Issues associated with US livestock disease compensation in the 21st century.

Abstract

This chapter focses on compensation for livestock when the government orders their destruction to stop or control the spread of livestock diseases. It examines: the reason for offering compensation; the current compensation schemes from the US federal government's perspective; issues that make fair compensation difficult to achieve; and compensation alternatives, including insurance, industry-generated compensation funds, and a permit/assurance bonding scheme.

Will an incentive‐compatible indemnity policy please stand up? Livestock producer willingness to self‐protect

“…Government indemnity is not the only way to encourage producers to report potential disease problems. Alternatives include insurance, industry generated funds and a permit/assurance bonding scheme (Ott, 2006). While the United States does not currently have a significant livestock insurance industry or the other aforementioned mechanisms, several European countries have various combinations of government and industry funded schemes (Ott, 2006).…”

Adoption of Secure Pork Supply Plan Biosecurity by U.S. Swine Producers

“…The literature on biosecurity adoption by swine producers in other countries is more comprehensive likely due to the number and type of animal disease outbreaks and damages incurred as well as both the existence of permit/assurance bonding schemes where it is the owners' responsibility to keep their animals free of disease and livestock disease insurance products available that offer reduced premiums for owners practicing good biosecurity (11). In particular, many studies have addressed livestock biosecurity adoptions in Europe, with recent examples including Simon-Grifé et al (12) in Spain, Sahlström et al (13) in Finland, and Postma et al (14) in Belgium, France, Germany, and Sweden.…”

Indemnity payments in foreign animal disease eradication campaigns in the United States

“…Regulations assume that FMV will be determined by an appraiser. 5 There are multiple sections within 9 CFR detailing the appraisal and indemnity process; however, this process may differ for FADs versus endemic (ie, program) diseases. Animals with FADs are usually not marketed or sent for control-slaughter.…”

“…9 Fair market value also has been defined as the estimated monetary worth of an animal at the time of its taking. 5 However, given the legal definition, the FMV could be zero or close to zero for an animal with an FAD because there is unlikely to be any willing buyer. Offering zero indemnity payments will not provide incentives for owners to cooperate with reporting and depopulation.…”