Socio-economic analysis of the impacts of avian influenza epidemic on households poultry consumption and poultry industry in Nigeria: empirical investigation of Kwara State

A E Obayelu

Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Ibadan, Ibadan .Oyo state, Nigeria
Obayelu@yahoo.com

Abstract

The paper presents a theoretical and an empirical study of avian flu epidemic in Nigeria. A rapid assessment of the effects of avian flu outbreaks was conducted in May 2006 in kwara State. This was done by a structured interviewed schedule. Thirty Poultry farmers and 100 households were randomly selected for the interview.

The results of the analysis showed that avian flu outbreaks and spread in Nigeria have caused serious threat not only to the poultry industry but also to food security and the livelihoods of both the rural and urban communities. The study revealed that there was a fall in consumers' and producers' confidence in poultry. About 75% of poultry farmers were also found to have stopped ordering for new birds to their farms preparing to leave poultry business for other jobs the moment they disposed the birds on their farms. About 80% of the sampled households were found to have stopped the purchase and consumption of poultry products in their households for the fear of being affected by the flu. In addition, prices of chicken and egg were negatively affected with supply outweighing demand. There was a shift of consumers' attentions to consumption of beef, pork, fish, and animal skin as substitute with a decrease in the Gross Domestic Product from agriculture, increase in unemployment rate, worsen health, poverty and malnutrition level.

Poultry farmers should be encouraged, educated and assisted on the preventive measures. The farmers can be encouraged on the need for diversification since the outbreaks of the flu incidence mostly occur suddenly. Rearing of Grass cutters, cattle, rabbits and pigs, bee keeping, and snail farming as well as mushroom farming as means of livelihood should be encouraged. There must be extensive public enlightenments on the dangers of flu and how it can be overcome

Keywords: avian flu, epidemic, poultry, socio-economic

Introduction

Background to the study

Most studies in the past on the socio-economic impact of diseases affecting livestock often limit their analysis to production impacts with relatively little about subsequent impacts on health, prices, trade and markets.  The recent outbreak of poultry pandemic (A pandemic is an infectious disease, like bird flu or the avian influenza, that spreads across many countries within a short time, a sort of epidemiological form of instant globalism. It can be a catastrophic pandemic, such as the Black Death (1945-50) or the 1918 Influenza (now listed as Influenza A/H1N1), or a mild pandemic, such as the world flu pandemics of 1957 and 1968. Epidemics are local, or regional occurrences) has raised some concern about poultry production, marketing and consumption globally. Notable among these is the Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) also known as bird flu. Avian influenza is a contagious viral infection disease primarily affecting birds and sometimes mammals, such as pigs, tigers and humans. There are about 15 types that affect the respiratory, digestive and / or nervous system of many species of birds such as ducks and domestic chickens. Avian flu has the potential to develop into a global pandemic that can be as devastating as the Black Death of the 14th century. The H5N1 strain (which is one of the strains of avian flu) has a unique capacity to cause severe disease, with high mortality, in humans (Public Health Agency of Canada, 2006). Illness and death caused by this disease also have both economic and social costs. Migratory birds and mechanical vectors, such as contaminated cages and clothing, and through the international trade in live poultry, spread the infection. The disease can be transmitted to human through exposure to infected birds or handling of infected carcasses.

The outbreak of H5N1 avian influenza was first reported on the February 8, 2006 in Nigeria. The virus is now on the list of serious health problems facing many countries in the world, it threatens the economic as well as the society. The incidence of this disease in a country like Nigeria (a country where most village households maintain free ranging flocks of poultry as a source of income and food) was a "shock" to poultry farmers, consumers, and the economy because the impact ranges from market demand, market supply, financial to external effects (In epidemiology, an effect is the endpoint of a causal organism. An effect measure is an estimate of the influence of a particular factor on a population's health ) in the short run (see figure 1).

This study distinguishes itself from other studies with the main objective as analysis of the social and economic effects of avian flu in Nigeria using Kwara state as case study by considering the effects on market, farm income, social cost, as well as the health implications. Specifically the study describes the theoretical underpinning of avian flu like the history and causative agents, symptoms and preventive measures with a brief review of reported cases on both human and animals in different parts of the world. The study becomes a relevant issue not only for agricultural policy makers but also for animal and human public health policy formulation. The findings also add to the scanty literature on economic and social aspects of avian flu.

