IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v13y2023i11p2086-d1272462.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

U.S. Small-Scale Livestock Operation Approach to Biosecurity

Author

Listed:
  • Glen Morris

    (Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA)

  • Shawn Ehlers

    (Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA)

  • John Shutske

    (Biological Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA)

Abstract

Agricultural biosecurity is a pressing global issue that must be given continuous attention by researchers, producers, consumers, and government agencies responsible for food security. This article examines the relevant literature specifically related to recommended practices for U.S. small-scale farms and ranches to minimize potential disease susceptibility in animals and humans. Current training and educational resources appear to focus on mechanisms of disease transmission and ecological and/or social factors that support mitigation efforts. Training against biological incursion and knowledge of diseases are typically focused on serving the continuing educational needs of veterinarians, epidemiological groups, and animal health technicians for large-scale facilities. However, there is a gap in the available resources that could be beneficial to keepers of livestock, smaller farmers, and ranchers who lack the financial capability to employ the most proven prevention or mitigation strategies. There have been limited comprehensive reviews in the U.S. of disease control, perception, education, or analysis on current prevention measures among small-scale producers. Findings from a review of the literature were used to formulate disease-prevention training resources and outreach strategies directed at U.S. small-scale farm operators and those likely to be involved in disease outbreak situations (e.g., veterinarians, first responders, and family members). The evaluation of the current types and causes of diseases, along with their respective level of current threat to agriculture, was a fundamental strategy to achieve this goal while reviewing literature focused on U.S. biosecurity and international biosecurity. Developing an evidence-based approach to prevention measures for biosecurity operations will allow for more effective execution and adoption of protocols for small-scale farms.

Suggested Citation

  • Glen Morris & Shawn Ehlers & John Shutske, 2023. "U.S. Small-Scale Livestock Operation Approach to Biosecurity," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-10, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:11:p:2086-:d:1272462
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/11/2086/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/11/2086/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peterson, Willis L., 1997. "Are Large Farms More Efficient?," Staff Papers 13411, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    2. Scott C. Merrill & Christopher J. Koliba & Susan M. Moegenburg & Asim Zia & Jason Parker & Timothy Sellnow & Serge Wiltshire & Gabriela Bucini & Caitlin Danehy & Julia M. Smith, 2018. "Decision-making in Livestock Biosecurity Practices amidst Environmental and Social Uncertainty: Evidence from an Experimental Game," Papers 1811.01081, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2019.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Johan F. M. Swinnen & Liesbeth Dries & Karen Macours, 2005. "Transition and agricultural labor," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 15-34, January.
    2. Zegar, Józef S., 2012. "Gospodarstwa Rodzinne Wobec Wyzwań Wyżywienia I Ochrony Środowiska – Ujęcie Globalne," Village and Agriculture (Wieś i Rolnictwo), Polish Academy of Sciences (IRWiR PAN), Institute of Rural and Agricultural Development, vol. 4(157).
    3. Rogier van den Brink & Glen Thomas & Hans Binswanger & John Bruce & Frank Byamugisha, 2005. "Consensus, Confusion, and Controversy : Selected Land Reform Issues in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 7387.
    4. Dries, Liesbeth & Swinnen, Johan F. M., 2002. "Institutional Reform and Labor Reallocation During Transition: Theory Evidence From Polish Agriculture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 457-474, March.
    5. Fertő, Imre, 2002. "A mezőgazdasági termelés szerkezetének változásai a fejlett országokban, II. Az üzemnagyság és a mérethozadék problémája a mezőgazdaságban [Changes in the structure of agricultural production in th," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(9), pages 760-773.
    6. Mathijs, Erik & Swinnen, Johan F M, 1998. "The Economics of Agricultural Decollectivization in East Central Europe and the Former Soviet Union," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(1), pages 1-26, October.
    7. Morrison Paul, Catherine J. & Nehring, Richard F. & Banker, David E. & Breneman, Vincent E., 2001. "Productivity Growth, Technological Progress, and Technical Efficiency in the Heartland and Southern Cotton States:1996-1999," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20679, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Erik Mathijs & Johan F. M. Swinnen, 2001. "Production Organization And Efficiency During Transition: An Empirical Analysis Of East German Agriculture," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(1), pages 100-107, February.
    9. Saed Alizamir & Foad Iravani & Hamed Mamani, 2019. "An Analysis of Price vs. Revenue Protection: Government Subsidies in the Agriculture Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 32-49, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:11:p:2086-:d:1272462. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.