Economic impact assessment of foot-and-mouth disease burden and control in pastoral local dairy cattle production systems in Northern Nigeria: A cross-sectional survey

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2020.104974Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Most of the respondents had no formal education

  • Production losses accounted for USD 11,104,673.0

  • Mortality losses accounted for USD 4,487,021.3

  • Cost of control was estimated to be USD 463,673.7

  • Benefit-cost ratio for FMD control was 33.6.

Abstract

Milk has been envisaged as a major source of high-quality protein and bioavailable nutrients to humans. Its production is constraint by foot and mouth disease (FMD), a contagious viral disease of very high economic importance worldwide. This study was aimed at assessing the economic impact of FMD in pastoral dairy cattle herds in Nigeria and determines returns to investments in its control to better inform policy decisions. An interview questionnaire-based cross-sectional study was conducted in 660 nomadic and agro-pastoral dairy cattle herds in 2019. Economic impact analyses were conducted using the total economic cost and benefit-cost analysis models. Of the 660 pastoralists enrolled, 92.6% (n = 611) participated. Nomadic pastoralists constituted 50.7% (n = 310) of the respondents while 49.3% (n = 301) were agro-pastoralists. Most of the respondents (66.4%, n = 406) had no formal education. The value of visible losses to the herders was estimated at USD 15,591,694.30 and the cost of control by treatment of secondary infections was USD 463,673.70. The economic impact of FMD due to production losses and costs of treatment to pastoralists was estimated to be USD 16,055,368.00. Return on investment in FMD control was positive with a benefit-cost ratio of 33.6. The estimated total economic costs due to FMD have indicated that it is a disease of high economic importance to dairy production herds and must be controlled to assure food security, local incomes to herders, and protein requirement of human population, especially the children in FMD endemic countries.

Introduction

Milk has been envisaged as a major source of high-quality protein and bioavailable nutrients (such as calcium) to humans (IFPRI et al., 2006), especially in Africa. Dairy production can also contribute to local, regional, and national level economies; and provides opportunities for employment and income generation (IFPRI et al., 2006). Globally, there is strong demand for milk and dairy products, which is largely due to global population growth, and increase in per capita dairy intake (FAO/IFCN 2010; IDF, 2016). In 2014, more than 655 million tons of milk were produced by the global dairy sector, and projected to increase by 23% from 2014 to 2025 (FAO, 2017; OECD/FAO, 2016). However, a number of potential infectious diseases militate against potential adequate milk production, particularly foot and mouth disease (Rushton, 2009).

Foot and mouth disease (FMD) is a contagious transboundary viral disease of very high economic importance, affecting cloven‐hoofed domestic and wildlife animals (Thomson et al., 2003; Mahy, 2005; Nardo et al., 2015). It is caused by foot and mouth disease virus (FMDV), classified in the genus Aphtovirus and family Picornaviridae, and consists of seven different serotypes (A, O, C, Asia1, SAT (South African territories) 1, SAT2 and SAT3). The disease is characterized by fever, vesicular eruptions in the oral cavity, on the foot and udder, lameness, salivation, anorexia, and death especially in young animals (OIE, 2017; Wungak et al., 2019). FMD is considered as the most important livestock disease in the world in terms of its economic impact (James and Rushton, 2002), and one of the major diseases challenging cattle production in Nigeria (Ehizibolo et al., 2014).

The economic impact of FMD can be classified into direct and indirect losses. The direct losses include milk production loss, loss due to death, loss in weight and draft power, and decrease in livestock products values (Senturk and Yalcin, 2005; Barasa et al., 2008; OIE/FAO, 2012; Young et al., 2013). Indirect losses are associated with additional expenditures in disease control by vaccination, movement control, diagnostic and surveillance (OIE/FAO, 2012), as well as treatment of secondary bacterial infections in diseased herds. The economic impact of FMD is especially meaningful to smallholder farmers as it threatens their livelihood due to impacts upon productivity, food security, and income losses (Madin, 2011). The annual global economic impact of FMD has recently been estimated at USD 11 billion (90% range USD 6.5-21 billion) in endemic settings and an additional minimum of US$1.5 billion was ascribed to virus incursions into FMD-free countries (Knight-Jones and Rushton, 2013).

Information on the economic burden of the disease in FMDV-endemic countries is poorly investigated and not readily available on pastoral dairy cattle production systems in Nigeria, yet essential for prioritization of scarce resources on its control programs in smallholder herding systems. Despite its importance, there is also dearth of quantitative economic insight on the benefits and costs of potential control options to support decision making on its interventions. Despite its relevance, benefit-cost analysis of FMD control has not been known to have been conducted in Nigeria at the dairy cattle herd-level. However, it is an important analytical framework that commonly supports decision-making process in animal disease control programs in terms of financial return (Rushton, 2009; Yoe, 2012).

