Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Modelling the global economic consequences of a major African swine fever outbreak in China

Nature Food volume 1, pages 221–228 (2020)Cite this article

Subjects

An Author Correction to this article was published on 21 January 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

African swine fever is a deadly porcine disease that has spread into East Asia where it is having a detrimental effect on pork production. However, the implications of African swine fever on the global pork market are poorly explored. Two linked global economic models are used to explore the consequences of different scales of the epidemic on pork prices and on the prices of other food types and animal feeds. The models project global pork prices increasing by 17–85% and unmet demand driving price increases of other meats. This price rise reduces the quantity of pork demanded but also spurs production in other parts of the world, and imports make up half the Chinese losses. Demand for, and prices of, food types such as beef and poultry rise, while prices for maize and soybean used in feed decline. There is a slight decline in average per capita calorie availability in China, indicating the importance of assuring the dietary needs of low-income populations. Outside China, projections for calorie availability are mixed, reflecting the direct and indirect effects of the African swine fever epidemic on food and feed markets.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Summary of changes from the reference scenario in pork markets in China and selected regions.
Fig. 2: Summary of changes from the reference scenario in selected commodity markets in China and globally.
Fig. 3: Effect of the ASF epidemic on calorie availability and risk of hunger.
Fig. 4: Percentage change in average household welfare by region and scenario.
Fig. 5: Changes in Chinese pork prices from 31 December 2017 to 6 February 2020.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Full documentation for IMPACT and GLOBE is available at http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/129825 and http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/132757, respectively. Model output from this study can be found in the Mendeley Data repository at https://doi.org/10.17632/zgrngg5hp5. Source data are provided with this paper.

Change history

References

  1. Cwynar, P., Stojkov, J. & Wlazlak, K. African swine fever status in Europe. Viruses 11, 310 (2019).

  2. African Swine Fever Situation in Asia Update (FAO, 2019); http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/programmes/en/empres/ASF/situation_update.html

  3. McCracken, C., Pan, C. & Sherrard, J. Rising African swine fever losses to lift all protein boats. Rabobank (April 2019); https://research.rabobank.com/far/en/sectors/animal-protein/rising-african-swine-fever-losses-to-lift-all-protein.html

  4. Gu, H. & Daly, T. China has shown ‘shortcomings’ in bid to contain African swine fever. Reuters (3 July 2019); https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-china-swinefever-policy/china-has-shown-shortcomings-in-bid-to-contain-african-swine-fever-cabinet-idUKKCN1TY15E

  5. Pan, C. African swine fever affects China’s pork consumption. Rabobank (June 2019); https://research.rabobank.com/far/en/sectors/animal-protein/african-swine-fever-affects-china-s-pork-consumption.html

  6. Beltrán-Alcrudo, D., Arias, M., Gallardo, C., Kramer, S. & Penrith, M. L. African Swine Fever: Detection and Diagnosis – A Manual for Veterinarians FAO Animal Production and Health Manual No. 19 (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2017).

  7. Penrith, M. L. & Vosloo, W. Review of African swine fever: transmission, spread and control. J. S. Afr. Vet. Assoc. 80, 58–62 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Costard, S., Mur, L., Lubroth, J., Sanchez-Vizcaino, J. M. & Pfeiffer, D. U. Epidemiology of African swine fever virus. Virus Res. 173, 191–197 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Sanchez-Vizcaino, J. M., Mur, L., Gomez-Villamandos, J. C. & Carrasco, L. An update on the epidemiology and pathology of African Swine Fever. J. Comp. Pathol. 152, 9–21 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhou, L., Yu, E. Y. W., Wang, S. J. & Sun, C. P. African swine fever epidemic in China. Vet. Rec. 184, 713–713 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Costard, S. et al. African swine fever: how can global spread be prevented? Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 364, 2683–2696 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Barasona, J. A. et al. First oral vaccination of Eurasian wild boar against African swine fever virus genotype II. Front. Vet. Sci. 6, https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2019.00137 (2019).