Theoretical framework

History and the spread of avian flu disease

Influenza pandemics are rare but recurring events (WHO 2005). Research has shown that avian flu typically occurred every 10-50 years throughout recorded history. It has found a permanent ecological niche, becoming entrenched among domestic ducks. Avian flu has been recognised as a highly lethal generalized viral disease of poultry since 1901. In 1955, a specific type of influenza virus was identified as a causal agent of what was then called fowl plague. This virus disease was however first noticed in terns in South Africa in 1961. The virus are usually host-specific with more than 100 subtypes that only infect birds and in rare instances, pigs and cause a wide range of disease syndromes, ranging from severe to mild in domestic poultry. The various types of avian influenza virus can broadly be categorised as either low pathogenicity (LPAI) or high pathogenicity (HPAI). Strains (eg: H5N1) that cause the greatest number of deaths are called highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). H5N1 strain originated with birds and moved to mammals, and began to affect humans after years of mutation. The first documented human infections with H5N1 avian influenza occurred in 1997 in Hong Kong, when the virus caused severe respiratory disease in 18 humans, of whom six died. Rapid destruction within three days of Hong Kong's entire poultry population, was estimated at around 1.5 million birds but opportunities for further transmission to humans was quickly averted. Since 1997, the H5N1 strain has gradually extended its reach, and has now become established within Asia. In 2003, there was the re-emergence of avian flu in Hong Kong. By September 2005, H5N1 was detected in domestic and wild birds in Russia and Kazakhstan and in wild birds in Mongolia. Isolated outbreaks of H5N1 in birds have also been reported in Romania, Russia and Turkey. The Hong Kong episode has since put the world health officials on alert because the H5N1 strain had fulfilled two of the three prerequisites for a pandemic. First, the strain was a new virus subtype to which the population would have little or no immunity, and second, the virus had the ability to replicate in humans and cause serious illness. Researches among public health officials since the beginning of 2004 have therefore been heightened on the possible prevention and control of this disease

Despite the efforts of most researchers, the H5N1 virus keeps on spreading, expanding beyond Southeast Asia and China into Central Asia and Europe. Laboratory results by scientists have shown that the virus may lead to pandemic with time. At present the H5N1 virus has become more robust than the 1997 strain capable of surviving longer under a broad range of environmental conditions. The virus has become increasingly pathogenic in poultry and has increased the range of species it can infect, now including domestic cats (in laboratory experiments) and captive tigers (after being fed infected chicken carcasses in a zoo in Thailand).

Causative agents of avian Flu to birds and human

Only domestic poultry are known to have played a role in the transmission cycle of the virus from animals to humans (Wikipedia 2006). Wild birds are the primary natural reservoir for Influenza A and are often the vector that introduces new outbreaks into domestic flocks. The virus can be highly contagious in domestic poultry, which are not as resistant as wild birds. Once present in domestic flocks, human activity becomes a risk for further transmission.

Humans get avian influenza virus infection through direct contact with bird faeces and respiratory secretions, droplets, and by mechanical transfer through contact with contaminated fomites (surfaces such as clothing, footwear, farm and transportation equipment, cages, tools, other materials and vehicles) but not through eating of cooked chickens (WHO 2004a). Influenza A (H5N1) has a documented tendency to acquire genes from other virus infecting other animals.

When a bird is infected with avian flu, it sheds the flu virus in its faeces, saliva and mucus and other birds become infected by eating or inhaling the virus. Wild migratory waterfowl can acquire HPAI infection without signs of clinical disease and spread this to domestic flocks. The virus can survive, at cool temperatures, in contaminated manure for at least three months. In water, the virus can survive for up to four days at 72ºF (^oF represents degree Fahrenheit ) and more than 30 days at 32ºF (Ausvetplan 2002). Wild waterfowl can initiate HPAI outbreaks in domestic poultry through contamination of their food and drinking water supplies. In an agricultural setting, animal manure containing influenza virus can contaminate dust and soil, causing infection when the contaminated dust is inhaled. Contaminated farm equipment, feed, cages, or shoes can carry the virus from farm to farm. The virus can also be carried on the bodies and feet of animals, such as rodents. In a food handling/preparation setting, there is also some concern that avian influenza could be transmitted from uncooked birds or bird products. AI virus can contaminate eggs and poultry meat (frozen and/or commercially packaged). For example, the PAI virus can survive in frozen carcasses and blood for as long as 3 weeks (WHO 2004b).

