Table 3. Net benefits for the stakeholders involved with the freezing meat interventions in 2016 (€)*1000.
| Steak tartare | Beef steak | Lamb chop | Leg of mutton | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stakeholdersa | Min | Max | Min | Max | min | max | min | max |
| Freezing companiesb | -975 | -89 | -4,811 | -626 | -98 | -8 | -28 | -8 |
| +975 | +89 | +4,811 | +626 | +98 | +8 | +28 | +8 | |
| Consumers | ||||||||
| Freezing costs | -975 | -89 | -4,811 | -626 | -98 | -8 | -28 | -8 |
| DALYs averted | 10,408 | 15,612 | 190 | 286 | 5.3 | 8 | 487 | 730 |
| Patient costs | 12 | 24 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 1.1 |
| Productivity losses | 199 | 362 | 3.6 | 6.6 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 9 | 17 |
| Consumer surplus | -907 | -112 | -2,722 | -622 | -10 | -8 | -4 | -3 |
| Government | ||||||||
| Healthcare costs | 1,836 | 15,136 | 33.6 | 277 | 0.9 | 7.8 | 86 | 708 |
| Special education costs | 3.2 | 143.3 | 0.06 | 2.6 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 6.7 |
| Net benefitsc | 10,576 | 31,077 | -7305 | -625 | -102 | -0.6 | 550 | 1,452 |
Min: using input parameters that result in economically least favorable outcomes, Max: using input parameters that result in economically most favorable outcomes,
a we assumed no change in costs for farmers and retailers
b Intervention costs occurring in freezing companies will be put through to consumer (so at slaughterhouse level it will be zero),
c note: a negative number corresponds with costs, a positive number with savings