The Costs, Benefits and Human Behaviours for Antimicrobial Use in Small Commercial Broiler Chicken Systems in Indonesia
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Results
2.1. Respondent and Farm Information
2.2. Perceptions on AMR and Antimicrobial Use Practices
2.3. Drivers for Antimicrobial Use
2.4. Perceptions on the Economics of Antimicrobial Use
2.5. Costs of Production
2.6. Relationships between Farm Size, Management Type, Productivity and Antimicrobial Use
3. Discussion
3.1. Policy and Social Drivers of Antimicrobial Use
3.2. Economic Drivers of Antimicrobial Use
4. Materials and Methods
4.1. Study Design and Setting
4.2. Questionnaire
- Demographic farm information.Demographic information on the type of broiler production, the workers employed on the farm, the flock size, location of the farm, feeding practices, management practices and productivity data on the broiler production enterprise.
- The behavioural influences behind antimicrobial use and farmers’ perspectives on AMR.Farmers’ perceptions on the definition of AMR, drivers for antimicrobial use in broiler production, attitudes on the responsibility of antimicrobial use practices and the costs and benefits of antimicrobial use.
- Survey on the economic drivers for antimicrobial use.The economic questions explored the profitability of the broiler enterprise, antimicrobial costs, feed costs, prices obtained for selling birds, average body weight at slaughter, weight at point of sale, mortality rates and other medicine management costs.
4.3. Data Collection
4.4. Data Analysis
4.5. Ethical Approval
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- WHO. Global action plan on antimicrobial resistance; World Health Organization (WHO) Press: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- WHO World Health Organisation—Ten threats to global health in 2019. Available online: https://www.who.int/emergencies/ten-threats-to-global-health-in-2019 (accessed on 13 May 2019).
- WHO. Draft thirteenth general programme of work, 2019–2023. Promote health, keep the world safe, serve the vulnerable; World Health Orgainzation (WHO) Press: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- O’Neill, J. Tackling drug-resistant infections globally: Final report and recommendations. The Review on Antimicrobial Resistance; The Wellcome Trust: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Fleming, A. Nobel Lecture: Penicillin; Nobel Lectures, Physiology or Medicine 1942-1962; Elsevier Publishing Company: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1945. [Google Scholar]
- WHO. WHO global principles for the containment of antimicrobial resistance in animals intended for food; World Health Organization Organization (WHO) Press: Geneva, Switzerland, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Tang, K.L.; Caffrey, N.P.; Nóbrega, D.B.; Cork, S.C.; Ronksley, P.E.; Barkema, H.W.; Polachek, A.J.; Ganshorn, H.; Sharma, N.; Kellner, J.D.; et al. Restricting the use of antibiotics in food-producing animals and its associations with antibiotic resistance in food-producing animals and human beings: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Planet. Heal. 2017, 1, e316–e327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aidara-Kane, A.; Angulo, F.J.; Conly, J.M.; Minato, Y.; Silbergeld, E.K.; McEwen, S.A.; Collignon, P.J.; Balkhy, H.; Collignon, P.; Conly, J.; et al. World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines on use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control 2018, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marshall, B.M.; Levy, S.B. Food animals and antimicrobials: Impacts on human health. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2011, 24, 718–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Boeckel, T.P.; Brower, C.; Gilbert, M.; Grenfell, B.T.; Levin, S.A.; Robinson, T.P.; Teillant, A.; Laxminarayan, R. Global trends in antimicrobial use in food animals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 5649–5654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Moradigaravand, D.; Jamrozy, D.; Seiffert, S.N.; Hilty, M.; Perreten, V.; Endimiani, A.; Mostowy, R.; Anderson, A.; Nickerson, E.K.; Thaipadungpanit, J.; et al. Evolution of the Staphylococcus argenteus ST2250 clone in Northeastern Thailand is linked with the acquisition of livestock-associated staphylococcal genes. MBio 2017, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Graveland, H.; Wagenaar, J.A.; Bergs, K.; Heesterbeek, H.; Heederik, D. Persistence of livestock associated MRSA CC398 in humans is dependent on intensity of animal contact. PLoS ONE 2011, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- O’Neill, J. Antimicrobials in Agriculture and the Environment: Reducing Unnecessary Use and Waste; The Wellcome Trust: London, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Rushton, J. Anti-microbial use in animals: How to assess the trade-offs. Zoonoses Public Health 2015, 62, 10–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Jones, K.E.; Patel, N.G.; Levy, M.A.; Storeygard, A.; Balk, D.; Gittleman, J.L.; Daszak, P. Global trends in emerging infectious diseases. Nature 2008, 451, 990–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Robinson, T.P.; Bu, D.P.; Carrique-Mas, J.; Fèvre, E.M.; Gilbert, M.; Grace, D.; Hay, S.I.; Jiwakanon, J.; Kakkar, M.; Kariuki, S.; et al. Antibiotic resistance is the quintessential One Health issue. Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2016, 110, 377–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Union Ban on antibiotics as growth promoters in animal feed enters into effect; Regulation; The European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2006.
