New!
8th Advisory Committee Meeting of the Peste des Petits Ruminants Global Eradication Programme, May 12th to 15th, 2025, Nairobi Kenya
Report to the IGA
Paula Menzies
Peste des petits ruminants (PPR), also known as sheep and goat plague is a virulent and devastating disease of sheep, goats and wild small ruminants – affecting animals in approximately 60 countries across most of Africa, the Middle East, Central, South and East Asia, and with recent incursions into Europe. The World Organization of Animal Health (WOAH) and the UN Food Agriculture Organization (FAO) jointly agreed to target PPR for eradication by 2030.
The IGA is represented on the Advisory Committee by the IGA President, Noemi Castro. Beth Miller (Past-President) and Paula Menzies (Assistant Secretary-Treasurer) are also members of the committee so that the IGA is well-represented.
Socio-economic Global Research and Expert Network (GREN) meeting.
This meeting which took place on May 12th & 13th, was devoted to discussion of the socioeconomics of the disease. While PPR causes significant illness and death in unvaccinated small ruminants – with goats being more severely affected, it is the socioeconomic effects of the disease that make it even more devasting. In many of the countries affected, sheep and goats are significant livelihood resources for marginalized or low income people, such as pastoralists, women, youth and ethnic minorities and their families. Goats in particular serve as a source of high-quality protein for children (milk), and sales of kids provides income that can be used for their children’s education and household supplies. When the goats die from PPR, poverty worsens and the families may be forced to migrate to cities where the social instability makes their lives even more impoverished and precarious.
A synopsis of a few of the presentations.
Jonathan Rushton of the University of Edinburgh, gave an overview of GBAD – Global Burden of Animal Diseases, a new way of assessing the impact of animal diseases on society. This project includes not just the effect of disease on the animal but also on the people who care and rely on them. PPR disease and its control have associated costs; there is also lost revenue when PPR is circulating in a population.
Data were presented on the economic effects of PPR. Alia Hassan’s work in Sudan showed PPR has negative effects all along the value chain, including abattoirs and trade. Veterinary services are often inadequate to provide control measures such as vaccination and surveillance. Pacem Kotchefa’s research on outbreaks of PPR in central and western Africa found that household incomes drop 30-60% during outbreaks, disproportionally affected women and youth. Conflict zones are particularly vulnerable to the socioeconomic effects of PPR, where there may be limited to no access to vaccines. Other small ruminant diseases (e.g., FMD, bluetongue, CCPP, pneumonic pasteurellosis) some of which are also zoonotic (e.g., brucellosis, Rift Valley fever) can be included in PPR control programmes and served by the same veterinary services and diagnostic laboratory capacity as PPR. PPR control and eradication can then help to prevent the impact of these diseases and optimize the health of small ruminants, and the people who depend on them.
Wildlife may also be affected. The example provided by Enkhtuvshin Shiiledgdamba of FAO Mongolia of the profound effect of PPR on the endangered Saiga antelope – was a lesson learned that PPR can devastate other species and harm biodiversity.
There were presentations on access to vaccines and vaccination hesitancy in some communities. As women are often the caregivers of small ruminants, they must be educated in the recognition and control of PPR. But beyond that, they must be allowed to obtain vaccines and to vaccinate their animals or work with Veterinary Services to deliver the vaccine. Gender barriers where women cannot interact with a man outside their household, geographic and financial isolation may prevent this, as presented by Ladi Chabiri of NVRI Nigeria. This led to a discussion of the importance of looking for novel ways to order and deliver vaccine (e.g., smart phone app, drones), to ensure proper cold chain (e.g., piggyback on systems used for human health care), and to make sure that female veterinarians / animal health workers are available to deliver “last mile” vaccination and surveillance activities. Sylvia Angubua of FAO Uganda gave us a particularly poignant example of how important and devasting PPR can be to a community. An NGO distributed improved breeding stock to villagers but unfortunately, these animals were not vaccinated against PPR. They spread the disease to goats in the villages, which had been free of PPR prior to this. Most of the goats died – images of the women and men of the village holding their dying kids and does while in disbelieve of what was happening, was very emotional – and should have been totally preventable.
