A framework for assessing the tangible and intangible impacts of emergency animal diseases

Abstract

A FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSING THE TANGIBLE AND INTANGIBLE IMPACTS OF EMERGENCY ANIMAL DISEASES Abstract In the thesis, a novel framework for addressing the tangible and intangible impacts of emergency animal diseases (EADs) is presented. Traditional economic assessment methodologies lack the capacity to measure the intangible impacts of EADs (which are by their definition ‘difficult to measure or unable to be precisely measured’). Intangible elements can have a great impact on decisions made relating to the response, control and prevention strategies that are ultimately used to address these EADs. Intangibles have value and worth, although this value is subjective and difficult to express in dollar terms. Consequently, the intangible elements are often lost in the scope of traditional economic analysis. Without the consideration of intangible impacts, the bottom-line for decision-making related to animal-health emergencies would be based only on financial measures. This does not reflect the reality of the consultative policy-making process. A novel method for measuring the intangible impacts of EADs is used in conjunction with economic analysis. The intangible measurements are used to inflate or deflate the economic costs and benefits to create a ‘value-adjusted’ outcome. Two case studies (PRRS in northern Victoria and Hendra virus in Southeast Queensland) demonstrate the operation of the framework and outcomes from an integrated economic and intangible analysis. The case studies demonstrate the use of an intangible measurement and the calculation of an integrated value measure. This integrated value measure is used to gauge a stakeholder’s response to a proposed EAD policy. In the PRRS case studies, the outcomes indicate that overall, the pork industry would be in favour of maintaining a PRRS-free status in Australia. Other stakeholder groups would be prepared to make some compromise on a ‘disease-free’ status. The reasons for this may include the continuation of positive flow-on effects from pork processing or to prevent animal welfare issues that may occur as a result of overcrowding and resource stress during an EAD response. The Hendra virus case study outcomes indicate that a subsidised vaccination campaign (in the form of vaccination clinics) would present a unanimously superior solution to preventing cases of Hendra virus in humans and horses when compared to flying-fox roost removal. Using this framework to gather stakeholder data during the consultative process of policy-making aids in the identification and recording of the perceived value of intangible costs and benefits from the stakeholder perspective. These data can be used to aid decision-making or to help facilitate capacity building through the policy-making process. The use of the framework will ensure that the resulting analysis includes the full impacts of EADs, rather than only a narrow comparison of financial costs and benefits.