Approaching to measuring the economic costs of food borne disease

When determining the economic costs of food borne disease it is important to begin by placing the measure in context.

Increasing demands for regulatory accountability have required governments to make greater use of cost benefit analysis in evaluating policy changes.

There are many different methods used to evaluate the costs of foodborne disease.

These differences severely compromise the degree to which the estimates obtained from such studies can be compared.

In part, this is a natural consequence of the fact that many studies have different objectives or specifically, different points of reference to which the status quo is compared.

For example, some studies consider the aggregate cost of incidences of a single disease with its complete elimination as the point of reference.

Others focus on the evaluating the costs and benefits of alternative government programs which are aimed at reducing the prevalence of pathogens in the food supply, and here the point of reference is the alternative policy options.

There are two approaches for evaluating the economic costs of (or benefits of a reduction in) foodborne disease: cost of illness (COI) and willingness to pay (WTP).
Approaching to measuring the economic costs of food borne disease

Economic Cost of Food Borne Disease

Economic Cost of Food Borne Disease
Reports by World Health Organization have concluded that, despite improvements in many areas foodborne disease caused by microbiological hazards and chemical contaminants continues to be a growing public concerns.

The direct and indirect economic costs associated with foodborne disease are known to be high but actual quantities estimates are difficult to obtain.

Differences about what costs to measure and how to measure them, combined with serious data limitations, make comparisons across pathogens, over time or among countries, extremely difficult.

Still for policy makers face with decisions based on cost-benefit analysis of measures to reduce foodborne disease it is essential to have the best possible estimates of the economic costs involved.

When determining the economic costs of foodborne disease, it is important to begin by placing the measure in context. Increasing demands for regulatory accountability have required government to make greater use of cost benefit analysis in evaluating policy changes.

This method is based n the Kaldor-Hicks compensation principle which states that a policy intervention is justified the beneficiaries could potentially compensate the losers and still leave both groups better off.

The application of the method therefore begins with a clear understanding of the nature of the policy intervention and an identification of the beneficiaries and the losers.

Without such a framework the meaning of the measure of cost is very likely to be ambiguous and may result in double counting.
Economic Cost of Food Borne Disease