The Other Immunisation Gap, Why Animal Vaccines Are the Sleeper Issue for Rural Prosperity, Climate Action, and Pandemic Prevention
Imagine a single intervention that could reduce poverty, lower greenhouse gas emissions, tackle antibiotic resistance, and cut the risk of the next pandemic. It sounds like the pitch for a miracle technology, too good to be true. Yet India has already witnessed the transformative power of such an intervention in another domain. Childhood immunisation has saved millions of lives, strengthened families, and accelerated economic progress. It is one of the most cost-effective public health investments ever made.
The argument advanced by Ramanan Laxminarayan in the accompanying analysis is that we have been overlooking an equally transformative opportunity. Animal vaccines—a technology that is proven, affordable, and scalable—remain dramatically underutilised in India. This neglect imposes enormous costs: an estimated $1 billion annually in disease-related mortality and productivity losses; high greenhouse gas emissions intensity from low-productivity livestock; rampant antibiotic use that fuels antimicrobial resistance; and elevated risk of zoonotic disease spillover that could trigger the next pandemic.
The stakes could not be higher. India has more cattle than China, the European Union, and the United States combined. Livestock contribute roughly 30 per cent of India’s agricultural gross value added and support the livelihoods of nearly 100 million rural households. For small and marginal farmers, who own the majority of the country’s livestock, animals are not merely productive assets; they are living savings accounts, sold to finance school fees, medical care, or to buffer against crop failure. A cow or a few goats represent the difference between resilience and destitution.
Yet livestock are also fragile assets. Disease-related mortality among indigenous calves can range between 10 and 15 per cent in the first year of life. Small ruminants face similar vulnerability, with annual mortality rates of 8 to 12 per cent in arid and semi-arid regions. For a smallholder household that owns a handful of animals, the loss of even one is catastrophic—daily cash flow falls, nutrition suffers, and the household’s primary asset erodes overnight.
Vaccination is the simplest and most cost-effective tool to prevent these losses. Yet routine animal vaccination rates in India lag far behind those in other countries. The reasons are multiple: smallholder farmers lack information about the economic returns of vaccination or face liquidity constraints; private vaccine manufacturers have limited incentives to serve dispersed, low-income markets; many livestock diseases are region-specific, limiting economies of scale; and some important diseases still lack thermo-tolerant or multivalent vaccines suited to hot climates and weak cold chains.
But the barriers, however real, are not insurmountable. India has substantial vaccine manufacturing capacity, scientific talent, and experience in running massive immunisation campaigns. The same capabilities that made India a powerhouse in human vaccines can be deployed to close the animal immunisation gap. The question is whether the country’s leadership recognises the opportunity and is willing to make the necessary investments.
The Economic Case: Livestock as Livelihoods
The economic argument for animal vaccination is straightforward and compelling. Healthier animals produce more—more milk, more meat, more offspring. Studies show that vaccination against diseases such as bovine viral diarrhoea can significantly raise milk production. The global variation in milk yield is striking: from a few hundred kilograms per cow per year in many parts of India to over 10,000 kilograms in advanced dairy economies. Genetics, feed, and management matter, but disease control is foundational. An animal that is sick, or constantly fighting off infection, cannot convert feed efficiently regardless of its genetic potential.
The gains from improved productivity would flow directly to smallholders. Crucially, these gains can occur without necessarily expanding herd sizes. India does not need more cattle; it needs healthier cattle. A modest increase in per-animal productivity would translate into billions of rupees of additional income for the 100 million rural households that depend on livestock.
The livestock sector also provides a form of economic security that crop agriculture cannot match. Dairy income provides regular liquidity—daily or weekly cash flow that families can use for food, medicine, and other immediate needs. This is in stark contrast to seasonal crop earnings, which arrive in lump sums after harvest and must be managed carefully to last through the year. Protecting this regular income stream through disease prevention is therefore not merely an agricultural intervention; it is a poverty-reduction strategy.
The Climate Case: Emissions Intensity and Productivity
The climate argument for animal vaccination is less intuitive but equally powerful. Livestock contribute roughly 14.5 per cent of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, amounting to about 7.1 gigatons of CO2 equivalent annually. But emissions intensity—the emissions per litre of milk or kilogram of meat—varies dramatically across countries. It is high in India precisely because productivity per animal is low. A cow that produces little milk emits nearly as much methane as a high-producing cow; the emissions are spread over less output, resulting in higher intensity.
Increasing milk yield per cow can reduce emissions intensity substantially. Modelling studies suggest that raising productivity from very low levels can cut emissions per unit of output by more than 70 per cent. This is not a trade-off between climate action and development; it is a win-win. Healthier, more productive livestock mean higher incomes for farmers and lower emissions for the planet.
This is not to suggest that livestock emissions are negligible or that India can ignore its climate commitments. It is to argue that the path to lower emissions runs through productivity enhancement, not herd reduction. A strategy that focuses on improving animal health and productivity can deliver both economic and climate benefits simultaneously.
