Research
Activity I: Vaccine Production Distribution and Use

Problem Statement and Approach

The original intent of socioeconomic research on the CCPP vaccine was to measure the impact, or potential impact of small ruminant diseases and the saving that vaccines can provide. Measuring this impact requires an understanding of the costs of production and delivery of vaccines, as well as the costs of the disease to producers in the absence of the vaccine. Elements required for this assessment are the activities carried out this year, both on the production and delivery of vaccines, as well as the characteristics of producers, potential buyers of vaccines. assessment The potential economic impact of vaccine research by the SR-CRSP on CCPP, required information on current and past reported outbreaks, animal treatments and losses due to this disease, and cost saving to producers. Comparisons of treatment costs vs. vaccinations are made to determine unit cost reduction in the production of small ruminants. Two levels of impact may be measured, the first the result of the production of CCPP vaccines, the second the cost reduction result of the freeze dry processing stage of the vaccine.

The approach used was outlined in our work plan: to determine the feasibility of a returns to research study on CCPP, sondeo type interviews will be conducted at each step of production distribution and user chain. KEVEVAPI officials will be interviewed to determine current production conditions and who the buyers are. Interviews with health service providers, and agencies funding vaccination campaigns. This rapid appraisal inform on the need for further study of the demand for animal health preventive services. Costs of vaccine production will be calculated, if collaboration with KEVEVAPI is established. Outbreaks will be documented through government records. An appropriate methods to assess the impact of the vaccine will be selected. Absence of epidemiological research on CCPP difficults measure of potential returns to research.

Progress

The review of methodologies to measure the impact of vaccine is complete and is part of a technical report: "The Small Ruminant Industry in Kenya: Assessing Returns to Animal Health Research and Vaccines, A Review" that will be available in February of 1997.

Collaboration with KEVEVAPI was established to achieve three specific objectives: a) to identify the buyers of Caprivax at KEVEVAPI; b) to estimate and compare the production costs of both types of Caprivax (CCPP vaccines), liquid and lyophilized; and c) to establish whether there is competition for machinery between Caprivax and the two other vaccines that are produced at the Muguga production unit, namely Rindervax and Contavax.

To determine if there was need to study the causes affecting the delivery of animal health services and CCPP vaccines several interviews, "sondeos", at the research institutions (domestic and international), the production centers for vaccines (KEVEVAPI), the extension services working on the delivery of health services, and with the district and division veterinary officers as various sites. The purpose, to understand what is known about the presence and effect of CCPP on small holder flocks, and the animal health delivery system for small ruminant producers.

Officers from ODA, ILRI, KEVEVAPI, and the Veterinary Field Services were interviewed, and a common statement was that there was not enough information on the reasons for lack of use of the vaccine and constraints to the delivery. Statements from the Field Veterinary Services indicated that farmers did not want or were unable to pay for the vaccine. Information on outbreaks reported by the Field Veterinary Services, would record initial mortality when reporting outbreaks but not the total mortality nor morbidity rates associated with them, therefore not a good indicator of the patter of the disease. The outbreaks would be lower bound indicators, since all are not officially reported.

Demand For Vaccines: KEVEVAPI

A first approximation to the demand of vaccines was through the sales by KEVEVAPI, the sole producer of the vaccine (Caprivax). A market profile was developed to understand who the users of the vaccine were in the past five years. Sales were summarized for the period 1991 through 1995 (see table 1). Data indicate that the government was the most important costumer, at the beginning of the 1990s with a decreasing participation as cost recovery policies are introduced (see table 1). The export and NGO markets are thin, and volatile. The private individuals purchasing directly the vaccine are increasing but have not been able to substitute for the main buyer, the government. Sales in 1995 were fifty percent lower than in 1991. As a consequence, KEVEVAPI reduced the production of vaccines. The decrease in government purchases, the reduction in vaccination campaigns and the market volatility have led in 1996 to a situation where outbreaks are taking place, and KEVEVAPI is having difficulties filling the increased demand, both from the private and NGO sectors (see Techinical Report: An Economic Analysis of the Production and Distribution of CCPP Vaccine).

Source: An Economic Analysis of the Production of CCPP Vaccine, 1996.

Cost Analysis of CCPP Vaccine Production

Production costs were estimated using the vaccine formula (variable inputs) as well as assigned fixed capital and labor. Costs were calculated for 1991 to 1995, allowing to measure changes in productivity which have direct impact on the average cost of production. Sensitivity analysis was carried out to assess production conditions of CCPP vaccine that are economically efficient. Results on productivity indicate that KEVEVAPI was not operating in previous years to full potential. This is reflected in the doses per batch, the maximum potential being 20,000 doses per batch.

Table 2 presents the costs of production calculated for Caprivax using actual production data for the period 1992-1995. Current yields are lower than the potential level, especially because of recurrent losses of the culture through contamination, as the efficiency indicator shows. Sensitivity analysis measured the effect of improved production process that minimize frequency of culture media contamination.

