IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0206717.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benefit-cost analysis of the policy of mandatory annual rabies vaccination of domestic dogs in rabies-free Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Nigel C L Kwan
  • Akio Yamada
  • Katsuaki Sugiura

Abstract

Japan is one of the few rabies-free countries/territories which implement the policy of mandatory vaccination of domestic dogs. In order to assess the economic efficiency of such policy in reducing the economic burden of a future canine rabies outbreak in Japan, a benefit-cost analysis (BCA) was performed using probabilistic decision tree modelling. Input data derived from simulation results of published mathematical model, field investigation conducted by the authors at prefectural governments, literature review, international or Japanese database and empirical data of rabies outbreaks in other countries/territories. The current study revealed that the annual costs of implementing the current vaccination policy would be US$160,472,075 (90% prediction interval [PI]: $149,268,935–171,669,974). The economic burden of a potential single canine rabies outbreak in Japan were estimated to be US$1,682,707 (90% PI: $1,180,289–2,249,283) under the current vaccination policy, while it would be US$5,019,093 (90% PI: $3,986,882–6,133,687) under hypothetical abolition of vaccination policy, which is 3-fold higher. Under a damage-avoided approach, the annual benefits of implementing the current vaccination policy in expected value were estimated to be US$85.75 (90% PI: $55.73–116.89). The benefit-cost ratio (BCR) was estimated to be 5.35 X 10−7 (90% PI: 3.46 X 10−7–7.37 X 10−7), indicating that the implementation of the current policy is very economically inefficient for the purpose of reducing the economic burden of a potential canine rabies outbreak. In worse-case scenario analysis, the BCR would become above 1 (indicating economic efficiency) if the risk of rabies introduction increased to 0.04 corresponding to a level of risk where rabies would enter Japan in 26 years while the economic burden of a rabies outbreak under the abolition of vaccination policy increased to $7.53 billion. Best-case analysis further revealed that under relatively extreme circumstances the economic efficiency of the current policy could be improved by decreasing the vaccination price charged to dog owners, relaxing the frequency of vaccination to every two to three years and implementing the policy on a smaller scale, e.g. only in targeted prefectures instead of the whole Japan.

Suggested Citation

  • Nigel C L Kwan & Akio Yamada & Katsuaki Sugiura, 2018. "Benefit-cost analysis of the policy of mandatory annual rabies vaccination of domestic dogs in rabies-free Japan," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-18, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0206717
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0206717
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0206717&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0206717?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0206717. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.