- Maron, D.F.; Smith, T.J.S.; Nachman, K.E. Restrictions on antimicrobial use in food animal production: An international regulatory and economic survey. Global. Health 2013, 16, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Laxminarayan, R.; Van Boeckel, T.; Teillant, A. The Economic Costs of Withdrawing Antimicrobial Growth Promoters from the Livestock Sector; Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics and Policy (CDDEP): Princeton, NJ, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Anon Poultry Sector in South East Asia Iowa Economic Development Authority; Iowa Economic Development Authority: Des Moines, IA, USA, 2017.
- World Bank. The World Bank. Indonesia Country Profile; World Bank Group: Washington, DC, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- OECD. OECD Economic Surveys: INDONESIA; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Publishing: Paris, France, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Wright, T.; Darmawan, B. Indonesia Voluntary Poultry Report. GAIN Report: 1701; USDA: Washington, DC, USA, 2017.
- Parathon, H.; Kuntaman, K.; Widiastoety, T.H.; Muliawan, B.T.; Karuniawati, A.; Qibtiyah, M.; Djanun, Z.; Tawilah, J.F.; Aditama, T.; Thamlikitkul, V.; et al. Progress towards antimicrobial resistance containment and control in Indonesia. BMJ 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mendes, R.E.; Mendoza, M.; Banga Singh, K.K.; Castanheira, M.; Bell, J.M.; Turnidge, J.D.; Lin, S.S.F.; Jones, R.N. Regional resistance surveillance program results for 12 Asia-Pacific nations (2011). Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Nhung, N.T.; Cuong, N.V.; Thwaites, G.; Carrique-Mas, J. Antimicrobial Usage and Antimicrobial Resistance in Animal Production in Southeast Asia: A Review. Antibiotics 2016, 5, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- CIVAS; FAO. Document and Characterize Antimicrobial Use in Livestock Use in Livestock Sector; Center for Indonesian Veterinary Analytical Studies: Bogor, Indonesia, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Zalizar, L.; Relawati, R.; Pancapalaga, W. Usage of Antibiotic on Chicken Poultry in District of Malang, East Java, Indonesia; Universitas Halu Oleo: Kendari, Southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Wasnaeni, Y.; Iqbal, A.; Ismoyowati, I. Broiler Farmers’ Behavior in Administering Antibiotic and Types of Antibiotic Content in Commercial Feed (A Case Study). Anim. Prod. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Suandy, I.; Suparno, X. Country Report: Indonesia. Report of the thirty-sixth session of the Animal Production and Health Commission for Asia and the Pacific (APHCA); Food and Agriculture Organization Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific: Bangkok, Thailand, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Usui, M.; Ozawa, S.; Onozato, H.; Kuge, R.; Obata, Y.; Uemae, T.; Ngoc, P.T.; Heriyanto, A.; Chalemchaikit, T.; Makita, K.; et al. Antimicrobial Susceptibility of Indicator Bacteria Isolated from Chickens in Southeast Asian Countries (Vietnam, Indonesia and Thailand). J. Vet. Med. Sci. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Yulistiani, R.; Praseptiangga, D.; Supyani; Sudibya; Raharjo, D.; Shirakawa, T. Prevalence of Antibiotic-resistance Enterobacteriaceae strains Isolated from Chicken Meat at Traditional Markets in Surabaya, Indonesia. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; Institute of Physics (IOP) Publishing: Brisol, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Simmons, P.; Winters, P.; Patrick, I. An analysis of contract farming in East Java, Bali, and Lombok, Indonesia. Agric. Econ. 2005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nurtini, S.; Muzayyanah, M.A.U.; Haryadi, F.T.; Hakim, A. Performance of Broiler Farmer in Partnerships System at Surakarta, Indonesia. J. Adv. Agric. Technol. 2019, 4, 192–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Horne, P.; van Emous, R.; Setiawan Hirawan, B. Economics of Closed versus Open Broiler Houses in West Java; Dutch-Indonesian Food Security Programme: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2017.
