Dear all,
I have enjoyed the last few weeks of this e-conference, and especially the last interactions. Let me introduce myself – I used to work at FAO as
coordinator of socio-economics on animal health, where I was especially interested in smallholder diseases, of which PPR was one of the important ones, and I spend significant time looking at the impact of PPR on livelihoods.
I agree with what both Tabitha and Nick say, but would also like to take the issues of innovation as mentioned by the moderator, and see that to
deal with PPR (whether eradication or elimination or even living with the disease) we need to look for innovative solutions. The world has changed and is not as willing to invest in large schemes. This means developing a mosaic of approaches, both at global,
regional and local level, building on the epidemiology that is there, but also on the ability of livestock owners to participate in protecting his/her assets.
This leads to socio-economics, though justification is important – 1) but be aware that goats are different to cattle, and the justification both
at national level and household level is much harder to make in comparison to cattle. Goats monetary value is lower and their role within these households and national GDP is very different. Providing a different cost picture, and not always a convincing one.
Goats often fulfill a more livelihood/resilience role. An innovation here could be looking for none traditional partners in dealing with the disease, either livelihood based organizations or even the private sector (in all its shapes and forms). 2)
Placing socio-economics under justification means you lose out on the breadth of input socio-economics can give in providing solutions to getting rid of PPR, as mentioned, it can help understand the cost benefit aspects, and ways of better targeting disease
management to the mosaic of goat systems across the world. An innovation here would be to engage and indeed link the epidemiology much closer to the social sciences from the beginning.
Looking forward to further discussions,
Nicoline
From: Establishment of a PPR Global Research and Expertise Network (PPR-GREN) [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Paul Rossiter
Sent: 21 February 2014 13:34
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: From Dr Nick Honhold also on the wide role of socio-economics in PPR control
Dr Honhold writes with similar advice to Dr Kimani about the wider involvement of socio-economics in PPR control. It can provide much
more than simply $£ "Justification" for eradication. Moderator.
Dear All
I think what Paul has suggested looks pretty good. I'd like to add a suggestion but am not sure where it will come. Socio-economic impact is one thing but I think we need also to focus on understanding the socio-economics of why and how people keep small ruminants.
I see this as somewhat different because we need to be sure that the campaigns and control measures we develop fit in with the lives of the owners and keepers of small ruminants in each country/region/culture, indeed are developed with them. Perhaps this is
part of implementation but it is one that has often been ignored with top down solutions devised by technical specialists having to be forced on people or amended after they have caused the overall purpose to lose credibility. Where PPR is having an immediate
socio-economic impact and people haven't come to live with it, implementation may be easy, but outside those areas it may not be so easy unless we understand thoroughly what the background socio-economic and cultural situation is. In this respect, PPR may
have important similarities with HPAI control as well as with RP control. We also need to bear in mind that in many areas, small ruminants are owned and cared for by women so we must be sure to involve them in the process.
This may seem picky but my experience is that this is an aspect that tends to end up being addressed post hoc as a matter of necessity to correct failures that could have been avoided by thinking about it up front. I think we need to have social scientists
and gender specialists involved all along the way. Hopefully there are already some involved in this discussion.
Nick Honhold