Participants in the meeting joined a workshop put on by SEBI Livestock (led by Julie Koehler). The purpose was to develop evidence-based advocacy and communication products to make sure that resource partners, governments and farmers understand the importance of PPR and the benefits of its eradication. It was an eye-opening exercise into communicating and advocacy.
The PPR GEP (Global Eradication Programme) Advisory Committee meeting took place on May 14th and 15th, 2025. The meeting provided participants with an overview of progress made on the PPR GEP and of barriers that still exist.
The status of countries and regions in the different PMAT (PPR Monitoring and Assessment Tool) stages were given. Countries may be in < Stage 1 (no determination of status with regards to PPR), Stage 1 (undergo epidemiological knowledge of PPR status including surveillance data), Stage 2 (control where mass or risk-based vaccination is occurring based on knowledge obtained from Stage 1), Stage 3 (eradication where vaccination ceases but surveillance continues), Stage 4 (post-eradication where surveillance continues), and beyond Stage 4 where the country applies for WOAH PPR-free status after having no cases of PPR for at least 2 years. While there has been significant progress in each regional economic community, there are also many examples where countries are still in Stage 1 and / or do not have a validated National Strategic Plan. Failure to progress is often related to insufficient resources – money, veterinary services, access to vaccines and diagnostic tests, infrastructure, etc. As discussed at the socio-economic meeting, some of these barriers are due to social norms that marginalize certain groups of people from resources, decision-making and mobility to participate in Animal Health Services.
For the PPR GEP to be successful, there must be additional effort to assist countries to obtain sufficient funds to achieve PPR eradication and / or prove that their country is free of PPR. The politicians must see how beneficial this will be to all people in their country, including those currently experiencing discrimination (advocacy communication). Potential resource partners must be also appraised of the need to eradicate this disease through improving access to veterinary services, by recognizing and addressing the social as well as technical barriers to vaccination) and control of other high impact and zoonotic small ruminant diseases. When successfully implemented, the GEP results in improved social conditions and food security. These efforts are ongoing but much more needs to be done to be successful.
There is much good news though. The European Union has indicated its willingness to contribute significant funding to PPR eradication in sub-Saharan Africa. These funds are to be matched from contributions from participating countries are well as other development partners. AU-IBAR (African Union-Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources) is leading this Pan-African PPR eradication programme and working closely with the Global PPR Secretariat.
The PPR GEP is a programme with an intended endpoint, currently 2030 – a scant 5 years away. However, the benefits of PPR eradication will only be the start of the benefits of the programme in terms of improved animal health and welfare, and the welfare and well-being of the people in affected countries. The IGA continues to be an important part of this effort and many of its members and member countries will benefit from the work that IGA has been doing over the last 8 years.
For more information, visit the website https://www.fao.org/ppr/en
8th Advisory Committee Meeting of the Peste des Petits Ruminants Global Eradication Programme, May 12th to 15th, 2025, Nairobi Kenya
Report to the IGA
Paula Menzies
Peste des petits ruminants (PPR), also known as sheep and goat plague is a virulent and devastating disease of sheep, goats and wild small ruminants – affecting animals in approximately 60 countries across most of Africa, the Middle East, Central, South and East Asia, and with recent incursions into Europe. The World Organization of Animal Health (WOAH) and the UN Food Agriculture Organization (FAO) jointly agreed to target PPR for eradication by 2030.
The IGA is represented on the Advisory Committee by the IGA President, Noemi Castro. Beth Miller (Past-President) and Paula Menzies (Assistant Secretary-Treasurer) are also members of the committee so that the IGA is well-represented.
Socio-economic Global Research and Expert Network (GREN) meeting.
This meeting which took place on May 12th & 13th, was devoted to discussion of the socioeconomics of the disease. While PPR causes significant illness and death in unvaccinated small ruminants – with goats being more severely affected, it is the socioeconomic effects of the disease that make it even more devasting. In many of the countries affected, sheep and goats are significant livelihood resources for marginalized or low income people, such as pastoralists, women, youth and ethnic minorities and their families. Goats in particular serve as a source of high-quality protein for children (milk), and sales of kids provides income that can be used for their children’s education and household supplies. When the goats die from PPR, poverty worsens and the families may be forced to migrate to cities where the social instability makes their lives even more impoverished and precarious.