- WHO. World Health Organisation Fact Sheets. Antimicrobial Resistance; World Health Organization (WHO) Press: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Carrique-Mas, J.; Van, N.T.B.; Van Cuong, N.; Truong, B.D.; Kiet, B.T.; Thanh, P.T.H.; Lon, N.N.; Giao, V.T.Q.; Hien, V.B.; Padungtod, P.; et al. Mortality, disease and associated antimicrobial use in commercial small-scale chicken flocks in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam. Prev. Vet. Med. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schar, D.; Sommanustweechai, A.; Laxminarayan, R.; Tangcharoensathien, V. Surveillance of antimicrobial consumption in animal production sectors of low- and middle-income countries: Optimizing use and addressing antimicrobial resistance. PLoS Med. 2018, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sommanustweechai, A.; Chanvatik, S.; Sermsinsiri, V.; Sivilaikul, S.; Patcharanarumol, W.; Yeung, S.; Tangcharoensathien, V. Antibiotic distribution channels in Thailand: Results of key-informant interviews, reviews of drug regulations and database searches. Bull. World Health Organ. 2018, 92, 101–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Om, C.; McLaws, M.-L. Antibiotics: Practice and opinions of Cambodian commercial farmers, animal feed retailers and veterinarians. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control. 2016, 5, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Morgan, D.J.; Okeke, I.N.; Laxminarayan, R.; Perencevich, E.N.; Weisenberg, S. Non-prescription antimicrobial use worldwide: A systematic review. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kinfu, Y.; Dal Poz, M.R.; Mercer, H.; Evans, D.B. The health worker shortage in Africa: Are enough physicians and nurses being trained? Bull. World Health Organ. 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yusuf, H.; Rukkwamsuk, T.; Idris, S.; Paul, M. Antimicrobial usage surveillance of cattle in Indonesia to address Antimicrobial resistance. In Proceedings of the Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 98; Atlantis Press: Surabaya, East Java, Indonesia, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- MOH. National Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance Indonesia 2017–2019; Ministry of Health: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2017.
- Buller, H.; Hinchcliffe, S.; Hockenhull, J.; Barrett, D.; Reyher, K.; Butterworth, A.; Heath, C. Systematic review and social research to further understanding of current practice in the context of using antimicrobials in livestock farming and to inform appropriate interventions to reduce antimicrobial resistance within the livestock sector; Department for the Environmental Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA): London, UK, 2015.
