| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Last Published | Before April 17, 2021 12:04 AM | After December 24, 2021 07:50 AM |
| Field Keyword(s) | Before Agriculture, Other | After Agriculture, Other |
| Field Building on Existing Work | Before | After No |
| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Paper Abstract | Before | After Calcium deficiency in high yielding bovines during calving causes “milk fever” which leads to economic losses of around ₹ 1,000 crores (US $ 137 million) per annum in Haryana, India. With increasing milk production, the risk of milk fever is continuously rising. In the context, we aim to address the most fundamental research question: What is the effect of a preventive health product (anionic mineral mixture (AMM)) on milk fever incidence, milk productivity and farmers’ income? In an effort to contribute to the scanty economic literature on effect of preventive measures on nutritional deficiency disorders in dairy animals, specifically, on AMM effects in India, this study uses a randomized controlled design to estimate internally valid estimates. Using data from 200 dairy farms, results indicate that milk fever incidence decreases from 21% at baseline to 2% in treated animals at follow-up. Further, AMM leads to a 12% and 38% increase in milk yield and farmer’s net income, respectively. Profits earned due to the prevention of milk fever [₹ 16,000 (US$ 218.7)] overweighs the losses from milk fever [₹ 4,000 (US$ 54.7)]; thus, prevention using AMM is better than cure. |
| Field Paper Citation | Before | After Cariappa, A G Adeeth and Chandel, B S and Sankhala, Gopal and Mani, Veena and R, Sendhil and Dixit, Anil Kumar and Meena, B S, Prevention Is Better Than Cure: Experimental Evidence From Milk Fever Incidence in Dairy Animals of Haryana, India (May 23, 2021). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3851561 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3851561 |
| Field Paper URL | Before | After https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3851561 |
| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Paper Abstract | Before | After Should we distribute preventive animal health products for free or charge a positive price? The decision depends on the price sensitivity of the product and the effect prices have on product use. We explore this idea through a field experiment in which we randomize the price a farmer faces for an animal health product. We find that the demand for the product is highly sensitive to prices; willingness to pay (WTP) decreased from 44% at ₹ 100 to 18% at ₹ 500. Further, among farmers who were willing to pay, the product usage rate was 71% and usage did not increase in prices (lack of screening effect). Furthermore, we find that farmers whose animals were sick in the baseline had a higher WTP. These findings support the human capital model relating to demand for human health products. We argue that individuals behave in a similar way when the decisions concern their own health or the health of an animal they rear for commercial purposes. A highly subsidized distribution of the product is recommended due to high price sensitivity, lack of screening effect, equitable distribution among poor and lesser implementation costs found in this study. |
| Field Paper Citation | Before | After Cariappa, A G Adeeth and Chandel, B S and R, Sendhil and Dixit, Anil Kumar and Sankhala, Gopal and Mani, Veena and Meena, B S, Do the prices of a preventive animal health product affect dairy farmers’ willingness to pay and product use? Evidence from an experimental study. Available at ResearchSquare: https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-731711/v1 |
| Field Paper URL | Before | After https://dx.doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-731711/v1 |