Most infectious diseases in humans originate from animals. In this paper, we explore the role of animal farming and meat consumption in the emergence and amplification of infectious diseases. First, we discuss how meat production increases epidemic risks, either directly through increased contact with wild and farmed animals or indirectly through its impact on the environment (e.g., biodiversity loss, water use, climate change). Traditional food systems such as bushmeat and backyard farming increase the risks of disease transmission from wild animals, while intensive farming amplifies the impact of the disease due to the high density, genetic proximity, increased immunodeficiency, and live transport of farmed animals. Second, we describe the various direct and indirect costs of animal-based infectious diseases, and in particular, how these diseases can negatively impact the economy and the environment. Last, we discuss policies to reduce the social costs of infectious diseases. While existing regulatory frameworks such as the "One Health" approach focus on increasing farms' biosecurity and emergency preparedness, we emphasize the need to better align stakeholders' incentives and to reduce meat consumption. We discuss in particular the implementation of a "zoonotic" Pigouvian tax, and innovations such as insectbased food or cultured meat.

Vaccination is one of the main tools currently available to control animal diseases. In eradication campaigns, vaccination plays a crucial role by reducing the number of susceptible hosts with the ultimate goal of interrupting disease transmission. Nevertheless, mass vaccination campaigns may be very expensive and in some cases unprofitable. VacciCost is a tool designed to help decision-makers in the estimation of the resources required to implement mass livestock vaccination campaigns against regulated diseases. The tool focuses on the operational or running costs of the campaign, so acquisition of new equipment or vehicles is not considered. It takes into account different types of production systems to differentiate the vaccination productivity (number of animals vaccinated per day) in systems where animals are concentrated and easy to reach, from those characterized by small herds that are scattered and less accessible. The resource requirements are classified in eight categories: vaccines, injection supplies, personnel, transport, maintenance and overhead, training, social mobilization, and surveillance and monitoring. This categorization allows identifying the most expensive components of a vaccination campaign, which is crucial to design cost-reduction strategies. The use of the tool is illustrated using data collected in collaboration with Senegalese Veterinary Services regarding vaccination against peste des petits ruminants. The average daily number of animals vaccinated per vaccination team was found to be crucial for the costs of the campaign so significant savings can be obtained by implementing training to improve the performance of vaccination teams.

In this paper, we provide reviews of recent scientific findings on health effects and preference valuation of health risks related to pesticides, and the role of benefit-cost analysis in policies related to pesticides. Our reviews reveal that whereas the focus of the health literature has been on individuals with direct exposure to pesticides, e.g. farmers, the literature on preference elicitation has focused on those with indirect exposure, e.g. consumers. Our discussion of pesticides policies emphasizes the need to clarify the rationale for regulation and the role of risk perceptions in benefit-cost analysis, and stress the importance of inter-disciplinary research in this area.

One of the main strategies to control the spread of infectious animal diseases is the implementation of movement restrictions. This paper shows a loss in efficiency of the movement restriction policy (MRP) when behavioral responses of farmers are taken into account. Incorporating the strategic behavior of farmers in an epidemiologic model reveals that the MRP can trigger premature animal sales by farms at high risk of becoming infected that significantly reduce the efficacy of the policy. The results are validated in a parameterized network via Monte Carlo simulations and measures to mitigate the loss of efficiency of the MRP are discussed. Financial aid to farmers can be justified by public health concerns, not only for equity. This paper contributes to developing an interdisciplinary analytical framework regarding the expansion of infectious diseases combining economic and epidemiologic dimensions.