Large-scale livestock production and global disease risk

Globalisation has brought an unwelcome problem– increased risk of transboundary diseases. This problem is apparent in the livestock sector, where global networks link animal production, processing and distribution systems.

Many factors increase the risk of diseases emerging and spreading (including to humans). These include the growth of human and livestock populations, changes in livestock production practices, and emerging global supply networks for agricultural and food products (agro-food networks).

Research from the Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative examines recent outbreaks of Influenza ‘A’ Viruses – including ‘Bird Flu’ – to explain the influence of industrial livestock production systems on global disease risk. The researchers recommend adapting animal health policies to reflect changing livestock production systems and reduce risks.

Large-scale, industrial production systems are a particular concern. These raise thousands of animals with similar genotypes (genetic identity), often in confined conditions and receiving homogeneous, industrially produced feed. Different production stages often happen at different sites, with animals often moved in large groups. These conditions enable disease transmission between animals and over large distances. Disposing of waste material also provides opportunities for disease transmission to wild animals and humans. These systems dominate in industrialised countries, and are increasingly common in developing countries.

Animal producers use several strategies to reduce the risk of diseases spreading. However, the realities of industrial livestock production often compromise these:

• Animal facilities are ventilated with fans to reduce heat and humidity. These release particles into the environment, which can carry faecal and other organic material. A gram of faeces from an infected animal can contain as many as ten billion infectious virus particles.
• Detecting a disease early is essential in containing outbreaks. However, current disease control policies do not encourage early reporting. Livestock producers have little to gain by alerting authorities to a potential outbreak. This increases detection times for diseases, leading to larger-scale outbreaks.
• People working with large livestock populations are most at risk from cross-species diseases, yet monitoring the health status of farmers and farm workers is not integral to either human or animal health programmes.

Developing robust animal health policies requires a detailed understanding of both animal health and the economics of livestock production and marketing. Animal disease control programmes must recognise the motives of people involved in animal food supply chains, and the incentives for managing disease risk. There are three key points to consider:

• Control measures that involve killing healthy animals can be seen as penalising. They must have clear aims and not affect farmers economically.
• Improving and maintaining animal health reduces the risk of disease transmission to other livestock and humans. Contributing to this public good deserves greater economic rewards.
• Uncertainty about the economic impacts of disease and control policies can trigger undesirable behaviour, such as illicit trade and hiding knowledge of diseases. Clear policies that do not affect farmer’s incomes can reduce the likelihood of this, but they must be open and strictly sanctioned.

Local animal health practices have global implications. Only a comprehensive, evidence-based approach to risk management can sustain a secure and safe food supply.

Source(s):
‘Industrial Livestock Production and Global Health Risks’, Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative Research Report, Rome: FAO, by J. Otte, D. Roland-Holst, D. Pfeiffer, R. Soares-Magalhaes, J. Rushton, J. Graham, E. Silbergeld. June 2007
‘Evidence-based Policy for controlling HPAI in Poultry: Bio-security Revisited’, Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative Research Report, Rome: FAO, by J. Otte, D. Pfeiffer, T. Tiensin and E. Silbergeld, December 2006

Funded by: The Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative of the Food and Agriculture Organization is funded by the UK Department for International Development (GCP/INT/804/UK)

id21 Research Highlight: 12 September 2007

Further Information:
Joachim Otte
Food and Agriculture Organisation – Animal Production and Health Division
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla
00153 Rome
Italy

Tel:  +39 06 57051
Fax: +39 06 57055749
Contact the contributor: joachim.otte@fao.org

Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative, Food and Agriculture Organization

Other related links:
id21 insights health 5 'Natural resource management and human health: the forgotten link?'

'id21 viewpoint - AUVEC: using the virtual world to achieve real world gains in livestock care'

'Uganda faces double threat from sleeping sickness'

'Healthier livestock, wealthier people: the impact of livestock disease on poverty reduction'

See id21's links for agriculture and development