  13. Sanchez, E. G., Perez-Nunez, D. & Revilla, Y. Development of vaccines against African swine fever virus. Virus Res. 265, 150–155 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Polansek, T. China makes major U.S. pork purchase despite steep import tariffs, as hog virus takes toll. Reuters (14 March 2019); https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-trade-pork/china-makes-major-u-s-pork-purchase-despite-steep-import-tariffs-as-hog-virus-takes-toll-idUKKCN1QV2MR

  15. Food and Agriculture Commodities Production (FAOSTAT, 2019); http://faostat.fao.org/default.aspx

  16. IMF Primary Commodity Prices (IMF, 2017); https://www.imf.org/external/np/res/commod/index.aspx

  17. Caskie, P., Moss, J. E. & Davis, J. The beginning of the end or the end of the beginning for the BSE crisis? Food Policy 23, 231–240 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Taha, F. A. & Hahn, W. F. The impact of BSE on U.S. exports of beef and pork. Agribusiness 30, 5–16 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Luo, Z. J. & Tian, X. Can China’s meat imports be sustainable? A case study of mad cow disease. Appl. Econ. 50, 1022–1042 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yu, W. S. & Cao, L. J. China’s meat and grain imports during 2000–2012 and beyond: a comparative perspective. J Integr. Agr. 14, 1101–1114 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Peters, D. Sweet Potato and Pigs: Traditional Relationships, Current Practices and Future Prospects (Nova Science, 2010).

  22. Ekpa, O., Palacios-Rojas, N., Kruseman, G., Fogliano, V. & Linnemann, A. R. Sub-Saharan African maize-based foods: technological perspectives to increase the food and nutrition security impacts of maize breeding programmes. Glob. Food Secur. 17, 48–56 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. De Groote, H. & Kimenju, S. C. Consumer preferences for maize products in urban Kenya. Food Nutr. Bull. 33, 99–110 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Baffes, J., Kshirsagar, V. & Mitchell, D. What Drives Local Food Prices? Evidence from the Tanzanian Maize Market Policy Research Working Paper no. WPS 7338 (World Bank, 2015).

  25. Rudolf, R. The impact of maize price shocks on household food security: panel evidence from Tanzania. Food Policy 85, 40–54 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Abidoye, B. O. & Labuschagne, M. The transmission of world maize price to South African maize market: a threshold cointegration approach. Agr. Econ. 45, 501–512 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Yu, X. H. & Abler, D. Where have all the pigs gone? Inconsistencies in pork statistics in China. China Econ. Rev. 30, 469–484 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Yan, B. J., Yan, J. J., Shi, W. J. & Li, Y. X. Study on the comprehensive comparative advantages of pig production and development in China based on geographic information system. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 22, 105–117 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mu, J. H. E., McCarl, B. A., Hagerman, A. & Bessler, D. Impacts of bovine spongiform encephalopathy and avian influenza on US meat demand. J. Integr. Agr. 14, 1130–1141 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Zhou, L., Turvey, C. G., Hu, W. Y. & Ying, R. Y. Fear and trust: how risk perceptions of avian influenza affect Chinese consumers’ demand for chicken. China Econ. Rev. 40, 91–104 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Chiang, L. & Sun, J. Impacts of African swine fever on China’s feed industry and soy demand. Rabobank (April 2019); https://research.rabobank.com/far/en/sectors/grains-oilseeds/ASF-China-Feed-and-Soy.html

  32. Gilbert, M. et al. Income disparities and the global distribution of intensively farmed chicken and pigs. PLoS ONE 10, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133381 (2015).

  33. Brown, V. R. & Bevins, S. N. A review of African swine fever and the potential for introduction into the United States and the possibility of subsequent establishment in feral swine and native ticks. Front. Vet. Sci. 5, https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2018.00011 (2018).

  34. Capua, I. & Monti, M. African swine fever could splinter the EU. Nature 566, 326–326 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. World Development Indicators (World Bank, 2018).