The symptoms and effects of avian flu on birds and human

The Signs of avian influenza are extremely variable. H5N1 can replicate in a wide range of cells, resulting in a severe disseminated disease affecting multiple organs and causing high rates of mortality. The virus in most cases is carried by some birds without displaying any symptoms of the disease and can spread over great distances while remaining healthy. However, the clinical signs of birds affected with all forms of AI may show one or more of the following: Sudden death of the affected bird without clinical signs on the first day especially those that are infected with the "highly pathogenic avian influenza," characterized by very high and rapid mortality, with rates approaching 100 percent, lack of energy and appetite, decreased egg production, soft-shelled or misshapen eggs, ruffled feathers, swollen heads, cyanosis of the combs or wattles, and possibly neurologic signs and diarrhoea. Purple discoloration of the wattles, combs, and legs, nasal discharge, coughing, sneezing, lack of coordination; are other symptoms. Any poultry establishment experiencing an unusually high mortality rate (e.g. >1% daily mortality for 2 days in commercial settings and >5% for village poultry farms) and where the mortality is associated with one or more of the above signs should be suspected to have been infected with avian flu.

The symptoms of avian influenza in humans on the other hand ranged from fever, cough, sore throat, and muscle aches to eye infections (conjunctivitis), pneumonia, acute respiratory distress, viral pneumonia, and other severe and life-threatening complications (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2006).

A review of reported cases of avian flu on poultry and human

Computing accurately the percentage of infected persons who eventually die from the disease or from its complications is impossible because authorities do not know how many people had milder cases but did not seek medical care or how many received care that was not reported. Nearly all of the human cases resulted from close contact with infected birds. However, research has shown that since 2004, several countries in Asia reported new outbreaks of lethal avian influenza A (H5N1) infection among poultry farmers. Such countries are: Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam. In similar manner the 2005 outbreaks of H5N1 disease was reported among poultry in China, Kazakhstan, Romania, Russia, Turkey, and Ukraine. China, Croatia, Mongolia, and Romania (see table 1).

Three rare Owston's palm civets were also confirmed in Viet Nam to have been infected by avian flu. Large cats, including tigers and leopards, kept in capacity and fed on infected poultry carcasses, were reported to be susceptible to H5N1 infection. In the year 2006, several countries such as: Iraq (H5), Nigeria, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Slovenia, Iran, Austria, Germany, Egypt, India, France, Bosnia and Herzegovina (H5), Slovak Republic, Switzerland, Niger, Hungary, Serbia and Montenegro (H5), Pakistan (H5), Albania, Poland, Georgia, Cameroon, and Myanmar (Burma) have also reported avian flu outbreaks avian flu in their respective country (see table 1)

On March 2006, for instance, H5N1 infection was confirmed in Germany in a second mammalian species, the stone marten after the previously documentation of the effect of flu on three domestic cats in the same country following the tests conducted at Germany's Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute for Animal Health. Similar study in Germany on February 16 also confirmed H5N1 infection in 125 wild swans, ducks, geese, and birds of prey on Ruegen Island, pointing to considerable opportunities for exposures to occur in small mammals that feed on birds.

The first human case of avian flu was in 1997 in Hong Kong with H5N1 (18 cases, 6 deaths) and a repeat in 1999 and 2003 (3 cases) with H9N2 (WHO 2004c). In a similar manner in 2003 there was a report of human case in Netherlands (83 cases, 1 death) with H7N7 strain. The human disease caused by H5N1 differs from typical human flu (See figure 2 and table 2)

