Volume 13, Number 4—April 2007
Synopsis
Human Benefits of Animal Interventions for Zoonosis Control
Jakob Zinsstag*
, Esther Schelling*†, Felix Roth*, Bassirou Bonfoh*‡, Don de Savigny*, and Marcel Tanner*
, Esther Schelling*†, Felix Roth*, Bassirou Bonfoh*‡, Don de Savigny*, and Marcel Tanner*Table 1
Distribution of benefits and suggested allocation of intervention costs for livestock brucellosis mass vaccination campaign in Mongolia*†
| Cost | Benefit | Net present value‡ | Benefit: cost ratio§ | |
| Total agriculture sector | 5,174.9 | 16,611.6 | 11,436.7 | 3.2 |
| Human health | ||||
| Public health sector | ||||
| Central government | 1,009.4 | 3,240.3 | 2,230.9 | 3.2 |
| Health Insurance Fund | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Patient | ||||
| Out-of-pocket contribution to health costs | 1,669.3 | 5,358.7 | 3,689.4 | 3.2 |
| Change in household income | 1,103.7 | 3,542.8 | 2,439.1 | 3.2 |
| Total overall human health | 3,782.4 | 12,141.8 | 8,359.4 | 3.2 |
| Total private sector | 7,947.9 | 25,513.1 | 17,565.2 | 3.2 |
| Total society | 8,957.3 | 28,753.4 | 19,796.1 | 3.2 |
*Scenario for proportion of protected animals at 52% and discount rate at 5%. Costs are in Mongolian tugriks; 1 US$ ≈1,080 MNT in October 2000.
†Table reproduced from (4).
‡Benefits minus costs.
§Benefits divided by costs (minimum 2.27, maximum 4.37).
