Socio-economic impacts of alternative GIN control practices. Project deliverable 11 (WP4)

Summary in the original language of the document

This report is a deliverable (WP4) from the EU-funded PrOPara project. The PrOPara project aspires to i) assess existing knowledge from research, development and benchmarking studies on alternatives to parasite control on organic ruminant farms, ii) collecting novel data on disease prevalence, risk assessment analysis and parasite control measures, through monitoring (farm surveys and stakeholder participation studies), iii) performing cost-benefit analysis on alternative parasite control measures and iv) developing and delivering technical innovation to facilitate implementation of sustainable parasite control strategies.
A combined approach of modelling and focus groups for feedback was employed to assess the economic impacts of alternative GIN control strategies in South West France and North East Scotland. This two step method allowed results from the survey and farm modelling to be used during workshops, which also addressed social factors explaining the uptake and acceptance of GIN practices to control parasites.
An existing excel based farm model was adapted in order to estimate the economic impacts of a range of alternative GIN practices. The model was adapted using data from a typical farm for organic goat system in France (Occitanie and Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Regions) and two organic sheep systems (lowland and upland) in Scotland.
A structured workshop approach was utilised to address both the social and economic factors related to adoption of alternative GIN practices by farmers. To this purpose, we adapted the Structured Decision Making (SDM) approach commonly used for decisions taking (Gregory and Keeney 1994, Conroy, Barker et al. 2008, Ogden and Innes 2009, Gregory 2012, Johnson, Eaton et al. 2015, Fatorić and Seekamp 2017).
Overall, the modelling and farmer feedback showed that control of GIN needs to be farm specific, to suit the individual characteristics of both the farm but also the beliefs of the farmer. The extension of withdrawal periods combined with resistance issues in France have led to the adoption of TST by some farmers, but others are less convinced of its efficiency. The farmers in Scotland seem to have adopted multiple strategies such as use of arable land and mixed grazing to keep GIN levels from severely affecting their profits. However, the diversity of opinions and calls by the French farmers in particular for more trials, shows there is still further work to understand this problem and develop more effective, sustainable solutions.