Abstract
This paper compares two ways of financing the combating of Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) in the EU and uses a simulation model to determine the welfare and production implications of the two systems. The two systems analysed are (i) financing by the tax payers, resembling the system currently in place, and (ii) a compulsory insurance scheme where all costs are converted into regionally differentiated insurance premiums that are paid by the producers. The analysis indicates that welfare gains may be realised by shifting from the former to the latter financing system.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