- Coyne, L.A.; Latham, S.M.; Williams, N.J.; Dawson, S.; Donald, I.J.; Pearson, R.B.; Smith, R.F.; Pinchbeck, G.L. Understanding the culture of antimicrobial prescribing in agriculture: A qualitative study of UK pig veterinary surgeons. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2016, 71, 3300–3312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Sherrad, J.; Cordingley, B. Global Animal Protein Outlook 2018; RaboResearch: Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- EIP-AGRI. EIP-AGRI Focus Group: Reducing antibiotic use in pig farming: FINAL REPORT; The European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Postma, M.; Stärk, K.D.C.; Sjölund, M.; Backhans, A.; Beilage, E.G.; Lösken, S.; Belloc, C.; Collineau, L.; Iten, D.; Visschers, V.; et al. Alternatives to the use of antimicrobial agents in pig production: A multi-country expert-ranking of perceived effectiveness, feasibility and return on investment. Prev. Vet. Med. 2015, 118, 457–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sommanustweechai, A.; Tangcharoensathien, V.; Malathum, K.; Sumpradit, N.; Kiatying-Angsulee, N.; Janejai, N.; Jaroenpoj, S. Implementing national strategies on antimicrobial resistance in Thailand: Potential challenges and solutions. Public Health 2018, 157, 142–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Bank Drug-resistant infections: A Threat to Our Economic Future; World Bank Rep.; World Bank Group: Washington, DC, USA, 2016.
- USAID Indonesia’s Poultry Value Chain. Costs, Margins, Prices, and Other Issues; United States Agency for International Development: Washington, DC, USA, 2013.
- FAO Survey result: Antibiotic use to prevent disease on chicken farms is still high. Food Agric. Organ. United Nations 2018.
- Bao, T.; Van Cuong, N.; Doan, H.P.; Bach, D.N.T.T.T.K.; Carrique-Mas, J.; Rushton, J. Traditional small-scale meat chicken production systems in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam: An economic assessment. Front. Vet. Sci. 2020. In Press. [Google Scholar]
- Van Boeckel, T.P.; Thanapongtharm, W.; Robinson, T.; D?Aietti, L.; Gilbert, M. Predicting the distribution of intensive poultry farming in Thailand. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2012, 149, 144–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fitriani, A.; Daryanto, H.K.; Nurmalina, R.; Susilowati, S.H. Impact on increasing concentration in Indonesian broiler industry. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Coyne, L.A.; Latham, S.M.; Dawson, S.; Donald, I.J.; Pearson, R.B.; Smith, R.F.; Williams, N.J.; Pinchbeck, G.L. Antimicrobial use practices, attitudes and responsibilities in UK farm animal veterinary surgeons. Prev. Vet. Med. 2018, 161, 115–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Coyne, L.; Arief, R.; Benigno, C.; Giang, V.N.; Huong, L.Q.; Jeamsripong, S.; Kalpravidh, W.; McGrane, J.; Padungtod, P.; Patrick, I.; et al. Characterizing Antimicrobial Use in the Livestock Sector in Three South East Asian Countries (Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam). Antibiotics 2019, 8, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Aarestrup, F. Sustainable farming: Get pigs off antibiotics. Nature 2012, 486, 465–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mulder, D.N. Poultry Quarterly Q1 2019; RaboResearch: Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- AHPA. Use of Antimicrobial Agents in Veterinary Medicine in Thailand; Animal Health Products Association (AHPA): Bangkok, Thailand, 2017. [Google Scholar]
Province Locations of Respondent Farms | |||||||||
Lampung Province | Central Java Province | West Kalimantan Province | All Provinces | ||||||
Respondent Characteristics | |||||||||
n | % | n | % | n | % | n | % | ||
Role on farm | Farm owner | 29 | 63 | 126 | 80 | 250 | 85 | 405 | 82 |
Farm manager | 17 | 37 | 31 | 20 | 43 | 15 | 91 | 18 | |
Gender | Male | 48 | 94 | 152 | 94 | 277 | 95 | 478 | 94 |