Source: "An Economic Analysis of the Production of CCPP Vaccine".

Table 3 presents an average yield based on production between 1992 and 1995. Sensitivity analysis modifies productivity to increase towards potential. Only with yields of 10,000 doses per batch or more costs of production equate the price set by the government. Details of the analysis and scenarios can be found in the technical report "An Economic Analysis of the Production of CCPP Vaccine." Recommendations were formulated to KEVEVAPI, result of the study, to reduce losses in the production process. Both the liquid and freeze dry vaccine costs were calculated, as well as the competition for equipment.

We still need to understand the discrepancies between the numbers quoted in the vaccination campaign record and the production of the vaccine, because the latter is lower than reported vaccination campaign numbers. We also found from the analysis that there is no competition in machinery nor labor in the production of CCPP vaccine, both in the liquid and lyophilized forms, at the present production levels of Rinderpest and Contavax.

Source: Ibid.
Key: a is the actual yield/batch obtained; b, c, d are sensitivity analysis with three higher levels of yield per batch.

Demand of Animal Health Services

This is also an important part of the research in Activity II. Based on a rapid appraisal, interviews with decision makers and researchers, the project decided to conduct a study of animal health delivery and demand services. This would inform KEVEVAPI and animal health providers of the market conditions and potential for vaccines, and the constraints faced by users (household producers) in the delivery of CCPP vaccines and other animal health services. Because production decisions for several economic activities are joint (substitution and complement effects exist), especially in livestock production, information on the production system, demographic and cultural characteristics of the household producers were included in the study.

Four different ethnic groups involved in livestock, specifically goat production were chosen, Masai, Kalenjin, Bantu, and Hamites. Districts for each ethnic group were identified, and one was chosen. The Masai in Kajiado, the Kalenjin in Koibatek, the Bantu in Kitui and the Hamites in Marsabit. During 1996 the Kalenjin in Koibatek were surveyed. The Bantu and the Masai will be studied in 1996-1997. Marsabit, a camel small ruminant production system will be studied by KARI social scientists. Production system characteristics, ethnicity, agroecological/rainfall zones, and market

integration were the variables selected to characterize distinct groups, which may influence decision making. A necessary condition was that all production systems were in CCPP endemic areas, and that vaccination campaigns had been conducted in provinces and specific districts chosen. Support from the Veterinary Field Services Offices in Kabete, districts and locations was obtained for this study. A second condition was that the sites selected reflected the characteristics of the production systems where the lyophilized form of the vaccine was being tested (Suswa, Mogotio, Ngong and Kajiado). In order to assure this, the questionnaire was field tested with the farmers participating in the vaccine experiment. The questionnaire elicited information on the household production systems, animal herd composition, economic activities, livestock composition, animal health problems, and small ruminant diseases.

In order to develop the survey a literature review of methodologies was completed during 1995, a questionnaire was developed and field tested during 1996 and applied to sixty farmers at the first site selected, Koibatek for two months. This was formerly part of the Baringo district, where the Kalenjin live in pastoral production systems with some crop production for home consumption, as the survey results showed. In July 1995, just before the creation of Koibatek from Baringo, the district had the second largest goat population (732,000 head in 1994) after Kajiado (875,000).

Previous reports indicated that this was not only an endemic site with outbreaks, but also had experienced heavy vaccination campaigns financed by the government. Mogotio was the division selected, and two locations identified, Mugurin and Koibos. A sample frame was developed with the assistance of local chiefs, sub chiefs, and veterinary officer, and applied to 60 farmers selected at random. The data was processed and cleaned, and a code book developed. Data analysis is on going, and will be completed in 1997, as will data collection and analysis of additional sites with a contingent valuation model.

Farmers were asked to identify and rank animal diseases, for all livestock and for goats and sheep. They were also asked current methods to treat or deal with diseases, as well as experience with vaccines and animal health providers. Production and income information by economic enterprises was also gathered. A section on CCPP disease sought to understand outbreak patterns in households' flocks, and prevention and treatment methods used by producers, and associated costs. The purpose was to look at the level of risk, probability of occurrence, and treatment expenditures as well as identify economic losses. Distance to animal health delivery and awareness of the existence of vaccines was critical to the contingent valuation study. Willingness to pay information was identified by stating the value in terms of goats and cash income of vaccinating the flock. Some interesting results of the preliminary data analysis indicate that although this is an area of outbreaks, where vaccination campaigns against CCPP have taken place, the majority of farmers were not aware of the existence of the vaccine.

Two other sites will be researched in 1996-1997, Kitui, an agropastoral semiarid district in Eastern Province and Kajiado a pastoral setting (Masai people) in the Rift Valley.

[Back to Annual Report 96 Contents]
[Continue to Animal Health Activity 2]

970328