi B., 2014. "Issues and strategies in ex-post evaluation of intervention against animal disease outbreaks and spread," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P2), pages 418-424.
    5. Fadiga, Mohamadou L. & Okike, Iheanacho & Bett, Bernard, 2014. "An expost economic assessment of the intervention against highly pathogenic avian influenza in Nigeria," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 3(1), pages 1-17, April.
    6. Elbakidze, Levan, 2008. "Modeling of Avian Influenza Mitigation Policies Within the Backyard Segment of the Poultry Sector," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 1-17.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jongeneel, Roelof A. & Ge, Lan, 2005. "Explaining Growth in Dutch Agriculture: Prices, Public R&D, and Technological Change," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24573, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Paul, Saumik, 2019. "A Decline in Labor's Share with Capital Accumulation and Complementary Factor Inputs: An Application of the Morishima Elasticity of Substitution," IZA Discussion Papers 12219, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Massimo Filippini & Cornelia Luchsinger, 2007. "Economies of scale in the Swiss hydropower sector," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(15), pages 1109-1113.
    4. Peterson, Jeffrey M. & Boisvert, Richard N. & de Gorter, Harry, 1999. "Multifunctionality and Optimal Environmental Policies for Agriculture in an Open Economy," Working Papers 127701, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    5. Cai, Yiyong & Newth, David & Finnigan, John & Gunasekera, Don, 2015. "A hybrid energy-economy model for global integrated assessment of climate change, carbon mitigation and energy transformation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 381-395.
    6. V. Vandenberghe, 2018. "The Contribution of Educated Workers to Firms’ Efficiency Gains: The Key Role of Proximity to the ‘Local’ Frontier," De Economist, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 259-283, September.
    7. Tchale, H. & Sauer, J., 2007. "Soil Fertility Management and Agricultural Productvity in Malawi," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 42, March.
    8. Oleg Badunenko & Michael Fritsch & Andreas Stephan, 2006. "What Determines the Technical Efficiency of a Firm? The Importance of Industry, Location, and Size," Jenaer Schriften zur Wirtschaftswissenschaft (Expired!) 33/2006, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    9. David Van Dijcke, 2022. "On the Non-Identification of Revenue Production Functions," Papers 2212.04620, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    10. Margarita Genius & Spiro Stefanou & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2009. "Productivity Growth and Efficiency under Leontief Technology: An Application to US Steam-Electric Power Generation Utilities," Working Papers 0913, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    11. Shumway, C. Richard & Davis, George C., 2001. "Does consistent aggregation really matter?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(2), pages 1-34.
    12. Mehdi Farsi & Aurelio Fetz & Massimo Filippini, 2007. "Benchmarking and Regulation in the Electricity Distribution Sector," CEPE Working paper series 07-54, CEPE Center for Energy Policy and Economics, ETH Zurich.
    13. Arnade, Carlos A., 1992. "Productivity of Brazilian Agriculture: Measurement and Uses," Staff Reports 278673, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    14. Targetti, Stefano & Viaggi, Davide & Cuming, David & Sarthou, J.P. & Choisis, J.P., "undated". "Assessing the costs of measuring biodiversity: methodological and empirical issues," 120th Seminar, September 2-4, 2010, Chania, Crete 109414, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Coleman, Jane A. & Shaik, Saleem, 2009. "Time-Varying Estimation of Crop Insurance Program in Altering North Dakota Farm Economic Structure," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49516, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Renwick, Alan W. & Revoredo-Giha, Cesar & Reader, Mark A., 2005. "Uk Sugar Beet Farm Productivity Under Different Reform Scenarios: A Farm Level Analysis," Environmental Economy and Policy Research Discussion Papers 31936, University of Cambridge, Department of Land Economy.
    17. Bailey, Alastair & Irz, Xavier T. & Balcombe, Kelvin George, 2003. "An Appliation Of The Stochastic Latent Variable Approach To The Correction Of Sector Level Tfp Calculations In The Face Of Biased Technological Change," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25842, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Lofgren, Hans & Robinson, Sherman, 1997. "The mixed-complementary approach to specifying agricultural supply in computable general equilibrium models:," TMD discussion papers 20, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Rasmussen, Svend, 2003. "Criteria for optimal production under uncertainty. The state-contingent approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 1-30.
    20. Ma, Chunbo & Stern, David I., 2016. "Long-run estimates of interfuel and interfactor elasticities," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 114-130.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:102:y:2021:i:c:s0306919221000452. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.