Prevention and control measures of avian flu

Since avian Influenza virus is highly contagious and easily spread, the most common method of control is the culling (depopulation, or killing) of the infected flocks. Another method is the quarantine of affected areas until the disease is no longer present. While vaccination is possible and has been tested on a small scale, it is not widely considered a viable control method. After the contaminated flock is depopulated, buildings and equipment are rigorously disinfected before new birds are allowed, a process that takes at least several weeks. The virus can also be killed by common disinfectants or heat. For instance, heat of 170^oF, has been recommended for Chicken, Turkey Dark Meat, 180^oF, Ground Chicken, Turkey: 165^oF, Eggs: 160^oF (WHO 2004d). While the best method to prevent or limit the impact of HPAI outbreaks on public health is to promptly contain and control these outbreaks in poultry, conduct efficient surveillance and report potentially infected poultry flocks to the right authority. There is the need to implement biosecurity measures that reduce human exposure to potentially infective birds, bird debris such as litter, feather dust and husbandry equipment. The more countries in which H5N1 is detected, the greater the risk that the virus will mutate or re-assort with another influenza virus to produce a strain capable of igniting a pandemic

Methodology

Trend of poultry production in Nigeria and bird flu outbreaks

Nigeria has an estimated poultry population of around 140 million birds, largely concentrated in the southwestern part of the country. About 60% of Nigeria's poultry production takes place in small backyard farms scattered throughout the rural areas. Large-scale commercial farming of poultry occurs mainly in the northern states of Nigeria where outbreaks have been confirmed (WHO 2006b). Research findings have shown that the Nigeria poultry meat production has started growing in the last few years. It grew from 0.08million tones in 2001 to 0.11 million tones in 2004, while its percentage contribution to livestock GDP also increased from 4.29 percent to 4.45 percent in 2001 and 2004 respectively (CBN report, 2004). Also assuming a carcass weight of a fowl to be 0.75 kg, poultry production increased from 117.3 million birds in 2001 to 144.2 birds in 2004 (table 3)

But the country became one of 13 countries that reported their first cases of H5N1 infection in birds in 2006 with serious effects on the poultry industry. The 13 countries, listed in order of reporting, are Iraq, Nigeria, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Slovenia, Iran, Austria, Germany, Egypt, India and France. Later, Malaysia joined the countries where flu outbreak in poultry was reported after having been considered free of the disease for more than a year. Nigeria's outbreak of highly pathogenic H5N1 avian influenza was initially confirmed at a single farm on 8 February before spreading to several parts of the country. By the end of February, local laboratory tests had detected the virus in 7 contiguous states in the northern and central parts of the country (Kaduna, Kano, Plateau, Katsina, Bauchi, Yobe, and Nasarawa) and in the Federal Capital Territory of Abuja. During the first week of March, the virus was detected in three additional states, Anambra, Benue, and Rivers, located in the southern part of the country (WHO 2006c) and by May 2006, the outbreaks were detected on more than 130 farms in 11 of the 37 states with over 450,000 birds reported to have either died or destroyed (Akintunde, 2006). The spread has gone to the Western part of the country with recent report of the outbreak of the disease in Ogun State, Nigeria. This means that avian flu disease has no geographical boundary.

Sampling techniques and analysis of data

There was no estimates in literature based on past flu epidemics in Nigeria before February outbreak, so this paper relies in part on evidence from the WHO and investigation from Kwara State, Nigeria. The selection of the state was based on the fact that Kwara state is one of the agricultural states in Nigeria. A cost sectional survey was carried out in Kwara state with a total sample of 30 poultry farmers and 100 households randomly selected and interviewed. The selection of poultry farmers was based on estimated size in kwara state, while a sample of 100 households was taken to be a fairly large sample that is representative of the entire households in Kwara state consuming poultry and its products. The study was conducted in May 2006 for a 3 months assessment of the effects of avian flu outbreak of February 2006 in Nigeria

Results and discussion

Effects of avian flu on poultry industry and households in Nigeria

There are only limited works on the social and economic impacts of avian flu in the affected countries of the World. However, this study investigates the extent of damages or benefits of the outbreaks on both poultry industry as well as the consuming households in Nigeria.

