If we could eliminate the challenges from the most serious global pig disease, we could have pork with improved animal welfare, reduced need for antibiotics and a reduced environmental impact.

Without PRRS, producers could also have improved herd health, enhanced farm sustainability, reduced strain on farm staff and increased resiliency. That’s exactly why PIC has spent years developing, researching and validating the PRRS-resistant pig.

But what would be the economic impact of introducing the PRRS-resistant pig into the U.S. swine herd, and what are the global implications?

To answer those important questions, PIC commissioned research by Dr. Jayson Lusk, Vice President and Dean of the Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources (OSU Agriculture) and Regents Professor at Oklahoma State University.

Dr. Lusk holds a B.S. in Food Technology from Texas Tech University and a Ph.D. in Agricultural Economics from Kansas State University. Since 2000, Dr. Lusk has published more than 280 articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals on a wide assortment of topics ranging from the economics of animal welfare to consumer preferences for genetically modified food to the impacts of new technologies and policies on livestock and meat markets to analyzing the merits of new survey and experimental approaches eliciting consumer preferences. 

Dr. Lusk developed a research report, titled Market Impact of the Global Adoption of PRRS-Resistant Pigs, which will soon be published in a peer-reviewed journal. We recently sat down with Dr. Lusk to get a preview of his research findings.

Watch the interview here or read more about it below:

Question: What is your background?  

Dr. Lusk: I’m currently the Dean and Vice President of Agriculture at Oklahoma State University, but I’ve spent about 25 years as an agricultural and food economist, studying what people eat and why they eat it. A lot of my research is focused on consumer demand issues and how do consumers respond to new technologies and new food products, but I’ve also had a keen interest in how those demands translate throughout the agricultural supply chain and how, ultimately, they impact farmers.

Question: Tell us more about your research findings in Market Impact of the Global Adoption of PRRS-Resistant Pigs?

Dr. Lusk: The recent research focuses on the market and economic impacts of pigs that are resistant to PRRS. PRRS is a disease that is endemic to the pork industry around the world. It’s an exciting new development, but the question is, ‘if this technology becomes available in breeding herds, what happens? What happens to pork production, what happens to prices? Are farmers better off, worse off? Are consumers better off, worse off?’

So, the research I did was to construct an economic model. It links the supply of market hogs on the one end to demand for pork by consumers on the other end, and it does that in a way that links global trade. So, you have our major pork producers in countries like the U.S., China, Canada and other parts throughout the world and links those to each other in terms of global trading patterns. In that research, what we’re able to do is say ‘if we had 5% adoption, 10% adoption, 100% adoption of PRRS-resistant pigs, what would happen?’ And the overarching story is essentially that as adoption increases, pork production increases, and pork prices fall.

To a pork producer, that sounds like bad news, with pork prices falling but the important thing to note is that costs fall more than prices fall. So, you’re able to sell more pork at a lower cost, and the result is those people that adopt PRRS-resistant pigs are more profitable. It’s also good news for food consumers – if you can have more pork at a more affordable price, that’s great news for you. So, it’s also a technology that can improve food security.

Question: What stood out to you or surprised you as you conducted the research?

Dr. Lusk: There are several interesting nuances to the results that are interesting to focus on. One relates to the speed of adoption, and the results are pretty clear in showing that if you’re an early adopter, you’re a bigger beneficiary. So, producers that adopt soonest and most quickly enjoy the benefits of those cost savings before prices start to come down as other people adopt. Whether it’s a country that adopts sooner than others or an individual producer that adopts earlier than others, the results clearly show that there’s a benefit to being early on that adoption curve.

A couple other things that stick out in the results are the productivity increases that come from adopting PRRS-resistant pigs are so large that a lot of the concerns that people have about this technology – while real and certainly present – are kind of small in relation to those productivity gains. For example, if some consumers say ‘I don’t like this technology that’s being used to create PRRS resistance’ and they say ‘I’m going to reduce my willingness to pay for pork,’ it would take a really large reduction in willingness to pay to offset those productivity gains. Or, even if there were changes in global trade patterns – so you get a country that says ‘we’re not going to import pork from countries that use this technology,’ in most cases, it is still beneficial to adopt that technology because the productivity gains are so large.

Question: What do you hope the industry takes from this research?

Dr. Lusk: There are points in time in industry where you have an opportunity to adopt technologies that can have significant impacts on productivity growth. And I think this is certainly one of those technologies that has the potential to offset a very significant cost that the industry has incurred for decades. I think the interesting question will be does the industry do it? And it could be one of those inflection points that we look back on years from now where you really see an inflection point in productivity growth, but that really depends on the choices that producers and consumers make. I think we’re at one of those pivotal points in the industry and it’s important to sit back and think about whether we want to make this step and accelerate that innovation and productivity growth that is now available.

Question: What impact might consumers notice if PRRS-resistant pigs are adopted?

Dr. Lusk: The main benefit that consumers are going to see directly are lower food prices – and fairly significant lower food prices. Particularly if we get to full, widespread adoption. You could see 10% lower food prices. So, a very significant change in the affordability of pork products and that’s also important in terms of competition. Consumers have choices between what they put on their dinner plates. Other proteins – both plant and animal – are competing for a place on that dinner plate. Their prices are going to fall as they try to find new technologies that bring increased productivity and bring down cost of food, so this is not like the industry can just sit back and say, ‘if we don’t do anything, we get to keep our share of that dinner plate.’ That’s not what happens.

There are a lot of benefits that consumers will enjoy, but they may not see directly. Some of those benefits include things like improved animal welfare, lower mortality rates, we may be able to cut down on some inputs – antibiotics and other things that are used to treat sick animals. A variety of things we’re able to cut back on because of this technology and even though consumers don’t see that directly, it’s something that our research suggest most consumers do in fact care about.

The views, thoughts and opinions expressed in this article are those of Dr. Lusk and do not necessarily reflect the views, policies or positions of PIC.