A synopsis of a few of the presentations.
Jonathan Rushton of the University of Edinburgh, gave an overview of GBAD – Global Burden of Animal Diseases, a new way of assessing the impact of animal diseases on society. This project includes not just the effect of disease on the animal but also on the people who care and rely on them. PPR disease and its control have associated costs; there is also lost revenue when PPR is circulating in a population.
Data were presented on the economic effects of PPR. Alia Hassan’s work in Sudan showed PPR has negative effects all along the value chain, including abattoirs and trade. Veterinary services are often inadequate to provide control measures such as vaccination and surveillance. Pacem Kotchefa’s research on outbreaks of PPR in central and western Africa found that household incomes drop 30-60% during outbreaks, disproportionally affected women and youth. Conflict zones are particularly vulnerable to the socioeconomic effects of PPR, where there may be limited to no access to vaccines. Other small ruminant diseases (e.g., FMD, bluetongue, CCPP, pneumonic pasteurellosis) some of which are also zoonotic (e.g., brucellosis, Rift Valley fever) can be included in PPR control programmes and served by the same veterinary services and diagnostic laboratory capacity as PPR. PPR control and eradication can then help to prevent the impact of these diseases and optimize the health of small ruminants, and the people who depend on them.
Wildlife may also be affected. The example provided by Enkhtuvshin Shiiledgdamba of FAO Mongolia of the profound effect of PPR on the endangered Saiga antelope – was a lesson learned that PPR can devastate other species and harm biodiversity.
There were presentations on access to vaccines and vaccination hesitancy in some communities. As women are often the caregivers of small ruminants, they must be educated in the recognition and control of PPR. But beyond that, they must be allowed to obtain vaccines and to vaccinate their animals or work with Veterinary Services to deliver the vaccine. Gender barriers where women cannot interact with a man outside their household, geographic and financial isolation may prevent this, as presented by Ladi Chabiri of NVRI Nigeria. This led to a discussion of the importance of looking for novel ways to order and deliver vaccine (e.g., smart phone app, drones), to ensure proper cold chain (e.g., piggyback on systems used for human health care), and to make sure that female veterinarians / animal health workers are available to deliver “last mile” vaccination and surveillance activities. Sylvia Angubua of FAO Uganda gave us a particularly poignant example of how important and devasting PPR can be to a community. An NGO distributed improved breeding stock to villagers but unfortunately, these animals were not vaccinated against PPR. They spread the disease to goats in the villages, which had been free of PPR prior to this. Most of the goats died – images of the women and men of the village holding their dying kids and does while in disbelieve of what was happening, was very emotional – and should have been totally preventable.
Participants in the meeting joined a workshop put on by SEBI Livestock (led by Julie Koehler). The purpose was to develop evidence-based advocacy and communication products to make sure that resource partners, governments and farmers understand the importance of PPR and the benefits of its eradication. It was an eye-opening exercise into communicating and advocacy.
The PPR GEP (Global Eradication Programme) Advisory Committee meeting took place on May 14th and 15th, 2025. The meeting provided participants with an overview of progress made on the PPR GEP and of barriers that still exist.
The status of countries and regions in the different PMAT (PPR Monitoring and Assessment Tool) stages were given. Countries may be in < Stage 1 (no determination of status with regards to PPR), Stage 1 (undergo epidemiological knowledge of PPR status including surveillance data), Stage 2 (control where mass or risk-based vaccination is occurring based on knowledge obtained from Stage 1), Stage 3 (eradication where vaccination ceases but surveillance continues), Stage 4 (post-eradication where surveillance continues), and beyond Stage 4 where the country applies for WOAH PPR-free status after having no cases of PPR for at least 2 years. While there has been significant progress in each regional economic community, there are also many examples where countries are still in Stage 1 and / or do not have a validated National Strategic Plan. Failure to progress is often related to insufficient resources – money, veterinary services, access to vaccines and diagnostic tests, infrastructure, etc. As discussed at the socio-economic meeting, some of these barriers are due to social norms that marginalize certain groups of people from resources, decision-making and mobility to participate in Animal Health Services.
