IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0216615.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A social cost-benefit analysis of two One Health interventions to prevent toxoplasmosis

Author

Listed:
  • Anita W M Suijkerbuijk
  • Eelco A B Over
  • Marieke Opsteegh
  • Huifang Deng
  • Paul F van Gils
  • Axel A Bonačić Marinović
  • Mattijs Lambooij
  • Johan J Polder
  • Talitha L Feenstra
  • Joke W B van der Giessen
  • G Ardine de Wit
  • Marie-Josee J Mangen

Abstract

In the Netherlands, toxoplasmosis ranks second in disease burden among foodborne pathogens with an estimated health loss of 1,900 Disability Adjusted Life Years and a cost-of-illness estimated at €45 million annually. Therefore, effective and preferably cost-effective preventive interventions are warranted. Freezing meat intended for raw or undercooked consumption and improving biosecurity in pig farms are promising interventions to prevent Toxoplasma gondii infections in humans. Putting these interventions into practice would expectedly reduce the number of infections; however, the net benefits for society are unknown. Stakeholders bearing the costs for these interventions will not necessary coincide with the ones having the benefits. We performed a Social Cost-Benefit Analysis to evaluate the net value of two potential interventions for the Dutch society. We assessed the costs and benefits of the two interventions and compared them with the current practice of education, especially during pregnancy. A ‘minimum scenario’ and a ‘maximum scenario’ was assumed, using input parameters with least benefits to society and input parameters with most benefits to society, respectively. For both interventions, we performed different scenario analyses. The freezing meat intervention was far more effective than the biosecurity intervention. Despite high freezing costs, freezing two meat products: steak tartare and mutton leg yielded net social benefits in both the minimum and maximum scenario, ranging from €10.6 million to €31 million for steak tartare and €0.6 million to €1.5 million for mutton leg. The biosecurity intervention would result in net costs in all scenarios ranging from €1 million to €2.5 million, due to high intervention costs and limited benefits. From a public health perspective (i.e. reducing the burden of toxoplasmosis) and the societal perspective (i.e. a net benefit for the Dutch society) freezing steak tartare and leg of mutton is to be considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Anita W M Suijkerbuijk & Eelco A B Over & Marieke Opsteegh & Huifang Deng & Paul F van Gils & Axel A Bonačić Marinović & Mattijs Lambooij & Johan J Polder & Talitha L Feenstra & Joke W B van der Giess, 2019. "A social cost-benefit analysis of two One Health interventions to prevent toxoplasmosis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-16, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0216615
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216615
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0216615
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0216615&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0216615?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. M.‐J.J. Mangen & A.M. Burrell, 2001. "Decomposing Preference Shifts for Meat and Fish in the Netherlands," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 16-28, May.
    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. Yeboah, Godfred & Maynard, Leigh J., 2004. "The Impact Of Bse, Fmd, And U.S. Export Promotion Expenditures On Japanese Meat Demand," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 19978, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Jin, Hyun Joung & Sun, Changyou & Koo, Won W., 2003. "The Effect Of Food-Safety Related Information On Consumer Preference: The Case Of The Bse Outbreak In Japan," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 23636, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    3. Yadavalli, Anita & Jones, Keithly, 2014. "Does media influence consumer demand? The case of lean finely textured beef in the United States," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 219-227.
    4. Hyun Joung Jin & Jang-Chul Kim, 2008. "The effects of the BSE outbreak on the security values of US agribusiness and food processing firms," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 357-372.
    5. Jill J. McCluskey & Kristine M. Grimsrud & Hiromi Ouchi & Thomas I. Wahl, 2005. "Bovine spongiform encephalopathy in Japan: consumers' food safety perceptions and willingness to pay for tested beef," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(2), pages 197-209, June.
    6. Corsi, Alessandro, 2012. "Willingness-to-pay in terms of price: an application to organic beef during and after the “mad cow” crisis," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 92(01), pages 25-46, October.
    7. Paramasivam, R Malaiarasan & Umanath, 2021. "Fish consumption in India: probability and demand," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 34(1), June.
    8. Jin, Hyun Joung & Skripnitchenko, Anatoliy & Koo, Won W., 2004. "The Effects Of The Bse Outbreak In The United States On The Beef And Cattle Industry," Special Reports 23072, North Dakota State University, Center for Agricultural Policy and Trade Studies.
    9. Mazzocchi, Mario, 2004. "Food Scares and Demand Recovery Patterns: An Econometric Investigation," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24990, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Echeverría, Lucía & Molina, José Alberto, 2021. "Poor vs Non-Poor Households in Uruguay: Welfare Differences from Food Price Changes," GLO Discussion Paper Series 890, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    11. Chen‐Ti Chen & John M. Crespi & William Hahn & Lee L. Schulz & Fawzi Taha, 2020. "Long‐run impacts of trade shocks and export competitiveness: Evidence from the U.S. BSE event," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(6), pages 941-958, November.
    12. Yeboah, Osei-Agyeman & Kebede, Ellene & Ofori-Boadu, Victor & Allen, Albert J., 2007. "BSE and the US Economy: Input-Output Model Perspective," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34877, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    13. Eric Giraud-Héraud & Maria Aguiar Fontes & Alexandra Seabra Pinto, 2014. "Crise sanitaires de l'alimentation et analyses comportementales," Working Papers hal-00949126, HAL.
    14. Maria Aguiar Fontes & Eric Giraud-Héraud & Alexandra Seabra Pinto, 2013. "Consumers' behaviour towards food safety: A litterature review," Working Papers hal-00912476, HAL.
    15. Livanis, Grigorios T. & Moss, Charles B., 2005. "Price Transmission and Food Scares in the U.S. Beef Sector," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19485, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Marie‐Josée J. Mangen & Arie H. Havelaar & Krijn P. Poppe & G. Ardine De Wit & the CARMA Project Team, 2007. "Cost‐Utility Analysis to Control Campylobacter on Chicken Meat—Dealing with Data Limitations," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 815-830, August.
    17. Mangen, M. -J. J. & Burrell, A. M. & Mourits, M. C. M., 2004. "Epidemiological and economic modelling of classical swine fever: application to the 1997/1998 Dutch epidemic," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 37-54, July.
    18. Hyun J. Jin, 2021. "Driving factors behind consumers' severe response to U.S. beef imports during the candlelight protest in South Korea," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(2), pages 438-448, April.
    19. Morrison, J. A. & Balcombe, K. & Bailey, A. & Klonaris, S. & Rapsomanikis, G., 2003. "Expenditure on different categories of meat in Greece: the influence of changing tastes," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 139-150, March.
    20. Mangen, Marie-Josee J. & Poppe, Krijn J. & Havelaar, Arie H., 2005. "Controlling Campylobacter in the chicken meat chain; Estimation of intervention costs," Report Series 29108, Wageningen University and Research Center, Agricultural Economics Research Institute.

    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:plo:pone00:0216615. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.