  36. McLeod, A., Morgan, N., Prakash, A. & Hinrichs, J. Economic and Social impacts of Avian Influenza (FAO Emergency Centre for Transboundary Animal Diseases Operations, 2005).

  37. Qiao, F. B., Huang, J. K., Wang, D., Liu, H. J. & Lohmar, B. China’s hog production: from backyard to large-scale. China Econ. Rev. 38, 199–208 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Rosegrant, M. W., Agcaoili-Sombilla, M. & Perez, N. D. Global Food Projections to 2020: Implications for Investment (International Food Policy Research Institute, 1995).

  39. Robinson, S. et al. The International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade (IMPACT): Model description for version 3 (IFPRI, 2015); http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/129825

  40. McDonald, S., Robinson, S. & Thierfelder, K. GLOBE: A SAM Based Global CGE Model Using GTAP Data Departmental Working Papers 14 (United States Naval Academy Department of Economics, 2007).

  41. Godfray, H. C. J., Mason-D’Croz, D. & Robinson, S. Food system consequences of a fungal disease epidemic in a major crop. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 371, https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0467 (2016).

  42. Agricultural Policies in the Philippines (OECD, 2017).

  43. Food System Shock: The Insurance Impacts of Acute Disruption to Global Food Supply (Lloyd’s, 2015).

  44. Springmann, M., Godfray, H. C. J., Rayner, M. & Scarborough, P. Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change cobenefits of dietary change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 4146–4151 (2016).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Aguiar, A., Narayanan, B. & McDougall, R. An overview of the GTAP 9 data base. J. Glob. Econ. Anal. 1, 181–208 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Willenbockel, D. et al. Dynamic Computable General Equilibrium Simulations in Support of Quantitative Foresight Modeling to Inform the CGIAR Research Portfolio: Linking the IMPACT and GLOBE models (IFPRI, 2018).

  47. Gale, F., Marti, D. & Hu, D. China’s Volatile Pork Industry (USDA Economic Research Service, 2012).

  48. Gale, F. & Huang, K. Demand for Food Quantity and Quality in China 69–115 (USDA, 2010).

  49. Chen, D. H., Abler, D., Zhou, D., Yu, X. H. & Thompson, W. A meta-analysis of food demand elasticities for China. Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy 38, 50–72 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

H.C.J.G. and K.W. acknowledge support from the Wellcome Trust’s Our Planet Our Health programme (205212/Z/16/Z); S.R., T.B.S. and K.W. from the CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets; and D.M.-D’C., J.R.B. and M.H. from the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (grant no. LS/2018/107, South East Asian Livestock Futures).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), St Lucia, Queensland, Australia

    Daniel Mason-D’Croz, Jessica R. Bogard & Mario Herrero

  2. Environment and Production Technology Division, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington DC, USA

    Sherman Robinson, Timothy B. Sulser & Keith Wiebe

  3. Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, Brighton, UK

    Dirk Willenbockel

  4. Oxford Martin School & Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    H. Charles J. Godfray

Authors
  1. Daniel Mason-D’Croz
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jessica R. Bogard
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mario Herrero
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sherman Robinson
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Timothy B. Sulser
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Keith Wiebe
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Dirk Willenbockel
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. H. Charles J. Godfray
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The project was conceived by H.C.J.G., S.R. and D.M.-D’C.; all authors contributed to its execution and write up with D.M.-D’C. leading on the IMPACT analysis, D.W. on the GLOBE analyses, J.R.B. on the nutrition aspects and H.C.J.G. and D.M.-D’C. on writing the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Mason-D’Croz.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary figures, tables and extended discussion of modelling methodology.

Reporting Summary

Source data

Source Data Fig. 1

Statistical source data.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mason-D’Croz, D., Bogard, J.R., Herrero, M. et al. Modelling the global economic consequences of a major African swine fever outbreak in China. Nat Food 1, 221–228 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-0057-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-0057-2

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Anthropocene