IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/sysdyn/v38y2022i4p374-397.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Foodborne transmission of norovirus: mechanism modelling, seasonality and policy implications (2020 System Dynamics Applications Award paper)

Author

Listed:
  • David C. Lane
  • Elke Husemann
  • Darren Holland
  • Abdul Khaled

Abstract

The article describes a study of the foodborne transmission mechanisms for norovirus. It was undertaken for the U.K. Food Standards Agency and received the System Dynamics Society's 2020 “System Dynamics Applications Award”. The article opens with descriptions of norovirus, the organisational context and the aims of the study. The first phase involved the construction of a large, fully formulated SD simulation model which included person‐to‐person mechanisms and, newly built, food‐related mechanisms for norovirus transmission. The group modelling process and the model structure are described. The model's existence demonstrated that enough was known about foodborne mechanisms to create an explicit and carefully documented representation that specialists recognised, understood, and accepted. Additionally, a framework for analysing the model's parameters—some currently unknown—helped organise FSA thinking on future research and potential policy levers. A second phase used mathematical analysis of a simplified SD model to assess the relative scale of the foodborne effects. In terms of contributions, this generated insights into possible sources of seasonality and insights into whether the most effective leverage points in the system lay solely within the remit of the FSA or were also within the remits of other government departments. The article closes by summarising the findings and then exploring their policy implications and recording the client's reactions to them. © 2022 The Authors. System Dynamics Review published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of System Dynamics Society.

Suggested Citation

  • David C. Lane & Elke Husemann & Darren Holland & Abdul Khaled, 2022. "Foodborne transmission of norovirus: mechanism modelling, seasonality and policy implications (2020 System Dynamics Applications Award paper)," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 38(4), pages 374-397, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:sysdyn:v:38:y:2022:i:4:p:374-397
    DOI: 10.1002/sdr.1719
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.1719
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sdr.1719?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lane, David & Husemann, Elke & Holland, Darren & Khaled, Abdul, 2019. "Understanding foodborne transmission mechanisms for Norovirus: A study for the UK's Food Standards Agency," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 721-736.
    2. Lane, David C., 1999. "Social theory and system dynamics practice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(3), pages 501-527, March.
    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. Oliva, Rogelio, 2003. "Model calibration as a testing strategy for system dynamics models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 552-568, December.
    2. Elias Hartvigsson & Erik Oscar Ahlgren & Sverker Molander, 2020. "Tackling complexity and problem formulation in rural electrification through conceptual modelling in system dynamics," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 141-153, January.
    3. Etienne Rouwette & Ingrid Bastings & Hans Blokker, 2011. "A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 781-803, November.
    4. Erika Palmer, 2018. "The Heavy Cost of Care: Systemic Challenges in Norwegian Work Absenteeism," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Natalia Brzezina & Birgit Kopainsky & Erik Mathijs, 2016. "Can Organic Farming Reduce Vulnerabilities and Enhance the Resilience of the European Food System? A Critical Assessment Using System Dynamics Structural Thinking Tools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-32, September.
    6. Ghaffarzadegan, Navid & Xue, Yi & Larson, Richard C., 2017. "Work-education mismatch: An endogenous theory of professionalization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(3), pages 1085-1097.
    7. David C. Lane, 2022. "Fons et origo: reflections on the 60th anniversary of Industrial Dynamics," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 38(3), pages 292-324, July.
    8. David C. Lane, 2012. "What Is a ‘Policy Insight’?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 590-595, November.
    9. S Robinson, 2005. "Discrete-event simulation: from the pioneers to the present, what next?," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(6), pages 619-629, June.
    10. Cunico, Giovanni & Aivazidou, Eirini & Mollona, Edoardo, 2021. "Building a dynamic theory of citizens’ awareness of European Cohesion Policy interventions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(2), pages 758-773.
    11. David C. Lane & Birgit Kopainsky & David C. Lane, 2017. "‘Behavioural System Dynamics’: A Very Tentative and Slightly Sceptical Map of the Territory," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 414-423, July.
    12. Boelsen-Robinson, Tara & Blake, Miranda R. & Brown, Andrew D. & Huse, Oliver & Palermo, Claire & George, Neetu A. & Peeters, Anna, 2021. "Mapping factors associated with a successful shift towards healthier food retail in community-based organisations: A systems approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    13. Gábor Király & Alexandra Köves & György Pataki & Gabriella Kiss, 2016. "Assessing the Participatory Potential of Systems Mapping," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 496-514, July.
    14. H van de Water & M Schinkel & R Rozier, 2007. "Fields of application of SSM: a categorization of publications," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(3), pages 271-287, March.
    15. Benjamin L. Turner & Vincent Tidwell & Alexander Fernald & José A. Rivera & Sylvia Rodriguez & Steven Guldan & Carlos Ochoa & Brian Hurd & Kenneth Boykin & Andres Cibils, 2016. "Modeling Acequia Irrigation Systems Using System Dynamics: Model Development, Evaluation, and Sensitivity Analyses to Investigate Effects of Socio-Economic and Biophysical Feedbacks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-30, October.
    16. J Mingers, 2003. "A classification of the philosophical assumptions of management science methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(6), pages 559-570, June.
    17. Michael C. Jackson, 2020. "Critical systems practice 1: Explore—Starting a multimethodological intervention," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 839-858, September.
    18. David C. Lane & Özge Pala & Yaman Barlas & David C. Lane, 2015. "Validity is a Matter of Confidence—But Not Just in System Dynamics," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 450-458, July.
    19. Jim Duggan, 2020. "Exploring the opportunity of using machine learning to support the system dynamics method: Comment on the paper by Edali and Yücel," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 959-963, November.
    20. Leopold-Wildburger, Ulrike & Strohhecker, Jürgen, 2017. "Strategy map concepts in a balanced scorecard cockpit improve performanceAuthor-Name: Hu, Bo," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 664-676.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:sysdyn:v:38:y:2022:i:4:p:374-397. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/0883-7066 .

    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.