Ghimire Rabina, Mohanty Parimala, Hiby Elly, Larkins Andrew, Dürr Salome, Hartnack Sonja
Section of Epidemiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Jyoti and Bhupat Mehta School of Health Sciences and Technology, Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati, Assam, India.
Front Vet Sci. 2025 Jan 20;12:1519913. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1519913. eCollection 2025.
Dog Population Management (DPM) systems primarily aim to reduce the free-roaming dog population, improve the health and welfare of humans and dogs, and foster their peaceful coexistence. A key challenge to resource allocation and evidence-based policy making in DPM is the rare evaluation of the associated socio-economic impacts. This scoping review identifies, maps, and summarizes published parameters and methods on the socio-economic aspect of DPM systems.
Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, and with a protocol registered on the Open Science Framework, this review explores (i) types of DPM services, (ii) types of parameters (intervention, impact, monetized, or non-monetized), (iii) methodological approaches (such as cost-benefit or cost-effectiveness analysis), and (iv) gaps and challenges in socio-economic DPM assessments. Relevant publications were identified through a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science.
Our review identified 14 out of more than 7,200 studies indicating the limitation of socio-economic data associated with DPM systems. The studies revealed diverse approaches to DPM, sterilization being the most frequently used service, often combined with vaccination and community awareness. Culling was also used by several studies as a DPM intervention, though considered unethical. The review highlighted a range of intervention, impact, and monetary parameters to evaluate the economics of DPM systems, demonstrating the complexity and varied scope of the services. Varied categorizations of the dog population were observed, making comparative evaluation challenging. Economic methods such as cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses were observed, identifying several associated economic metrics. Studies highlighted gaps mostly related to data availability and accessibility.
The limitations of socio-economic data arise from a lack of standardized methodologies across regions and contexts and limited data collection efforts. Prioritizing systematic collection of data on costs, benefits and social impacts allows for a more robust analysis of DPM systems. Developing tools and standardized reporting methods would further facilitate consistent evaluation of impacts, efficient resource allocation and evidence-based policy making to implement the most cost-effective DPM systems.
DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/NHE3X.
犬类种群管理（DPM）系统的主要目标是减少流浪犬数量，改善人类和犬类的健康与福利，并促进它们的和平共处。DPM中资源分配和循证决策的一个关键挑战是对相关社会经济影响的评估很少。本范围综述确定、梳理并总结了已发表的关于DPM系统社会经济方面的参数和方法。
遵循PRISMA-ScR指南，并在开放科学框架上注册了方案，本综述探讨了（i）DPM服务的类型，（ii）参数的类型（干预、影响、货币化或非货币化），（iii）方法学途径（如成本效益或成本效果分析），以及（iv）社会经济DPM评估中的差距和挑战。通过对PubMed、Embase、Scopus和科学网进行系统检索，确定了相关出版物。
我们的综述在7200多项研究中发现了14项，表明与DPM系统相关的社会经济数据存在局限性。这些研究揭示了多种DPM方法，绝育是最常用的服务方式，通常与疫苗接种和社区宣传相结合。一些研究也将扑杀用作DPM干预措施，尽管这被认为是不道德的。该综述强调了一系列用于评估DPM系统经济性的干预、影响和货币参数，表明了这些服务的复杂性和不同范围。观察到对犬类种群的分类各不相同，这使得比较评估具有挑战性。观察到了成本效益和成本效果分析等经济方法，确定了几个相关的经济指标。研究突出了主要与数据可用性和可获取性相关的差距。
社会经济数据的局限性源于不同地区和背景下缺乏标准化方法以及数据收集工作有限。优先系统收集关于成本、效益和社会影响的数据，有助于对DPM系统进行更有力的分析。开发工具和标准化报告方法将进一步促进对影响的一致评估、有效的资源分配和循证决策，以实施最具成本效益的DPM系统。
DOI：10.17605/OSF.IO/NHE3X。
