Australia versus Denmark: an analysis of foot-and-mouth disease mitigation strategies.

IF 1.3 4区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Ajb Wagner, A E Boklund, M P Ward
{"title":"Australia versus Denmark: an analysis of foot-and-mouth disease mitigation strategies.","authors":"Ajb Wagner, A E Boklund, M P Ward","doi":"10.1111/avj.13435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) has progressively increased as an economically significant viral pathogen to the global agricultural and livestock industries, especially in those countries listed as FMD-free, such as Australia and Denmark. The potential risk associated with the loss of this status enlists an equally significant level of biosecurity and outbreak preparedness via specific mitigation strategies. Current technology allows for modelling of theoretical incursion scenarios; however, the parameters used are ever-changing and differ based on location. This study aims to compare the modelling outputs from at least five separate studies, from both Australia and Denmark respectively, to identify the most significant results and subsequently determine the recommendations most important to implement for national FMD outbreak mitigation. The comparative analysis suggests that the demographics, both within and between Australia and Denmark, can markedly affect the spread of FMD, but that each country's modelling of potential FMD outbreaks yielded three common areas for future recommendations: resource allocation and control; economic efficiency; and alternative interventions. Key points of difference, however, were Denmark's island geography and subsequent isolated populations of high-density production that led to a more regional approach of minimising island-island spread through varying vaccination regimes and depopulation/surveillance zone combinations. Australia's strategies of control centred more around enhanced detection and surveillance to prevent the incidence of significant outbreaks in the production animal industry. The most common factor for both was cost, specifically the reduction in time to export post-outbreak, due to each respective export industry, and the significant losses associated with even short periods of trade bans due to disease. The costs of surveillance and resources were similarly investigated in tandem with different interventions to further understand the components of an effective mitigation method for any outbreak of FMD.</p>","PeriodicalId":8661,"journal":{"name":"Australian Veterinary Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Veterinary Journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/avj.13435","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) has progressively increased as an economically significant viral pathogen to the global agricultural and livestock industries, especially in those countries listed as FMD-free, such as Australia and Denmark. The potential risk associated with the loss of this status enlists an equally significant level of biosecurity and outbreak preparedness via specific mitigation strategies. Current technology allows for modelling of theoretical incursion scenarios; however, the parameters used are ever-changing and differ based on location. This study aims to compare the modelling outputs from at least five separate studies, from both Australia and Denmark respectively, to identify the most significant results and subsequently determine the recommendations most important to implement for national FMD outbreak mitigation. The comparative analysis suggests that the demographics, both within and between Australia and Denmark, can markedly affect the spread of FMD, but that each country's modelling of potential FMD outbreaks yielded three common areas for future recommendations: resource allocation and control; economic efficiency; and alternative interventions. Key points of difference, however, were Denmark's island geography and subsequent isolated populations of high-density production that led to a more regional approach of minimising island-island spread through varying vaccination regimes and depopulation/surveillance zone combinations. Australia's strategies of control centred more around enhanced detection and surveillance to prevent the incidence of significant outbreaks in the production animal industry. The most common factor for both was cost, specifically the reduction in time to export post-outbreak, due to each respective export industry, and the significant losses associated with even short periods of trade bans due to disease. The costs of surveillance and resources were similarly investigated in tandem with different interventions to further understand the components of an effective mitigation method for any outbreak of FMD.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Australian Veterinary Journal
Australian Veterinary Journal 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
85
审稿时长
18-36 weeks
期刊介绍: Over the past 80 years, the Australian Veterinary Journal (AVJ) has been providing the veterinary profession with leading edge clinical and scientific research, case reports, reviews. news and timely coverage of industry issues. AJV is Australia''s premier veterinary science text and is distributed monthly to over 5,500 Australian Veterinary Association members and subscribers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信