Presentation by Dr Ayako Ebata of the Institute of Development Studies to the 2nd Regional Workshop on Swine Disease Control in Asia, held in Beijing, June 2017:

1. Socio-economic effect of swine diseases:
preliminary insights from Myanmar
Ayako Ebata
June 27, 2017
2nd Regional Workshop on Swine Disease Control in Asia
Beijing, China

2. Background: why do pig diseases matter?
Livestock and the poor
• 2/3 of resource-poor rural households keep livestock (Randolph et al., 2014);
• Livestock serves multiple purposes: food, income source, manure, labour, saving, social
status, etc.;
Pigs and pork in Asia
• Pork: the most important source of meat (58% of total meat output) increase in pig
population (Huynh et al., 2016);
• Pigs: reduced socio-economic risks through diversification of income sources, linkages
among resources (land, water, crops and pigs), value adding through converting plant
materials to animal products.

3. Background: why do pig diseases matter?
Pig diseases and their effect on livelihood
• Those that influence the vulnerability and assets of smallholder livestock keepers:
Causing high levels of mortality and jeopardize human health;
• Those that constrain increases in productivity:
Pathogenic in non-indigenous breeds of livestock that are used for increasing
productivity;
• Those that constrain market access:
Human disease can be caused by consumption of livestock products (e.g. meat, by-
products) (Randolph et al., 2007);
• Perceived risk of losing pigs leads to sometimes reckless preventive strategies

4. Background: Myanmar’s pig industry
• Expected to show the most rapid growth in pig production to 2030 (ILRI, 2012);
• 2nd most popular source of meat after chicken;
52%
30%
2%
12%
4%
Percentage sharing in total meat in Myanmar (LBVD, 2016)
Fowl meat Pork Mutton Beef Duck meat & others

5. Pig Density in Myanmar
(2012-13)

6. Background: Myanmar’s pig industry
• “Blue ear disease” or PRRS detected since 2011 (LBVD, 2017).
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

7. Background: Myanmar’s pig industry
Pig diseases identified (2010-2016) No.
cases
PRRS 146
PCV2 (Porcine cero virus type 2) 34
Swine plague 14
CSF (Classical swine fever) 2
Porcine brucellosis 1
Parasitic infection (metastrongylus, ascaris, trichuris, strongyloides, coccidiosis) 15
Bacterial disease (Citrobacter, Bacillus, Colicacillosis, Klebsiella, E. coli, Staphylococcus, Streptococcus,
Enterobacter aerogenes, Bordetella bronchoseptica, Pneumococci, Proteus, Enterococcus, Pseudomonus,
Salmonella, salmonella cholera suis, Shigella, Pasteurella, Pasteurella haemolytica, Pasteurella aeruginosa,
Diplococci Streptococcus pneumonia, Actonobacillus suis, Clostridium, Serratia, Vibrio)
232
Enteritis, Interstitial pneumonia, liver abscess, Pneumonia, Suppurative pneumonia, Pleuropneumonia, Heat
stroke, Piglet scour, Jaundice, Traumatic injury, Tumor, Gastnitis, Calcium deficiency, Cerebral haemorrhage,
edema, internal bleeding, Internal haemorrhage, Diarrhoea, Hepatitis, Nephritis, Septicaemia, General
debility, Ascities
135

8. Myanmar Pig Partnership and its insights
Our project
• To identify the burden of pig-borne zoonotic diseases on various stakeholders;
Salmonella, Streptococcus Suis
• Objectives:
Characterization of pork supply chains and related socio-economic factors;
Perceptions of zoonotic and livestock diseases;
Their risks and preventive health programmes;
Designing policies that combat pig diseases and associated human infection;
Insights
• What are the effects of pig diseases on socio-economic status of those involved in the pig
and pork sector?

9. Study sites
3 townships in the Yangon region:
• Production scale: Super large (1,000+ pigs); large (70 to 1,000 pigs); Medium (30 to 70
pigs); Small (less than 30 pigs);
• Geographical location: Urban; Peri-urban; Rural.
2 villages/wards per township:
• Active in pig farming;
• Representative of the type of pig farming in the respective townships.