The Antimicrobial Resistance Case: Reducing Antibiotic Use
The argument from antimicrobial resistance is equally compelling. When animals fall ill, antibiotics are frequently used therapeutically and sometimes preventively. This widespread use drives the evolution of resistant pathogens, which then threaten human health through direct contact, food consumption, and environmental contamination. The World Health Organization has declared antimicrobial resistance one of the top global public health threats.
Reducing disease incidence through vaccination directly reduces antibiotic demand. In poultry and pigs, vaccines not only prevent infection but also reduce disease severity, lowering the need for therapeutic antibiotics even when breakthrough infections occur. This is not a theoretical benefit; it is a demonstrated outcome in countries that have invested in animal vaccination.
India’s livestock sector, with its hundreds of millions of animals and limited disease control infrastructure, is a potential breeding ground for resistant pathogens. Investing in animal vaccines is therefore not merely an agricultural policy; it is a public health imperative.
The Pandemic Preparedness Case: Preventing Spillover
The COVID-19 pandemic was a brutal reminder of the risks posed by zoonotic diseases. The majority of emerging infectious diseases originate in animals, and the risk of spillover is amplified by the intensification of livestock production. Rising demand for meat and milk has brought livestock, wildlife, and humans into closer contact, creating opportunities for pathogens to jump species.
Strengthening herd immunity through vaccination reduces the amplification of pathogens within farms, lowering the probability of spillover into human populations. It also improves outbreak detection. In regions where routine vaccination against diseases like Newcastle disease is weak, highly pathogenic avian influenza can be misidentified or detected late because clinical signs are absent or ambiguous. Vaccination helps sharpen surveillance systems and helps differentiate routine disease from emerging threats.
This is not a hypothetical benefit. The 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic originated in pigs; the 2014-2016 Ebola outbreak in West Africa was amplified by contact with infected wildlife; Nipah virus, which has caused recurrent outbreaks in South Asia, circulates in bats and pigs. Each of these pathogens could have been detected earlier, and their spread contained more effectively, with stronger animal health systems.
India’s vaccine manufacturing capacity is a strategic asset in this context. Investments in high-quality animal vaccine production, particularly with flexible platforms such as mRNA technologies, could go hand-in-hand with greater supply chain security. They would strengthen livestock health today and create “warm” production capacity that could be repurposed rapidly during a human pandemic. This is not a cost; it is an insurance premium against the next global health catastrophe.
The Barriers: Why Animal Vaccination Lags
Given the compelling case for animal vaccination, why does India lag? The barriers are real, but they are not insurmountable.
First, information and liquidity constraints. Smallholder farmers often lack information about the economic returns of vaccination or face liquidity constraints that prevent them from paying for vaccines even when the returns are positive. A vaccine that costs ₹50 and prevents a loss of ₹500 is an excellent investment, but if the farmer does not have ₹50 at the right time, the investment cannot be made.
Second, market failures. Private vaccine manufacturers have limited incentives to serve dispersed, low-income markets. The costs of distribution and the challenges of maintaining cold chains in remote areas mean that private provision will always be inadequate. Public investment and public provision are necessary.
Third, technological gaps. Many livestock diseases are region-specific, limiting the economies of scale that make human vaccine markets attractive. Some important diseases still lack thermo-tolerant or multivalent vaccines suited to hot climates and weak cold chains. Research and development investments are needed to close these gaps.
Fourth, policy neglect. Animal health has never received the policy attention that human health commands. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare is a powerful bureaucratic player; the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying is not. Budgetary allocations for animal vaccination are a fraction of what the economic returns would justify.
Conclusion: A Place at the Centre
The case for animal vaccination is not a collection of separate arguments; it is a convergent case that touches every major policy domain. Rural prosperity, climate action, antimicrobial resistance, pandemic preparedness—each of these priorities would be advanced by a sustained investment in animal health. Few policy levers offer such broad and simultaneous benefits.
India is uniquely positioned to lead. It has the vaccine manufacturing capacity, the scientific talent, and the experience in running massive immunisation campaigns. It has the world’s largest livestock population and the world’s largest population of smallholder farmers who depend on those animals for their livelihoods. It has everything it needs to close the animal immunisation gap except the recognition that this gap matters.
The argument advanced by Ramanan Laxminarayan is that this recognition must come now. The costs of inaction are mounting: $1 billion in annual losses, high emissions intensity, rampant antibiotic use, elevated pandemic risk. The benefits of action are transformative: higher incomes for 100 million rural households, lower emissions, reduced antimicrobial resistance, stronger pandemic preparedness.
If India is serious about strengthening rural prosperity, meeting climate commitments, and safeguarding against the next pandemic, expanding access to animal vaccines deserves a place at the centre of the roadmap for Viksit Bharat. The other immunisation gap can no longer be ignored.
Q&A Section
Q1: What is the “other immunisation gap” identified by Ramanan Laxminarayan, and why does it matter for India’s rural economy?
A1: The “other immunisation gap” refers to the dramatic underutilisation of animal vaccines in India, despite the country having the world’s largest livestock population and animal vaccines being a proven, cost-effective technology. This gap matters because livestock are central to India’s rural economy: they contribute roughly 30 per cent of agricultural gross value added and support the livelihoods of nearly 100 million rural households, most of which are small and marginal farmers.
