Search results

This chapter reviews factors responsible for climate change, impacts of the change on animal health, zoonotic diseases, and their linkage with One-Health program.

This chapter is based on the available literature related to climate change and its effect on animal health and production from different points. The causes and change forcers of climate change, direct and indirect effects of the change on animal health management, host–pathogen–vector interaction, and zoonotic diseases are included. Inter-linkage between climate change and One-Health program are also assessed.

Beside natural causes of climatic change, greenhouse gases are increasing due to human activities, causing global climate changes which have direct and indirect animal health and production performance impacts. The direct impacts are increased ambient temperature, floods, and droughts, while the indirect are reduced availability of water and food. The change and effect also promote diseases spread, increase survival and availability of the pathogen and its intermediate vector host, responsible for distribution and prevalence of tremendous zoonotic, infectious, and vector-borne diseases. The adverse effect on the biodiversity, distribution of animals and micro flora, genetic makeup of microbials which may lead to emerging and re-emerging disease and their outbreaks make the strong linkage between climate change and One-Health.

Global climate change is receiving increasing international attention where international organizations are increasing their focus on tackling the health impacts. Thus, there is a need for parallel mitigation of climate change and animal diseases in a global form.

Most research on climate change is limited to environmental protection, however this chapter provides a nexus between climate change, animal health, livestock production, and the One-Health program for better livelihood.

Strategic management, operation management, health and safety

The authors have been developed the case to be applied for a diploma, undergraduate students and it might help the students in the postgraduate. The case is appropriate for courses in the area of strategic management, operation management and health and safety.

The learning outcomes are as follows: to understand the importance of animal disease prevention and the correct procedures for dealing with disease outbreaks in an animal facility; to reinforce the importance of adherence to strict procedures and chain of command by Life Sciences and Conservation sections in preserving the health of animals, zoo staff and visitors; to recognize the importance of disease monitoring and control in wildlife conservation; and to understand the importance of concrete experience in related positions to provide leaders like Director Mark Craig with the skills to handle such a big responsibility. Al Ain Zoo has such leaders along with a dedicated and resourceful management team that has proven capable of placing the institution among the best conservation parks in the world.

Large collections of animals of diverse species found in zoos and animal parks present a considerable challenge to facility managers in developing and implementing programs to prevent and control the spread of animal diseases. One need to only think about the nightmare consequences of an illness that could decimate a population of animals in a public setting such as a zoo and, in a worst-case scenario, spread to staff, visitors and even the public at large. Biologists have clearly shown how certain types of animals can act as reservoirs for disease viruses, for example, chimpanzees harboring the simian immunodeficiency virus that mutated to HIV or chickens and ducks spreading avian influenza virus to poultry workers and then to the public. Thus, disease control in zoos is an issue of the utmost importance, and managers and operators neglect it at their peril. The reputation and indeed the very existence of an animal park rests in the hands of a dedicated group of managers, veterinarians and technical staff, as well as zoo workers who must strictly follow procedures to prevent and contain animal-borne diseases. This case study focuses on the work of one man in a large internationally known facility to develop, implement, test and evaluate an innovative program for animal disease control. So, what would you do if you were the director of a large metropolitan zoo and your staff veterinarian came to you and said that there was an outbreak of a serious viral disease among a group of animals? Could you have prevented the disease? How will you treat the sick animals and stop the disease from spreading? Is there a risk of the zoo staff contracting the disease from handling sick animals? What about zoo visitors? These are all questions that are addressed in this new and intriguing case study focused on managing animal diseases in the setting of a zoo or wildlife park. Mark Craig, Director of Life Sciences at the Al Ain Zoo in the United Arab Emirates, has plenty to say about the planning, science and management skills necessary to insure that a large population of diverse wild animals remains healthy and thriving. The Al Ain Zoo is the largest of its kind in the Middle East, and while he has been in charge of the animal welfare program for more than six years, there have been few incidents of disease and all have been contained. What can be learned from his effective strategies and leadership skills is clearly discussed and illustrated in this unique real-world case study.

The authors have developed the case to be applied for a diploma, undergraduate students and it might help the students in the postgraduate. The case is appropriate for courses in the area of strategic management, operation management and health and safety.

Teaching notes are available upon request for educators only. These teaching notes should be shared solely with the instructor and students should not have access to. Please contact your library to gain login or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

CSS 11: Strategy.

