Dear Paul,
 
It can be either way, but each option has its disadvantages. If the socio-economics of PPR control is a main stand alone theme, the main challenge would be how the analysis would feed directly into or support the discussions and decisions made in the other major themes in a timely and coordinated manner. My experience is that often, a disconnect occurs where socio-economic findings don’t inform strategies.   On the other hand, if it's cross-cutting, the technical experts tend to ignore the issues Dr Nick Honhold  has raised  as they are only interested in socio-economic impacts only.  The control process  therefore faces the challenge of being disrupted by these other socio-economic issues.
 
I personally would prefer cross-cutting but have all the socio-economics issues of PPR prevention and control be delineated and assigned to the relevant major themes  (I hope you and others will help us to do this - mod). It should be kept in mind that any analysis done should inform policies and strategies developed be it for funding and resources mobilization, surveillance, diagnostics, vaccine production and delivery.  
 
Tabitha


To unsubscribe from the FAO-AnimalHealth-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=FAO-AnimalHealth-L&A=1