Economic implications

Conjectures about the possible human and economic cost of avian flu in Nigeria are fraught with uncertainty because there have been no or few economic studies on the impact of the disease (Meltzer et al.1999). The economic implications of avian flu depend on three things: whom does the virus affect, the measures taken to control it, and the wider impact on confidence. Direct economic costs include losses of poultry due to the disease and to control measures such as culling birds, with impacts extending not only to farmers but also to upstream and downstream sectors such as poultry traders, feed mills, breeding farms etc. Outbreaks of avian influenza in poultry are of great concern for the agricultural sector with considerable economic consequences. The flu brought an abrupt surge in illness and deaths of more than 450,000 birds in Nigeria, the outbreaks also overwhelmed the Nigeria health services with a called for international assistance. The empirical evidence from kwara state, Nigeria though not in the list of the affected states but one of the poultry consuming states showed some economic implications.

On the demand side

Many small-scale operators in Kwara state (farmers, traders/ local marketer) are involved in poultry production and marketing before the outbreak of avian flu in Nigeria. The large commercial producers specializing in poultry merely supply domestic markets. Avian flu outbreak in Nigeria was found to have affected those on small as well as large-scale production. They suffered from temporary loss of consumer confidence that have shifted their preference for other types of protein. About 80% of the sampled consuming households of poultry regularly demanding for poultry before avian flu outbreak in Nigeria have now changed their demand pattern to a decrease or total shift for other products (see table 4).

Small commercial and backyard producers suffered loss in terms of assets and income and the largest loss was observed to be borne by them and by those on medium sized commercial chicken production. Many who had borrowed money to fund their poultry production business were thrown into debt through lower price and destruction of suspected birds. About 75% of the poultry suppliers in the state have therefore decided to stop ordering for new birds to their farms and were contemplating going into other business rather than poultry business (see table 4).

There was excess supply of poultry products compared to demand leading to a drop in prices of poultry products (see tables 5 and 6). The flu outbreak also affected investors' confidence, as many interviewed have dropped the idea of embarking on poultry business in any parts of Nigeria. Such decision will eventually have a long-term consequence on economic growth and development.

On the supply side

The bird flu outbreaks affected the availability of labour and many businesses were forced to close down. This has eventually lowered the future investment and employment of people in the kwara state and Nigeria. A farm with about 20 employees in the study area was found to have reduced the number to about 3 due to the stoppage in getting new stock as well as lower prices of poultry products. Disease prevention and control strategies of bird flu were also found to have various economic and social costs and impacts. Interestingly, the most immediate economic impact arose not from actual death or sickness of birds but from the uncoordinated efforts of people to avoid becoming infected (Brahmbhatt, 2005) which may be as result of poverty, ignorance or uncared attitudes. Some of the costs government or individual farmers have incurred as aftermaths of avian flu outbreaks in Nigeria include: the costs of purchase of poultry vaccines, medications and other inputs, hiring workers for culling, cleanup, surveillance and diagnosis, as well as a payment of N250 compensation for every culled bird by government to affected poultry keepers. The cost on the control and prevention in Nigeria has been estimated to lead Nigeria government to reductions of GDP between 0.1-0.2 percent. There is also an additional loss due to a lower egg production and reduced activity in distribution channels. Other potential short-term impact was higher meat prices for all substitutes of poultry meats on domestic market. These substitutes include fish, mutton, beef and pork as a result of reduction in poultry meat and egg consumption but with increasing rise in their prices (see table 7).

Thus, bird flu invasion have shifted the demand curve for poultry products to the left while that of the substitutes to the right. There is a shift in trading patterns with some markets moving to fill the gap left by chicken and eggs. In addition, spill over effects are now evident in the feed industry as lower meat production pushes down protein feed ingredients and their prices down. The effects of bird flu on feeding cost remain the same except the average price of a layer mash that increased by 12.5% of the usually price before the outbreak (see table 8)

Societal effects of avian flu

Avian Influenza is a global challenge with animal and human health implications. It is unknown what percentages of birds that infected with H5N1 in Nigeria. Wild birds can pass on the H5N1 virus without becoming sick themselves (that is, they can be asymptomatically infected). The danger posed by wild birds is that they transmit H5N1 to domestic poultry flocks, which is a direct threat to human health. The incidence of avian flu in Nigeria has led many poultry farmers into psychological breakdown due to losses incurred. Typically avian influenza has a gross attack rate of 20-40% (Taubenberger 2005). Culling birds in order to eradicate and control the spread of the disease is have negatively affected the livelihoods of all classes of poultry owners and producers and their employees. Such an impact is most serious on the smaller family operated commercial producers for whom poultry production is their sole source of income generation. There were markets lost through the reduced ability to export restriction of movement of birds and the closure of some domestic markets, which affected income-generating ability, especially for the smaller producers in the study area and Nigeria in general. The non-consumption of poultry meat as well as its products has also affected animal protein intake of a large sector of the population in Nigeria. The most important effects were sharp decline in demand as people avoided eating poultry products out of fear of being affected.

