TY - JOUR
T1 - Using a Bayesian Network predictive model to understand vulnerability of Australian sheep producers to a foot and mouth disease outbreak
AU - Manyweathers, Jennifer
AU - Maru, Yiheyis
AU - Hayes, Lynne
AU - Loechel, Barton
AU - Kruger, Heleen
AU - Mankad, Aditi
AU - Xie, Gang
AU - Woodgate, Rob
AU - Hernandez-Jover, Marta
N1 - Copyright © 2021 Manyweathers, Maru, Hayes, Loechel, Kruger, Mankad, Xie, Woodgate and Hernandez-Jover.
PY - 2021/6/11
Y1 - 2021/6/11
N2 - To maintain and strengthen Australia's competitive international
advantage in sheep meat and wool markets, the biosecurity systems that
support these industries need to be robust and effective. These systems,
strengthened by jurisdictional and livestock industry investments, can
also be enhanced by a deeper understanding of individual producer risk
of exposure to animal diseases and capacity to respond to these risks.
This observational study developed a Vulnerability framework, built from
current data from Australian sheep producers around behaviors and
beliefs that may impact on their likelihood of Exposure and Response
Capacity (willingness and ability to respond) to an emergency animal
disease (EAD). Using foot and mouth disease (FMD) as a model, a
cross-sectional survey gathered information on sheep producers'
demographics, and their practices and beliefs around animal health
management and biosecurity. Using the Vulnerability framework, a
Bayesian Network (BN) model was developed as a first attempt to develop a
decision making tool to inform risk based surveillance resource
allocation. Populated by the data from 448 completed questionnaires, the
BN model was analyzed to investigate relationships between variables
and develop producer Vulnerability profiles. Respondents reported high
levels of implementation of biosecurity practices that impact the
likelihood of exposure to an EAD, such as the use of appropriate animal
movement documentation (75.4%) and isolation of incoming stock (64.9%).
However, adoption of other practices relating to feral animal control
and biosecurity protocols for visitors were limited. Respondents
reported a high uptake of Response Capacity practices, including
identifying themselves as responsible for observing (94.6%), reporting
unusual signs of disease in their animals (91.0%) and daily/weekly
inspection of animals (90.0%). The BN analysis identified six
Vulnerability typologies, with three levels of Exposure (high, moderate,
low) and two levels of Response Capacity (high, low), as described by
producer demographics and practices. The most influential Exposure
variables on producer Vulnerability included adoption levels of visitor
biosecurity and visitor access protocols. Findings from this study can
guide decisions around resource allocation to improve Australia's
readiness for EAD incursion and strengthen the country's biosecurity
system.
AB - To maintain and strengthen Australia's competitive international
advantage in sheep meat and wool markets, the biosecurity systems that
support these industries need to be robust and effective. These systems,
strengthened by jurisdictional and livestock industry investments, can
also be enhanced by a deeper understanding of individual producer risk
of exposure to animal diseases and capacity to respond to these risks.
This observational study developed a Vulnerability framework, built from
current data from Australian sheep producers around behaviors and
beliefs that may impact on their likelihood of Exposure and Response
Capacity (willingness and ability to respond) to an emergency animal
disease (EAD). Using foot and mouth disease (FMD) as a model, a
cross-sectional survey gathered information on sheep producers'
demographics, and their practices and beliefs around animal health
management and biosecurity. Using the Vulnerability framework, a
Bayesian Network (BN) model was developed as a first attempt to develop a
decision making tool to inform risk based surveillance resource
allocation. Populated by the data from 448 completed questionnaires, the
BN model was analyzed to investigate relationships between variables
and develop producer Vulnerability profiles. Respondents reported high
levels of implementation of biosecurity practices that impact the
likelihood of exposure to an EAD, such as the use of appropriate animal
movement documentation (75.4%) and isolation of incoming stock (64.9%).
However, adoption of other practices relating to feral animal control
and biosecurity protocols for visitors were limited. Respondents
reported a high uptake of Response Capacity practices, including
identifying themselves as responsible for observing (94.6%), reporting
unusual signs of disease in their animals (91.0%) and daily/weekly
inspection of animals (90.0%). The BN analysis identified six
Vulnerability typologies, with three levels of Exposure (high, moderate,
low) and two levels of Response Capacity (high, low), as described by
producer demographics and practices. The most influential Exposure
variables on producer Vulnerability included adoption levels of visitor
biosecurity and visitor access protocols. Findings from this study can
guide decisions around resource allocation to improve Australia's
readiness for EAD incursion and strengthen the country's biosecurity
system.
KW - Bayesian netword model
KW - foot and mouth disease
KW - biosecurity
KW - vulnerability
KW - Australian sheep producers
KW - serveillance
KW - partnership
U2 - 10.3389/fvets.2021.668679
DO - 10.3389/fvets.2021.668679
M3 - Article
C2 - 34179162
SN - 2297-1769
VL - 8
SP - 1
EP - 12
JO - Frontiers in Veterinary Science
JF - Frontiers in Veterinary Science
M1 - 668679
ER -