10. Taikkyi
Hlegu

11. Data collection methodologies
• In-depth individual interviews with multiple stakeholders (June – December 2016)
From farm to table: farmers, pig slaughterers, pork vendors, pork consumers
• Focus group discussions (June – December 2016)
Farmers and pork consumers
• Ethnographic observation (2 days/farm, December 2016 – March 2017)
Farmers

12. What data?
• In-depth individual interviews with multiple stakeholders
Livelihood options;
Perceived risk of pig diseases and their effects on livelihood;
• Focus group discussions
Dynamics and driving factors of pig/pork sector;
Socio-economic status of those involved in pig business;
• Ethnographic observation
Deeper understanding of behaviour, perceptions and actions around pig raising.

13. Study participants
Stakeholder # people
interviewed/
village
Total # people
interviewed
# focus group
discussions/
village
Total # FDG
conducted
Farmers 4 28 2 12
Slaughterers 2 12 NA NA
Slaughterhouse
workers
2 12 NA NA
Pork vendors 2 12 NA NA
Pork
consumers
2 12 1 6
Total 12 76 3 18

14. Socio-economic costs: household-level
Productivity loss and associated economic costs
• Diseased piglets do not gain weight;
• Sick pigs are sold at a lower price:
regular price of commercial breed = $170 – 205 US
price of sick pigs = $165 – 200 US;
• Dead pigs need to be buried or may be sold at $45 US;
• Diseased sows may give still birth:
Piglets can be sold at around $100 US;
• Economic losses for resource-poor, cash-constraint households:
Implications on paying off loans (20% interest rate);
Difficulty in financing household needs (emergency and/or expensive health care
costs, children’s education).

15. Socio-economic costs: household-level
Increase in costs for treatment and prevention due to the veterinary health system
• Limited veterinary health care provision alongside increase in livestock population:
Increased demand for livestock production with limited number of staffs;
Application of veterinary drugs requires a qualified vet;
Number of staffs of the Livestock Breeding and Veterinary Department (LBVD)
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
Vets 1,050 1,028 1,141 1,037 1,087 1,187 1,172 1,334
Others 891 818 671 521 799 1,354 1,757 1,838
Total 1,941 1,846 1,812 1,558 1,886 2,541 2,929 3,172

16. Socio-economic costs: household-level
Increase in costs for treatment and prevention due to the veterinary health system
• National diagnostic laboratories:
The number of samples sent by farmers is limited;
Sampling techniques not familiar to farmers;
Limited diagnostic testing done;
• Vaccination for PRRS approved by LBVD in 2017:
Small-scale producers are not encouraged to use vaccination they are left with
farm management techniques and use of antimicrobials;
• Unauthorized and irrational use of antimicrobials;
• Traditional preventive measure (e.g. lime powder) effective?

17. Socio-economic costs: sector-level
Variation in pig prices (correspond to prevalence of pig diseases)
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Price: commercial breed (MMK/viss)
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Price: local breed (MMK/viss)

18. Socio-economic costs: sector-level
Variation in pig prices
• Complex supply chain that involves multiple stakeholders
Farmers
Buyers
Large-scale urban slaughterersInformal
slaughterers
Small-scale rural slaughterers
Brokers
Wholesalers

19. Socio-economic costs: sector-level
Variation in pig prices
• Complex supply chain that involves multiple stakeholders
Enforcing traceability is challenging;
• Product differentiation non-existent;
• Consumers: aware of pig diseases in rural setting, are unsure of the quality of meat and
animals being slaughtered;
• Consumer willingness/ability to pay for an insured quality of meat is unclear;
• Demand decrease in pig disease season pig and pork prices decrease;
• Farmers risk selling pigs at lower prices;
• Some avoid raising pigs for 3-4 months in the disease-prone season (June-September)
lost income opportunity.

