Wild Animal Tuberculosis: Stakeholder Value Systems and Management of Disease

Abstract

When human health is put at risk from the transmission of animal diseases, the options for intervention often require input from stakeholders whose differing values systems contribute to decisions on disease management. Animal tuberculosis (TB), caused principally by Mycobacterium bovis is an archetypical zoonotic pathogen in that it can be transmitted from animals to humans and vice versa. Although elimination of zoonotic transmission of TB to humans is frequently promoted as the raison d'être for TB management in livestock, in many countries the control strategies are more likely based on minimizing the impact of sustained infection on the agricultural industry. Where wild animals are implicated in the epidemiology of the disease, the options for control and eradication can require involvement of additional stakeholder groups. Conflict can arise when different monetary and/or societal values are assigned to the affected animals. This may impose practical and ethical dilemmas for decision makers where one or more species of wild animal is seen by some stakeholders to have a greater value than the affected livestock. Here we assess the role of stakeholder values in influencing TB eradication strategies in a number of countries including Ireland, the UK, the USA, Spain, France, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. What it reveals is that the level of stakeholder involvement increases with the complexity of the epidemiology, and that similar groups of stakeholders may agree to a set of control and eradication measures in one region only to disagree with applying the same measures in another. The level of consensus depends on the considerations of the reservoir status of the infected host, the societal values assigned to each species, the type of interventions proposed, ethical issues raised by culling of sentient wild animals, and the economic cost benefit effectiveness of dealing with the problem in one or more species over a long time frame. While there is a societal benefit from controlling TB, the means to achieve this requires identification and long-term engagement with all key stakeholders in order to reach agreement on ethical frameworks that prioritize and justify control options, particularly where culling of wild animals is concerned.

Animal tuberculosis: impact of disease heterogeneity in transmission, diagnosis, and control

“…The legislation is strongly biased towards commercial animal productions and, in several countries, only deals with infection by M. bovis , excluding M. caprae as a causal agent of animal TB (Rodriguez‐Campos et al, 2014). One of the biggest issues concerning heterogeneity quantification is non‐commercial animal production, as testing is not obligatory (Gormley & Corner, 2018). Still, those animals remain a source of contamination and may interact with both wildlife and commercial production animals.…”

“…Moreover, the difference between disease reservoir and dead‐end spillover host is important when developing management and control programmes and defining the host targets to be monitored. Additionally, this distinction impacts the stakeholders' perspective and level of engagement with the disease problem, with stakeholders normally agreeing with a radical response to deal with spillover hosts (Gormley & Corner, 2018). However, the problem complexity increases when a reservoir host is the target of intervention, with an increase on the number of stakeholders being involved and more complex ethical issues arise that need to be solved, together with the economic cost–benefit effectiveness of dealing with the disease in a multi‐host and long‐time spatial system (Gormley & Corner, 2018).…”

“…Additionally, this distinction impacts the stakeholders' perspective and level of engagement with the disease problem, with stakeholders normally agreeing with a radical response to deal with spillover hosts (Gormley & Corner, 2018). However, the problem complexity increases when a reservoir host is the target of intervention, with an increase on the number of stakeholders being involved and more complex ethical issues arise that need to be solved, together with the economic cost–benefit effectiveness of dealing with the disease in a multi‐host and long‐time spatial system (Gormley & Corner, 2018). Stakeholders are also strongly influenced by different perspectives on the economic, technical or scientific knowledge, ethics, social and cultural background, ecological concerns, and political will (Chardonnet et al, 2002; Ryser‐Degiorgis, Pewsner, & Angst, 2015).…”

“…Heterogeneity in adherence to herd biosecurity measures and compliance with surveillance and slaughter of the reactor animal also increases the heterogeneity of control performance worldwide. So, in a management and control programme, not all species are of equal significance in the epidemiology of the disease or are subjected to uniform disease management (Gormley & Corner, 2018), leaving room for individual interpretations and, once again, increasing heterogeneity in an already complex epidemiological scenario.…”

“…Intervention targeting wildlife reservoirs is often underperformed, with these hosts being mostly screened postmortem and not removed earlier to prevent transmission cascades, due to high operational costs. The focus on high‐risk groups can be efficient, but the success of the control programmes is highly dependent on the mono‐host or multi‐host transmission system existing in the region and on the ongoing environmental cycle (Allen, Skuce, & Byrne, 2018; Gormley & Corner, 2018; Trauer et al, 2018).…”