socio-economic factors influencing animal health surveillance and control: the case of foot and...

SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS INFLUENCING ANIMAL HEALTH SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL: THE CASE OF FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE SURVEILLANCE IN

VIETNAM

Pham,T.T.Hoa1, Moussiaux NA2, Rukkwamsuk T3, Peyre M1

1CIRAD-AGIRs Vietnam/France; 2 University of Liege, Belgium; 3Kasetsart University, Thailand.

Content

• Introduction• Objectives • Material and methods• Results • Conclusions

Introduction• Persistent endemicity of FMD in Vietnam even high

efforts invested • Under-reporting of FMD outbreaks: a major constraint of

animal health surveillance and control

• Critical issue influencing performance of surveillance system: the willingness of the livestock owners to share animal health information with veterinary authorities

• Understanding the socio-economic factors behind this willingness will help to improve the efficacy of animal health surveillance system

Objectives

• To describe the interactions between all the actors of the animal health surveillance network

• To identify the socio-economic factors

influencing on farmer’s decision to report animal disease information in Vietnam

5

Material and methods

Material and methods• Data collection: October 2013-

February 2014• Selection of interviewee:

Random sampling pig holders in 8 villages

Exhaustive sampling of critical actors (veterinarians, drug sellers)

Snowball sampling to include new category of actors mentioned during the interviews: traders, drug delegation

• Semi-structured interview with a checklist covered: Animal health management at farm Exchange of animal disease

information Factors influencing animal disease

reporting

6

Material and Methods (cont.)• Network analysis: sna

package (R software)• Graph visualization

Nodes = actors Links= flows of animal disease

information between actors

• Indicator measuring Degree centrality Closeness centrality Betweenness centrality

• Frequency of social-economic factors mentioned by pig holders

Actors in the networkTotal interviewees: 121

• Stratified random sampling Small pig holders (SH): 76 ( 55%) Semi-commercial pig producers

(SC):15 ( 75%)

• Exhaustive sampling Animal health worker (vil.vet): 4 Commune para-veterinarian

(com.vet): 2 Veterinary drug seller: 3

• Snowball sampling Veterinarians : 4(district/provincial level) Local authorities : 7(head of villages/communes) Agriculture staff: 2 Commune para-veterinarian: 3 Private veterinarian: 1 Pig trader: 2 Veterinary drug delegation: 2

Results

Network of animal health information

9Hubs

Hubs

Broker

Measures of centrality in the networkDegree centrality

Top 4: Veterinary drug sellers and para-veterinarians

The most active actors in the network

Measures of centrality in the networkBetweenness centrality

Top 4: Para-veterinarians, drug delegation, and drug seller

The gate keeper in the network who get the earliest animal health information

Measures of centrality in the networkCloseness centrality

Top 4: Drug delegation, para-veterinarians, drug seller, and veterinarian

The closest relationship to other actors in the network, receiving information from other actors quickly

Socio-economic factors influence on farmer’s decision of disease reporting

13

Factors Semi-commercial farms (N=15)n (%)

Small pig farm holding (N=76)n (%)

Comments

Loss of reputation which gives a consequence of business interruption (stop breeding, feeding, drug selling)

13 (86.7) - Very important in breeding farms

Loss of reputation which causes the difficulty in bank loan or buying feed in credit

- 45 (59.2)

Drop of pig price and difficulty to sell breeding/fattening pigs

13 (86.7) 67 (88.2)

Uncertainty of being compensated 10 (66.7) 68 (89.5)

Unclear of compensation rate 6(40.0) 49 (64.5)Complicated administrative procedures of compensation and long period of compensation payment

11 (73.3) 41 (53.9)

Long period of movement restriction 8 (53.3) 18 (23.7)

Being confident on disease risk assessment and disease management

11(73.3) 7 (9.2)

Affection on the relationship with other farmers/relatives due to negative consequence of disease notification

2 (13.3) 5 (6.6)

Possibility to sell sick/dead pigs 9 (60.0) 57 (75.0)

Conclusions • The most active actors in animal health surveillance network:

drug sellers, para-veterinarians (commune vets.)

• Important socio-economic factors influencing on swine disease surveillance and control strategies: loss of reputation, dropping of pig price, uncertainty of compensation payment, and possibility to sell sick/dead pigs.

• Organization of surveillance and control program needs to take account role of private sectors and local constraints

Acknowledgement• Funding: Revasia project

(CIRAD), IRD• Hanoi Agriculture University• District Agriculture

Department,• Local authority• Pig holders in study area

Thank you very much for your attention