Female | 3 | 6 | 10 | 6 | 15 | 5 | 28 | 6 | |
Education level | Junior school | 10 | 20.4 | 17 | 10.4 | 82 | 28.7 | 109 | 21.9 |
High school | 28 | 57.2 | 124 | 76.1 | 185 | 64.7 | 337 | 67.7 | |
University | 11 | 22.4 | 22 | 13.5 | 19 | 6.6 | 53 | 10.4 | |
Median | IQ range | Median | IQ range | Median | IQ range | Median | IQ range | ||
Age | 42 | 15 | 42 | 12.5 | 41 | 14 | 42 | 14 | |
Years of experience working with broiler chickens | 8 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 |
Province Locations of Respondent Farms | |||||||||
Lampung Province | Central Java Province | West Kalimantan Province | All Provinces | ||||||
n | % | n | % | n | % | n | % | ||
Farm type | Contract | 40 | 78 | 159 | 97 | 82 | 28 | 281 | 56 |
Independent | 11 | 22 | 5 | 3 | 206 | 72 | 222 | 44 | |
Housing type | Open sheds | 48 | 96 | 153 | 94 | 286 | 99 | 487 | 97 |
Closed sheds | 2 | 4 | 9 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 13 | 3 | |
Median | IQ range | Median | IQ range | Median | IQ range | Median | IQ range | ||
Current broiler population | 7450 | 9125 | 5000 | 2500 | 2000 | 2700 | 3000 | 4000 | |
Farm capacity | 8000 | 10,000 | 5000 | 2625 | 3000 | 4000 | 4250 | 4500 | |
Number of broiler production cycles per year | 6 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 | 1 | 6 | 1 |
Province (Bold) and District of Respondent Farms | No. | DOC * | Feed | Disinfectant | Litter | Medicines | Labour | Heating | Other | Vaccine | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
West Kalimantan | 293 | 569 | 1586 | 7 | 10 | 19 | 61 | 12 | 42 | 13 | 2320 |
Ketapang | 15 | 580 | 2262 | 31 | 11 | 87 | 2971 | ||||
Mempawah | 60 | 587 | 2131 | 5 | 8 | 12 | 78 | 10 | 7 | 2837 | |
Kota Pontianak | 40 | 595 | 1557 | 4 | 9 | 20 | 58 | 10 | 30 | 29 | 2312 |
Kubu Raya | 60 | 567 | 1398 | 14 | 18 | 29 | 55 | 14 | 89 | 18 | 2202 |
Kayong Utara | 15 | 667 | 1472 | 6 | 17 | 8 | 3 | 2173 | |||
Sambas | 15 | 501 | 1481 | 2 | 13 | 18 | 53 | 8 | 12 | 2087 | |
Sanggau | 15 | 493 | 1401 | 3 | 10 | 14 | 65 | 25 | 0 | 2012 | |
Kota Singkawang | 60 | 535 | 1228 | 4 | 6 | 14 | 49 | 11 | 5 | 1853 | |
Sekadau | 13 | 596 | 1033 | 8 | 7 | 48 | 53 | 14 | 28 | 1788 | |
Central Java | 165 | 474 | 1435 | 5 | 18 | 31 | 33 | 20 | 18 | 12 | 2046 |
Semarang | 45 | 456 | 1620 | 4 | 22 | 30 | 34 | 19 | 15 | 13 | 2213 |
Boyolali | 60 | 469 | 1633 | 2 | 12 | 29 | 30 | 24 | 5 | 2205 | |
Klaten | 60 | 490 | 1287 | 6 | 17 | 35 | 32 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 1929 |
Lampung | 51 | 469 | 1246 | 1 | 9 | 30 | 34 | 17 | 17 | 42 | 1865 |
Lampung Selatan | 51 | 469 | 1246 | 1 | 9 | 30 | 34 | 17 | 17 | 42 | 1865 |
Average | 536 | 1505 | 7 | 11 | 29 | 49 | 16 | 30 | 17 | 2188 |
Province | District | Survey on the Economic Drivers for Antimicrobial Use |
---|---|---|
Central Java | Boyolali | 60 |
Klaten | 60 | |
Semarang | 45 | |
Lampung | Lampung Selatan | 51 |
West Kalimantan | Kayong Utara | 15 |
Ketapang | 15 | |
Kota Pontianak | 40 | |
Kota Singkawang | 60 | |
Kubu Raya | 60 | |
Mempawah | 60 | |
Sambas | 15 | |
Sanggau | 15 | |
Sekadau | 13 |
Evidence for the Economic and Behavioural Drivers of Antimicrobial Use | Policy Recommendations |
---|---|
The ease of access to antimicrobials for Indonesian broiler producers. | The study results identified a need for a stepwise approach to restrict antimicrobial use, which would be best achieved with better regulation of drug sellers and pharmacies as the initial stage with the ultimate goal of making antimicrobials a prescription-only drug. There is a risk that implementing major changes to policy may encourage farmers to source antimicrobials from black-market sources [39]. |
Poor access to trained veterinarians and para-veterinarians for small commercial broiler producers. | There is a need to increase the numbers of veterinary professionals in Indonesia as well as implement a more formal and structured training for para-veterinarians, with a particular focus on responsible antimicrobial use. |