20. Socio-economic costs: sector-level
Health risks through pork consumption and pig-related occupation
• Zoonotic pathogens are found at farms and slaughterhouses;
• These pathogens are resistant to certain antimicrobials:
Resistance can be transmitted to humans;
• The degree of exposure to these pathogens vary across stakeholders;
Farmers and slaughterers > vendors and consumers?
Meat is thoroughly cooked and no raw animal parts are consumed except “pork
sticks”;
Stigmatization toward those involved in killing animals (Buddhist concept)
Getting insights at slaughterhouses is challenging.

21. On-going interventions and challenges
Preventive guidelines for PRRS virus suggested by OIE (OIE, 2008)
• Vaccine use;
• Controlling incoming replacement gilts;
• Enforcing biosecurity (e.g. movement restriction, disinfection, etc);
• Whole herd depopulation/repopulation;
• Diagnostic testing of herd health;
What are socio-economic factors that prevent countries like Myanmar to follow these
guidelines?

22. On-going interventions and challenges
National Control Strategy (8 Road Map)
1. Policy and management
2. Surveillance and reporting
3. Outbreak response and restocking
4. Farm biosecurity
5. Trade biosecurity
6. Risk communication and education
7. Research
8. Vaccination

23. On-going interventions and challenges
• Access to PRRS vaccination
Policy revision recently completed to allow PRRS vaccination in 2017;
Highly controversial: large-scale vs small-scale farmers’ needs and financial
capability to take advantage;
Small-scale farmers are not advised to use vaccine;
• Controlling incoming replacement gilts;
Keeping a sow is too expensive for many boar rental;
Boar owners act as veterinary care providers and credit providers financial safety
network in the absence of affordable credit scheme;
• Travelling Boar Management and Promoting Artificial Insemination

24. On-going interventions and challenges
• Enforcing biosecurity and whole herd depopulation/repopulation
Backyard-farming setting and lack of space;
Supply chains involving multiple actors;
• Diagnostic testing of herd health
Strong history of microbiological laboratories;
Collaboration with various partners to strengthen lab capacity;
Number of samples processed remain relatively low.

25. On-going interventions and challenges
OIE guidelines need to be implemented with:
• Increased communication among laboratories, veterinary care providers and farmers
Understanding the current state of communication and challenges behind them;
• Increased knowledge among stakeholders
Understanding of disease transmission varies across stakeholders needs for
incentivizing disease control measures depending on stakeholders;
Product differentiation as a way to create value to the pig industry?
Shorter supply chains may reduce disease spread and help gain consumer
confidence;
• Strengthening veterinary health system
Understanding the current veterinary care providers and their qualification;
Formalizing Community Animal Health Workers (CAHWs) under policy revision.

26. Thank you!

27. (Veterinary or Animal Health Workforce)
Strengths Best practices
Updated nationwide animal population census by
Livestock Breeding and veterinary Department
Veterinary Coverage to sub-national level
(80%)
Joint FETP training between DOPH & LBVD
VS of of Myanmar had been evaluated by OIE
• LBVD, OIE, WAHIS, ARAHIS notification
• Livestock Statistic available
• Animal Census Piloting in 2017 and expend nation
wide
• 3172 LBVD staff at 295 townships providing
Veterinary Services
• 92587 Community Animal Heralth Workers (CAHW)
trained
• 20 veterinarians included in country FETP training
programme
• LBVD follow OIE PVS report, Gap analysis
recommendation

28. First PRRS stakeholder meeting
• A stakeholder meeting organized by FAO/LBVD for PRRS/CSF disease
control was conducted 22nd November 2011 at Yangon.
• A Feedback Report to Deputy Minister, Senior Officials from Livestock
Sector 24th November at NayPyiTaw.
• A 5 year planned strategic frame work consisting of 7 strategic frame
works
Objectives
• To reduce impact caused by swine diseases including PRRS and reduce
new incursion of emerging swine diseases
• To strengthen swine disease control process at national level
• To reduce the risk of reemerging swine diseases

29. Stakeholder meeting for pig disease control
(3-11-2016)
Review and revised National Pig Disease Control Strategy