For the PPR GEP to be successful, there must be additional effort to assist countries to obtain sufficient funds to achieve PPR eradication and / or prove that their country is free of PPR. The politicians must see how beneficial this will be to all people in their country, including those currently experiencing discrimination (advocacy communication). Potential resource partners must be also appraised of the need to eradicate this disease through improving access to veterinary services, by recognizing and addressing the social as well as technical barriers to vaccination) and control of other high impact and zoonotic small ruminant diseases. When successfully implemented, the GEP results in improved social conditions and food security. These efforts are ongoing but much more needs to be done to be successful.
There is much good news though. The European Union has indicated its willingness to contribute significant funding to PPR eradication in sub-Saharan Africa. These funds are to be matched from contributions from participating countries are well as other development partners. AU-IBAR (African Union-Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources) is leading this Pan-African PPR eradication programme and working closely with the Global PPR Secretariat.
The PPR GEP is a programme with an intended endpoint, currently 2030 – a scant 5 years away. However, the benefits of PPR eradication will only be the start of the benefits of the programme in terms of improved animal health and welfare, and the welfare and well-being of the people in affected countries. The IGA continues to be an important part of this effort and many of its members and member countries will benefit from the work that IGA has been doing over the last 8 years.
For more information, visit the website https://www.fao.org/ppr/en
Peste des Petits Ruminants - Outbreak in Europe 2024
On July 8, 2024 Greece reported its first case of PPR, a severe viral disease of sheep and goats. PPR has been targeted for eradication by 2030 by the World Organization of Animal Health (WOAH) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). On July 15, 2024 Romania also reported its first case of PPR. Since then there have been over 100 outbreaks in both countries. While PPR is endemic in over 60 countries in the world, these outbreaks in Europe mark only the 3rd time it has been seen in Europe, with the disease previously seen in Georgia (2016 and 2024) and Bulgaria (2018). Given the nature of animal movement within the EU, this is very concerning.
While the source of the outbreaks is still unknown, it is likely that a) the disease was first introduced to Romania likely by illegal movement of infected animals from an endemic country and b) the disease was then introduced to Greece from Romania - again by movement of infected animals. It is also very likely that the disease was firstly thought to be bluetongue and so diagnosis was delayed by one or more weeks which allowed for further spread. At this time, control and eradication measures are restrictions on movement of animals in zones around the regions where outbreaks are occurring and euthanasia of animals on affected premises, along with other biosecurity measures. While vaccination of unaffected animals is an option the country may use, this will delay moving the country to free-status.
Webinar Video on PPR Outbreak in Europe
On September 11, EU-FMD and the PPR Secretariat of WOAH & FAO, organized a webinar which give details of the outbreaks, recognition of PPR and diagnosis, and measures to eradicate. The recording (along with the powerpoint presentations) has been uploaded and is available for anybody to view. Please also feel free to share this link with others. https://trello.com/c/f5Xdfqum
How to Recognize PPR in Sick Animals
PPR usually presents as a very severe disease, usually affected youngstock more than adults and usually goats more than sheep. It affects more than one body system with the respiratory and gastrointestinal systems most affected. PPR virus is spread mostly by contact with infected sheep and goats, either before they become ill, while ill or up to 3 weeks after they have recovered. There is no carrier state. It can be transmitted within a short timeline by contaminated livestock vehicles and possibly equipment (e.g., shearing), clothing or hands. It is unlikely to be transmitted by feed. Cattle cannot transmit the virus. While some wildlife (ungulates) can become infected, they are unlikely to be a reservoir of infection.
The best detection method for PPR is to recognize potential clinical cases in the field. This means that producers, private veterinarians and anybody who serves the small ruminant industries should be aware of the likely clinical picture. This is termed "Syndromic Surveillance". PPR can be mistaken for many other diseases, e.g., pneumonic pasteurellosis, severe gastrointestinal parasitism, coccidiosis, bluetongue, orf (soremouth), and where present - sheep / goat pox, caprine contagious pleuropneumonia, foot and mouth disease. Below is a proposed case definition for pneumo-enteritis syndrome from Peter Roeder (an esteemed member of the team that eradicated Rinderpest). This was shared with me by Jeff Mariner, an epidemiologist consulting with FAO on PPR eradication.
