Hop G E, Mourits M C M, Oude Lansink A G J M, Saatkamp H W
Business Economics Group, Department of Social Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Transbound Emerg Dis. 2016 Feb;63(1):e80-e102. doi: 10.1111/tbed.12236. Epub 2014 Jun 4.
The cross-border region of the Netherlands (NL) and the two German states of North Rhine Westphalia (NRW) and Lower Saxony (LS) is a large and highly integrated livestock production area. This region increasingly develops towards a single epidemiological area in which disease introduction is a shared veterinary and, consequently, economic risk. The objectives of this study were to examine classical swine fever (CSF) control strategies' veterinary and direct economic impacts for NL, NRW and LS given the current production structure and to analyse CSF's cross-border causes and impacts within the NL-NRW-LS region. The course of the epidemic was simulated by the use of InterSpread Plus, whereas economic analysis was restricted to calculating disease control costs and costs directly resulting from the control measures applied. Three veterinary control strategies were considered: a strategy based on the minimum EU requirements, a vaccination and a depopulation strategy based on NL and GER's contingency plans. Regardless of the veterinary control strategy, simulated outbreak sizes and durations for 2010 were much smaller than those simulated previously, using data from over 10 years ago. For example, worst-case outbreaks (50th percentile) in NL resulted in 30-40 infected farms and lasted for two to four and a half months; associated direct costs and direct consequential costs ranged from €24.7 to 28.6 million and €11.7 to 26.7 million, respectively. Both vaccination and depopulation strategies were efficient in controlling outbreaks, especially large outbreaks, whereas the EU minimum strategy was especially deficient in controlling worst-case outbreaks. Both vaccination and depopulation strategies resulted in low direct costs and direct consequential costs. The probability of cross-border disease spread was relatively low, and cross-border spread resulted in small, short outbreaks in neighbouring countries. Few opportunities for further cross-border harmonization and collaboration were identified, including the implementation of cross-border regions (free and diseased regions regardless of the border) in case of outbreaks within close proximity of the border, and more and quicker sharing of information across the border. It was expected, however, that collaboration to mitigate the market effects of an epidemic will create more opportunities to lower the impact of CSF outbreaks in a cross-border context.
荷兰（NL）与德国的北莱茵 - 威斯特法伦州（NRW）和下萨克森州（LS）的跨境地区是一个大型且高度一体化的畜牧业生产区。该地区正日益朝着单一的流行病学区域发展，在这个区域内，疾病传入是一个共同面临的兽医问题，进而也是经济风险。本研究的目的是，鉴于当前的生产结构，考察经典猪瘟（CSF）控制策略对荷兰、北莱茵 - 威斯特法伦州和下萨克森州在兽医及直接经济方面的影响，并分析经典猪瘟在荷兰 - 北莱茵 - 威斯特法伦州 - 下萨克森州区域内的跨境病因及影响。疫情发展过程通过使用InterSpread Plus进行模拟，而经济分析仅限于计算疾病控制成本以及所采取控制措施直接产生的成本。考虑了三种兽医控制策略：基于欧盟最低要求的策略、疫苗接种策略以及基于荷兰和德国应急计划的扑杀策略。无论采用哪种兽医控制策略，2010年模拟的疫情规模和持续时间都比使用十多年前的数据模拟的结果小得多。例如，荷兰的最坏情况疫情（第50百分位数）导致30至40个农场感染，持续两到四个半月；相关的直接成本和直接间接成本分别在2470万至2860万欧元以及1170万至2670万欧元之间。疫苗接种和扑杀策略在控制疫情方面都很有效率，尤其是对于大规模疫情，而欧盟最低策略在控制最坏情况疫情方面尤为不足。疫苗接种和扑杀策略都导致了较低的直接成本和直接间接成本。跨境疾病传播的概率相对较低且跨境传播在邻国引发的疫情规模小、持续时间短。几乎没有发现进一步跨境协调与合作的机会，包括在边境附近爆发疫情时实施跨境区域（无论边境的自由区域和疫区）以及更快速地跨境共享信息。然而，预计为减轻疫情对市场的影响而开展的合作将创造更多机会，以降低跨境背景下经典猪瘟疫情的影响。
