A Role for Australia: Contributions and Benefit

R.J. Butler, R.R. Biddle and James Gardner Murray

No 124022, 2003: The Livestock Revolution: A Pathway from Poverty?, 13 August 2003 from Crawford Fund

Abstract: This paper summarises Australia’s contributions to the global animal disease control effort, from the perspective of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry – Australia (AFFA). AFFA’s objectives in the context of animal health and welfare, and veterinary public health, include minimising the impact of pests, diseases and contaminants, managing emergencies, facilitating the development of national policies and strategies, and advancing Australia’s trade interests. A result of such objectives has been the establishment of a strong international program within AFFA. The program has the advantages of collaboration with other countries on animal health matters, including that of aquatic animals, as well as progressing Australia’s trading interests. At a ‘global level’ Australia is active in multilateral standards and policy-setting organisations such as the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). These activities indirectly assist developing countries in numerous ways, including by promulgating standards that provide guidance in designing and implementing domestic animal health standards. Australia’s contributions are also made at a regional level, with direct and obvious benefits for developing countries such as information exchange, technology transfer, training and support. Examples include Australia’s leadership in initiatives such as the OIE Regional Commission for Asia, the Far East and Oceania, the South East Asia foot-and-mouth disease (SEAFMD) campaign, and the Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific (NACA). Involvement in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum technical working groups relating to animal and plant health has also had benefits through APEC harmonisation initiatives. Contributions may also be through direct, bilateral assistance and collaboration, with similar benefits. There are many examples of such bilateral activities, such as emergency management training in Indonesia and foot-andmouth disease projects with China, Thailand and Indonesia. Examples and case studies are provided in the paper to illustrate these direct and indirect contributions and benefits.

Keywords: Livestock; Production/Industries (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 7
Date: 2003-08-13
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/124022/files/Butler2003.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:cfcp03:124022

DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.124022

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in 2003: The Livestock Revolution: A Pathway from Poverty?, 13 August 2003 from Crawford Fund
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().