The study objectives were to assess economic impact of FMD in pastoral dairy cattle herds in Nigeria, and determine returns to investments in its control using empirical data. The survey was carried out ex-post evaluation to provide baseline estimates that will assist the national animal health authorities and international donors in making investment decisions regarding FMD economic burden and costs of its control in local milk production systems in poor resource endemic areas.

Section snippets

Study area, populations, and definition

The study was conducted in Niger State located at the North-central geopolitical zone of Nigeria. It has three agro-ecological zones (South, East and North) with variable climatic conditions and large arable and grazing lands, Kainji National Game Reserve, international stock routes, and an international border with the Republic of Benin at its Northern zone. The area experiences two distinct seasons: the dry season (October–March) and rainy season (April–September). The Nigerian Livestock

Demographic information

Of the 660 pastoralists enrolled to participate in the survey, 92.6% (n = 611) participated. Nomadic pastoralists constituted 50.7% (n = 310) of the respondents, while 49.3% (n = 301) were agro-pastoralists. Majority (84.8%, n = 618) were males and 15.2% (n = 93) were females. Also, 79.6% (n = 486) were married, 8.8% (n = 54) single and 11.6% (n = 71) widows. Most of the respondents (66.4%, n = 406) had no formal education, 12.6% (n = 77) had primary education, 11.5% (n = 70) possessed

Discussion

This study, to our knowledge, is the first to assess economic impact of FMD in local pastoral dairy cattle herds in Nigeria and has provided a useful means for assessing economic burden and return to investments in control of the disease, which could be used for decision makings. Although mortality in adult cattle due to FMD is unusual, it causes heavy economic losses on dairy cattle production in terms of weight loss, decreased milk production and draught power (Rushton et al., 2002; Blacksell

Conclusions

The study has demonstrated that foot-and-mouth disease is associated with high economic burden from production losses and control to the surveyed pastoral dairy cattle farmers in Nigeria. The benefit-cost analysis showed that an investment in the disease control was economically profitable and can serve as an effective tool for refining policy decisions on FMD control programs. A similar study could also be implemented at the national level to evaluate the total economic cost on FMD burden and

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgements

Authors gratefully acknowledge the Area Veterinary Officers for their field assistance during questionnaires administration and livestock market prices validation, and above all appreciate efforts of the pastoralists that participated in the survey.

References (51)

  • M. Barasa et al.

    Foot-and-mouth disease vaccination in south Sudan: benefit-cost analysis and livelihoods impact

    Transboundary and Emerging Diseases

    (2008)
  • S. Blacksell et al.

    Foot and mouth disease in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic: II. Seroprevalence estimates, using structured surveillance and surveys of abattoirs

    Revue Scientifique et Technique; Office International des Epizooties

    (2008)
  • D. Bourn et al.

    Nigerian livestock resources survey

    World Animal Review

    (1994)
  • W.B. Brouwer et al.

    Need for differential discounting of costs and health effects in cost effectiveness analyses

    British Medical Journal

    (2005)
  • A.G. Dean et al.

    The Open Source Epidemiologic Statistics for Public Health (OpenEpi) Version 2.3.1

    (2013)
  • D.O. Ehizibolo et al.

    Epidemiological analysis, serological prevalence and genotypic analysis of foot-and-mouth disease in Nigeria 2008-2009

    Transboundary and Emerging Diseases

    (2014)
  • FAO/IFCN

    Status and Prospects for Smallholder Milk Production: A Global Perspective

    (2010)
  • FAO

    Dairy Production and Products: Production Systems

    (2017)
  • K.J. Ferguson et al.

    Evaluating the potential for the environmentally sustainable control of foot and mouth disease in sub-Saharan Africa

    EcoHealth

    (2013)
  • IDF

    World Dairy Situation 2016. Bulletin of the International Dairy Federation

    (2016)
  • Todd IFPRI et al.

    Understanding the Links between Agriculture and Health: Agriculture, Food Safety, and Foodborne Diseases.2020 Vision for Food

    (2006)
  • A.D. James et al.

    The economics of foot‐and‐Mouth disease

    Revue Scientifique et Technique; Office International des Epizooties

    (2002)
  • W.T. Jemberua et al.

    Cost-benefit analysis of foot and mouth disease control in Ethiopia

    Preventive Veterinary Medicine

    (2016)
  • W.B.J. Mahy

    Foot and mouth disease virus

    (2005)
  • J.C. Mariner et al.

    Manual on participatory epidemiology: method for the collection of action-oriented epidemiological intelligence

    (2000)
  • Cited by (9)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text