Holistic approaches to public health such as “One Health” emphasize the interconnectedness between people, animals, ecosystems, and epidemic risk, and many advocate for this philosophy to be adopted within disaster risk management (DRM). Historically, animal and human diseases have been managed separately from each other, and apart from other hazards considered for DRM. Shifts in DRM, however, may complement a One Health approach. The taxonomy of hazards considered under DRM has expanded to include medical and social crises such as epizootics and terrorism. However, there is a gap in understanding how epidemic risk is integrated into DRM at the community-level. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

TACTIC adopts a participatory case study approach examining preparedness for multiple hazard types (floods, epidemics, earthquakes, and terrorism) at the community-level. This paper reports on findings from the epidemic case study which took as its focus the 2001 foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in the UK because of the diverse human, social, and environmental impacts of this “animal” disease.

Epizootic preparedness tends to focus on biosecurity and phytosanitary measures, and is geared towards agriculture and farming. Greater engagement with public health and behavioural sciences to manage public health impacts of animal disease epidemics, and activities for citizen engagement to improve preparedness are discussed. The impermeability of boundaries (hazard, institutional, disciplinary, etc.) is a key constraint to integrating One Health into DRM.

This work helps to situate the One Health discussion within the community-level DRM context.

Three events of significance to this country took place in 1899 – the British Food Journal was launched, Australia retained the Ashes, and the Boer War hostilities commenced. If challenged on the order of their importance, cricketers and Empire‐builders may be excused their preference. However, looking at it purely from the standpoint of pro bono publico, the dispassionate observer must surely opt for the birth of a certain publication as being ultimately the most beneficial of the three.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on economics literature on antimicrobial and alternative uses in food animal production on its current state, its drivers, impacts and policy, and provides a general picture of the research for this special agricultural input and future directions for the research and policy.

Reduction of antimicrobial uses in food animal production is relevant to both preventing antimicrobial resistance and ensuring global food security. This study focuses on reviewing antimicrobial impact on global food security, particularly in farm production by documenting the main drivers, functions and alternatives of antimicrobial animal uses, comparing different approaches used in evaluating its production effects and providing recommendations for future research and policy development.

Three main approaches, controlled animal experiments, comparisons between with and without using antimicrobials at the farm level and comparisons before and after antimicrobial ban as growth promoter, have been used in measuring food security effects of antimicrobial uses in food animal production. They are, however, answering different questions with different measuring conditions. The positive production impact of antimicrobial use is often associated to its functions as a growth promoter and in preventing and treating diseases. In this review the author question the technical legitimacy for antimicrobials as a growth promoter and argue that antimicrobials should be treated as a special class of conditional and supportive input in farm production instead of using it as a normal input in its impact evaluation.

An approach of combining damage control function and disease epidemiological model instead of a simplified production function should be used in its impact evaluation including in evaluating those used as antimicrobial growth promoters.

In reducing antimicrobial uses in animal production, apart from more active adoption of the alternatives, we call for a better understanding for the decision makings of antimicrobial use in the production process including government-veterinarian-farm links.

This study examines the main issues in current economic research in antimicrobial food animal production, clarifies ambiguities in antimicrobial production functions and in different approaches used in impact evaluation, provides a roadmap for reduction of antimicrobial uses and a new approach for the policy evaluation.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a dynamic, stochastic, mechanistic simulation model of a dairy business to evaluate the cost and benefit streams coinciding with technology investments. The model was constructed to embody the biological and economical complexities of a dairy farm system within a partial budgeting framework. A primary objective was to establish a flexible, user‐friendly, farm‐specific, decision‐making tool for dairy producers or their advisers and technology manufacturers.

The basic deterministic model was created in Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Seattle, Washington). The @Risk add‐in (Palisade Corporation, Ithaca, New York) for Excel was employed to account for the stochastic nature of key variables within a Monte Carlo simulation. Net present value was the primary metric used to assess the economic profitability of investments. The model was composed of a series of modules, which synergistically provide the necessary inputs for profitability analysis. Estimates of biological relationships within the model were obtained from the literature in an attempt to represent an average or typical US dairy. Technology benefits were appraised from the resulting impact on disease incidence, disease impact, and reproductive performance. In this paper, the model structure and methodology were described in detail.

Examples of the utility of examining the influence of stochastic input and output prices on the costs of culling, days open, and disease were examined. Each of these parameters was highly sensitive to stochastic prices and deterministic inputs.