Dominance of the integrated poultry production companies. | It is essential that any efforts to promote antimicrobial stewardship are led using a top-down approach by the industry. Significant progress has been made in Thailand through an industry-led initiative to collect veterinary antimicrobial sales data [61]. |
Overall antimicrobial use is a relatively minor cost for broiler producers. At present many farms rely on antimicrobials to control endemic disease. | Whilst increasing the cost of antimicrobials may act as a deterrent to their use, it is essential that any policy considers the likely negative effects in terms of food supply and the livelihoods of these small-scale commercial producers. |
Economic benefits in the form of improved productivity rates from their use were observed despite efforts by the Indonesian government to reduce antimicrobial use in livestock in-line with international efforts to safeguard human and animal health. | There is a need for further research on the cost-effectiveness of alternative methods of preventing disease and ensuring that feasible alternatives are easily available. Farmers must be incentivised to seek alternative approaches to prevent disease, such as vaccinations and improvements in management systems, including on-farm biosecurity. |
Record keeping on farm productivity was generally poor or absent. | The importance of collecting accurate farm productivity data and undertaking economic assessments in any interventions to reduce antimicrobial use. |
Open housing systems dominate small commercial broiler production and leave birds vulnerable to disease introduction and exposed to extreme temperatures. | Closed housing, offering producers better facilities to prevent and manage disease, provides scope to encourage producers to reinvest in their housing systems. This could only be achieved through the engagement of the broiler production companies and there is a need to offer incentives for contract farmers. |
There is a need to improve the robustness of broilers through improved management, husbandry and genetics. | Improvements in water quality, feed safety and genetics are essential to reducing the reliance on antimicrobials for disease prevention. |
Knowledge on AMR and its potential wider consequences was limited. | There is a need for greater knowledge exchange with farmers on the definition of AMR and the potential negative effects on human and animal health. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Coyne, L.; Patrick, I.; Arief, R.; Benigno, C.; Kalpravidh, W.; McGrane, J.; Schoonman, L.; Harja Sukarno, A.; Rushton, J. The Costs, Benefits and Human Behaviours for Antimicrobial Use in Small Commercial Broiler Chicken Systems in Indonesia. Antibiotics 2020, 9, 154. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9040154
Coyne L, Patrick I, Arief R, Benigno C, Kalpravidh W, McGrane J, Schoonman L, Harja Sukarno A, Rushton J. The Costs, Benefits and Human Behaviours for Antimicrobial Use in Small Commercial Broiler Chicken Systems in Indonesia. Antibiotics. 2020; 9(4):154. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9040154
Chicago/Turabian StyleCoyne, Lucy, Ian Patrick, Riana Arief, Carolyn Benigno, Wantanee Kalpravidh, James McGrane, Luuk Schoonman, Ady Harja Sukarno, and Jonathan Rushton. 2020. "The Costs, Benefits and Human Behaviours for Antimicrobial Use in Small Commercial Broiler Chicken Systems in Indonesia" Antibiotics 9, no. 4: 154. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9040154
APA StyleCoyne, L., Patrick, I., Arief, R., Benigno, C., Kalpravidh, W., McGrane, J., Schoonman, L., Harja Sukarno, A., & Rushton, J. (2020). The Costs, Benefits and Human Behaviours for Antimicrobial Use in Small Commercial Broiler Chicken Systems in Indonesia. Antibiotics, 9(4), 154. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9040154