Government efforts on prevention and control of avian flu

Some of the preventive /control measures that Nigerian government has adopted on the affected farms include: culling, disinfections, and safe disposal of carcasses. The result of the avian flu outbreaks, led Nigeria government to promulgate a law that all affected poultry within a certain radius of any discovered virus should be systematically culled, whereas those within a wider radius should be vaccinated.

Conclusion and recommendations

• This study provides background on the effects of a potential avian flu, gives very rough estimates of the social and economic effects and discusses policy options related to the preparedness of the Nigeria for such an outbreak. Avian flu has presented a major potential challenge to the development of poultry industry in Nigeria. There is nobody that can predict the exact consequences of the flu because there are simply too many unknowns. Since the bulk of poultry production in Nigeria and in Kwara state is still by backyard producers; the impacts of avian flu have therefore been felt by individual rural households, and have only partly been offset by government compensation to farmers. The disease is a public health concern because of its potential to spark a pandemic. It is the concern of those in agricultural sector because of the ability of reducing the GDP from the sector in the economy. It is also the concern of the consuming households due to the fact that as long as the virus continues to circulate in animals, there is the tendency for the virus to infect and adapt to humans, worsen cases of malnutrition, poverty and food insecurity situations and eventually dead.

Policy issues, implications and recommendations

• A key policy question for Nigeria government and any other countries on bird flu outbreak is how to win the trust and confidence of the population consuming poultry, minimize panic and disruption and indeed mobilize the public as a key partner in beating the disease. Attention to the avian flu disease in Nigeria calls for serious concern for human health as well as for agricultural sector (especially the poultry industry that is in crisis).

• Nigeria government law on culling of affected farm with avian flu has the potential danger of wiping out smaller and poorer farmers in Nigeria, which could further aggravate the social distortions now occurring in the economic and agricultural sectors. The N250 (that is less than $2) government compensation package to farmers who cull their livestock extensively is also capable of aggravating incidences of hunger and poverty of the affected farmers. On the other hands, the birds flu outbreak in poultry sectors in the future are likely to restructure the sector much more rapidly than they might otherwise have done in response to measures to improve biosecurity against Avian Influenza. One consequence of restructuring will be that there would be fewer small commercial and backyard producers as the transactions costs of sustaining and certifying their biosecurity will be higher than for large commercial farms.

• Rapid elimination of the H5N1 virus in bird populations should be given high priority as a matter of international public health importance.There should be a clearly priority on curbing avian flu "at source", in the agricultural sector, through implementation of strong animal and human health surveillance, disease control and mitigation measures, thereby reducing the probability of a far more costly human epidemic. Another clear lesson is the need for governments to establish a track record of credibility through honest, accurate and timely disclosure of information to their own people and to the outside world.

• Government must be battle ready in planning, training, surveillance, monitoring and diagnostic system through public communications, establishment of stockpiles of medications and equipment, preparation of national health care systems and facilities, implementation of control measures (culling, vaccination, use of anti-viral, quarantines etc.), compensation and other incentives to complement control measures, and embark on relevant research relating to avian flu similar to this etc. This must be done based on the experience in the past of countries such as Hong Kong, Germany, which recorded reoccurrence of the outbreak after a while.

• The infection of birds with H5N1 should be the first indication to public health authorities that human avian influenza cases might then be possible rather than out rightly telling the people about the impossibility of the flu to affect human which may lead to lack of peoples confidence in government proclamations. Government should intensify more efforts in educating poultry consumers on the only precaution they have to take when using poultry and its products in other to protect the poultry sector as well as their health. People must be made to know that influenza viruses can be destroying by heat up to 70°C. In addition to this, there is the need for public information campaigns to warn people to avoid high-risk behaviours, including the slaughtering, defeathering, butchering, and preparation for consumption of diseased poultry.