PNEUMO-ENTERITIS (PES) CASE DEFINITION
An outbreak of PES is characterized as a number of disease cases in a flock (in exceptional cases, an individual animal) in which the following clinical signs are present:
Bilateral, clear or purulent ocular and nasal discharges
Together with:
High fever, coughing and sneezing
AND one or more of the following:
Other useful links that will help to understand PPR and its risk to small ruminants:
Peste des Petits Ruminant FAO which includes a description of the eradication programme: https://www.fao.org/ppr/en
WOAH PPR which includes links to diagnosis: https://www.woah.org/en/disease/peste-des-petits-ruminants/
WOAH WAHIS Events Manager. This is a searchable listing of all notifiable disease incidents. Filter by disease (Peste des Petits Ruminants) to get the latest update of PPR outbreaks in the world. https://wahis.woah.org/#/event-management
While the source of the outbreaks is still unknown, it is likely that a) the disease was first introduced to Romania likely by illegal movement of infected animals from an endemic country and b) the disease was then introduced to Greece from Romania - again by movement of infected animals. It is also very likely that the disease was firstly thought to be bluetongue and so diagnosis was delayed by one or more weeks which allowed for further spread. At this time, control and eradication measures are restrictions on movement of animals in zones around the regions where outbreaks are occurring and euthanasia of animals on affected premises, along with other biosecurity measures. While vaccination of unaffected animals is an option the country may use, this will delay moving the country to free-status.
Webinar Video on PPR Outbreak in Europe
On September 11, EU-FMD and the PPR Secretariat of WOAH & FAO, organized a webinar which give details of the outbreaks, recognition of PPR and diagnosis, and measures to eradicate. The recording (along with the powerpoint presentations) has been uploaded and is available for anybody to view. Please also feel free to share this link with others. https://trello.com/c/f5Xdfqum
How to Recognize PPR in Sick Animals
PPR usually presents as a very severe disease, usually affected youngstock more than adults and usually goats more than sheep. It affects more than one body system with the respiratory and gastrointestinal systems most affected. PPR virus is spread mostly by contact with infected sheep and goats, either before they become ill, while ill or up to 3 weeks after they have recovered. There is no carrier state. It can be transmitted within a short timeline by contaminated livestock vehicles and possibly equipment (e.g., shearing), clothing or hands. It is unlikely to be transmitted by feed. Cattle cannot transmit the virus. While some wildlife (ungulates) can become infected, they are unlikely to be a reservoir of infection.
The best detection method for PPR is to recognize potential clinical cases in the field. This means that producers, private veterinarians and anybody who serves the small ruminant industries should be aware of the likely clinical picture. This is termed "Syndromic Surveillance". PPR can be mistaken for many other diseases, e.g., pneumonic pasteurellosis, severe gastrointestinal parasitism, coccidiosis, bluetongue, orf (soremouth), and where present - sheep / goat pox, caprine contagious pleuropneumonia, foot and mouth disease. Below is a proposed case definition for pneumo-enteritis syndrome from Peter Roeder (an esteemed member of the team that eradicated Rinderpest). This was shared with me by Jeff Mariner, an epidemiologist consulting with FAO on PPR eradication.
PNEUMO-ENTERITIS (PES) CASE DEFINITION
An outbreak of PES is characterized as a number of disease cases in a flock (in exceptional cases, an individual animal) in which the following clinical signs are present:
Bilateral, clear or purulent ocular and nasal discharges
Together with:
High fever, coughing and sneezing
AND one or more of the following:
- conjunctivitis
- difficulty breathing (dyspnoea)
- erosions (ulcers) in the epithelium of the mouth with or without a cheese-like coating on the epithelium. Often halitosis is present.
- diarrhea / dysentery
- death
Other useful links that will help to understand PPR and its risk to small ruminants:
Peste des Petits Ruminant FAO which includes a description of the eradication programme: https://www.fao.org/ppr/en
WOAH PPR which includes links to diagnosis: https://www.woah.org/en/disease/peste-des-petits-ruminants/
WOAH WAHIS Events Manager. This is a searchable listing of all notifiable disease incidents. Filter by disease (Peste des Petits Ruminants) to get the latest update of PPR outbreaks in the world. https://wahis.woah.org/#/event-management