For these households, animals are not merely productive assets but living savings accounts—sold to finance school fees, medical care, or to buffer against crop failure. Disease-related mortality and productivity losses are estimated at $1 billion annually, with indigenous calf mortality ranging from 10-15 per cent in the first year of life and small ruminant mortality of 8-12 per cent in arid regions. For a smallholder household that owns a handful of animals, the loss of even one is catastrophic: daily cash flow falls, nutrition suffers, and the household’s primary asset erodes overnight. Closing the immunisation gap would prevent these losses, increase productivity, and strengthen rural livelihoods at scale.
Q2: How does animal vaccination contribute to climate change mitigation, and why is this connection particularly important for India?
A2: Animal vaccination contributes to climate mitigation by reducing emissions intensity—the emissions per litre of milk or kilogram of meat. Livestock contribute roughly 14.5 per cent of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, but emissions intensity varies dramatically across countries. It is high in India precisely because productivity per animal is low. A cow that produces little milk emits nearly as much methane as a high-producing cow; the emissions are spread over less output, resulting in higher intensity.
Increasing milk yield per cow through disease control can reduce emissions intensity substantially—modelling studies suggest reductions of more than 70 per cent when productivity rises from very low levels. This is a win-win: healthier, more productive livestock mean higher incomes for farmers and lower emissions for the planet. For India, which faces pressure to reduce its emissions while also needing to support a growing population and rising demand for animal protein, this connection is particularly important. It offers a path to lower emissions that does not require reducing herd sizes or compromising rural livelihoods.
Q3: What is the relationship between animal vaccination and antimicrobial resistance, and why does this matter for human health?
A3: The relationship is direct: when animals fall ill, antibiotics are frequently used therapeutically and sometimes preventively. Reducing disease incidence through vaccination directly reduces antibiotic demand. In poultry and pigs, vaccines not only prevent infection but also reduce disease severity, lowering the need for therapeutic antibiotics even when breakthrough infections occur.
This matters for human health because widespread antibiotic use in animals drives the evolution of resistant pathogens, which then threaten humans through direct contact, food consumption, and environmental contamination. The World Health Organization has declared antimicrobial resistance one of the top global public health threats. India’s livestock sector, with its hundreds of millions of animals and limited disease control infrastructure, is a potential breeding ground for resistant pathogens. Investing in animal vaccines is therefore not merely an agricultural policy but a public health imperative—one that protects not only animals but also the humans who live near them, consume their products, and share their environment.
Q4: How does animal vaccination strengthen pandemic preparedness, and what role can India’s vaccine manufacturing capacity play in this context?
A4: Animal vaccination strengthens pandemic preparedness through multiple mechanisms. First, it reduces pathogen amplification within farms: when a high proportion of animals are immune, pathogens cannot circulate and amplify, lowering the probability of spillover into human populations. Second, it improves outbreak detection: in regions where routine vaccination is weak, emerging pathogens like highly pathogenic avian influenza can be misidentified or detected late because clinical signs are absent or ambiguous. Vaccination helps sharpen surveillance systems and differentiate routine disease from emerging threats. Third, it creates “warm” production capacity: investments in high-quality animal vaccine production, particularly with flexible platforms such as mRNA technologies, create manufacturing capacity that can be repurposed rapidly during a human pandemic.
India is uniquely positioned to benefit from this approach. The country has substantial vaccine manufacturing capacity, scientific talent, and experience in running massive immunisation campaigns. The same capabilities that made India a powerhouse in human vaccines can be deployed to strengthen animal health today and provide surge capacity for human health tomorrow. This is not a cost; it is an insurance premium against the next global health catastrophe.
Q5: What are the principal barriers to scaling up animal vaccination in India, and what policy responses does Laxminarayan implicitly recommend?
A5: Laxminarayan identifies four principal barriers. First, information and liquidity constraints: smallholder farmers often lack information about the economic returns of vaccination or face liquidity constraints that prevent them from paying for vaccines even when returns are positive. Second, market failures: private vaccine manufacturers have limited incentives to serve dispersed, low-income markets due to distribution costs and cold chain challenges. Third, technological gaps: many livestock diseases are region-specific, limiting economies of scale, and some important diseases still lack thermo-tolerant or multivalent vaccines suited to hot climates and weak cold chains. Fourth, policy neglect: animal health has never received the policy attention that human health commands, with budgetary allocations far below what economic returns would justify.
Implicit policy recommendations include: public investment in vaccine development to close technological gaps, particularly for thermo-tolerant and multivalent vaccines; public provision or subsidy to overcome liquidity constraints and address market failures; integration of animal vaccination into rural development programmes, recognising its role in poverty reduction; strengthened surveillance systems that leverage vaccination campaigns to improve outbreak detection; and elevation of animal health on the policy agenda, with budgetary allocations commensurate with the economic stakes. The argument is not that government should do everything, but that without government action, the barriers will remain insurmountable and the benefits will remain unrealised.