• Raising poultry at the backyard or inside living rooms by most Nigeria so as to make adequate used of their rented apartment should be avoided since most reported cases of human infection with avian flu were through direct contact. The small compensation package introduced for affected poultry farmers after bird flu outbreaks in Nigeria is inadequate, and this is capable of leading to farmers not reporting cases for fear of culling. Only the bigger poultry breeders are able to afford the enhanced bio-security requirements. Contingency plans for containing outbreaks in poultry and humans can be costly and involve diversion of human resources. A compensation payment by the government therefore should be increased and paid to farmers who would lose their fowls on time without bureaucratic bottlenecks.

• There is the need to give loans or subsidy to the affected registered farmers to enable them buy some equipment that are needed for precautions on their farms. Farmers are also advised to insure their farms against possible unforeseen incidence in the future.

References

Akintunde O 2006 "450,0000 birds lost to killer bird flu". Thursday Nigerian Punch newspaper, June 8, 2006 pp 20

Ausvetplan 2002 Australian Veterinary Emergency Plan. Disease Strategy: Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza. Animal Health Australia

Brahmbhatt M 2005 Avian and Human Pandemic Influenza: Economic and Social Impacts. Final Draft: Submitted to WHO November 8, 2005 http://www.who.int/mediacentre/events/2005/World_Bank_Milan_Brahmbhattv2.pdf

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2006 Avian Influenza Infection in Humans  August 9 http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/avian-flu-humans.htm

CBN 2004 Annual Report and Statement of Account, Central Bank of Nigeria 2004

Field Survey 2006 Responses to socioeconomic effects of Avian Influenza in Kwara State. Personal Communication from selected respondents May 2006. Unpublished data

Meltzer M I, Cox N J and Fukuda K 1999 "The Economic Impact of Pandemic Influenza in the United States: Priorities for Intervention." Emerging Infectious Diseases 5(5): 659-71 http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5no5/meltzer.htm

Taubenberger J 2005 "Chasing the Elusive 1918 Virus: Preparing for the Future by Examining the Past." In S Knobler, A Mack and A Mahmoud editors, The Threat of Pandemic Influenza: Are we Ready? Washington, DC: National Academies Press

WHO 2004a Avian influenza H5N1 infection in humans: urgent need to eliminate the animal reservoir - update 5. EPR January 22 http://www.who.int/csr/don/2004_01_22/en/index.html

WHO 2004b Avian influenza A(H5N1)- update 31: Situation (poultry) in Asia: need for a long-term response, comparison with previous outbreaks http://www.who.int/csr/don/2004_03_02/en/index.html

WHO 2004c Avian influenza A (H5N1) in humans and poultry in Viet Nam. EPR 13 January 2004 http://www.who.int/csr/don/2004_01_13/en/index.html  

WHO 2004d Public Health Considerations in the Application of Measures to Contain and Control Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) Outbreaks in Poultry World Health Organization Regional Office for the Western Pacific Manila Philippines http://www.wpro.who.int/NR/rdonlyres/23C21802-A0BE-42B9-825F-18977C05EE58/0/Advice30042004.pdf

WHO 2005 WHO Outbreak Communication WHO Handbook for Journalists: Influenza Pandemic Updated December 2005 http://www.who.int/csr/don/Handbook_influenza_pandemic_dec05.pdf

WHO 2006a Avian influenza - situation in Nigeria - update 2. EPR February 22 2006 http://www.who.int/csr/don/2006_02_22/en/index.html

WHO 2006b Avian influenza - situation in Nigeria - update 2. EPR March 9 2006 http://www.who.int/csr/don/2006_03_09/en/index.html

WHO 2006c Cumulative Number of Confirmed Human Cases of Avian Influenza A/ (H5N1) http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/country/cases_table_2006_03_13/en/index.html

Wikipedia 2006 Influenza A virus subtype H5N1  December 9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H5N1

World Organisation for Animal Health 2006 Update on Avian Influenza in Animals (Type H5) 14 December 2006 http://www.oie.int/downld/AVIAN%20INFLUENZA/A_AI-Asia.htm