Decision support tools, such as this one, that are designed to investigate dairy business decisions may benefit dairy producers.

One Health is defined as an approach of integrating animal, human, and environmental health to mitigate diseases. One Health promotes public health by studying all factors, such as agriculture, food, and water security, mechanisms of toxicity and pathogenesis of acute and chronic diseases, sociology, economics, and ecosystem health (to name a few). Such an approach is essential because human, animal, and ecosystem health are inextricably linked; therefore, with this One Health approach, we are called to work together to promote, improve, and defend the health and well-being of all by enhancing cooperation and collaboration between physicians, veterinarians social scientists, economists, psychologists, legal professionals, philosophers, and other scientific health and environmental professionals. As such, the One Health movement and approach is a growing vision in global health and is gaining increasing recognition by national and international institutions, organizations, stakeholders, NGOs, and health policymakers. Likewise, the role of world-class universities is pivotal in discovering One Health scientific knowledge and translating them to policy and evidence-based practices. Universities have responsibilities to train future professionals capable of solving global health issues through interdisciplinary scientific knowledge, integrative approaches to teaching, research collaboration, community linkages, and leadership. This chapter discusses the importance of One Health and the role of higher education institutions’ One Health partnerships to improve global health.

The great difficulties which attach to the fixing of legal standards of composition for food products have now to be grappled with by the Departmental Committee appointed by the Board of Agriculture to consider and determine what regulations should be made by the Board, under Section 4 of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 1899, with respect to the composition of butter. As we predicted in regard to the labours of the Milk and Cream Standards Committee, so we predict now that the Butter Committee will be unable to do more than to recommend standards and limits, which, while they will make for the protection of the public against the sale of grossly adulterated articles, will certainly not in any way insure the sale of butter of really satisfactory, or even of fair, composition. Standards and limits established by law for the purposes of the administration of criminal Acts of Parliament must of necessity be such as to legalise the sale of products of a most inferior character, to which the term “genuine” may still by law be applied as well as to legalise the sale of adulterated and sophisticated products so prepared as to come within the four corners of the law. It is, of course, an obvious necessity that official standards and limits should be established, and the Board of Agriculture are to be congratulated upon the manner in which they are endeavouring to deal with these extremely knotty problems; but it is important that misconception on the part of the public and the trade with respect to the effect of the regulations to be made should be as far as possible prevented. All that can be hoped for is that the conclusions at which the Committee may find themselves compelled to arrive will not be such as to place too high and too obvious a premium upon the sale of those inferior and scientifically‐adulterated products which are placed in such enormous quantities on the food market.

Aims to highlight how food contamination, whether accidental or deliberate, can have far‐reaching impact on individuals, organisations and the food supply chain.

This paper focuses on the use of agents such as foreign animal disease (FAD). The research included a literature review and evaluation to determine the mechanisms currently in place to counter‐act bioterrorism in the food supply chain with particular emphasis on poultry.

Food terrorism, where the contaminant is a FAD, would cause severe economic disruption by direct costs due to the culling of livestock and the compensation paid to growers. It could also lead to consequential loss to the local or national economy, loss of consumer confidence in the food supply chain and loss of political confidence and support following the mass culling of livestock, with some agents having the ability to impact directly on human health.

This paper analyses the current state of preparedness for food terrorism in the food supply chain and is of relevance to a cross‐section of the industry.

Millions of the British people have for some years now been struggling valiantly to live with hard times, watching them day by day grow worse but always hopefully that the cloud had a silver lining; that one day, reason and a sense of direction would prevail. Tyranny in many forms is a feature of history; the greatest epics have been risings of ordinary people to overthrow it. The modern form of tyranny is that of Money; the cruel and sinister ways in which it can be obtained and employed and the ineffectiveness of any measures taken to control the evils which result. Money savings over the years and the proverbial bank book, once the sure safeguard of ordinary people, are whittled away in value, never to recover. Causes always seemed to be contained within the country's own economy and industrial practices, and to this extent should have been possible of control. The complex and elaborate systems constructed by the last Government were at least intended for the purpose, but each attempt to curb excessive demands for more money, more and more for doing less and less— the nucleus of inflation—produced extreme reactions, termed collectively “industrial strife”. Every demand met without compensatory returns in increased work, inevitably led to rises in prices, felt most keenly in the field of food and consumer goods. What else would be expected from such a situation?