Table 3.

Characteristics of policy instruments applicable to decrease antimicrobial use (AMU) in beef production.

Type of instruments	Objectives	Example		Advantages	Limitations	Requirements for use
Regulations	Direct reduction of AMU	Set a target of AMU and control achievement	50% reduction target of AMU in farms animals in the Netherlands	Reduction objectives are set by the regulator allowing a quick achievement of the reduction	Less control of reduction achievements (time and amounts)	Monitoring of AMU
		Restrict use for selected AM classes	Specific requirements for the use of Critically Important Antimicrobials in France
					Requires a significant level of information
Economic incentives	Increase the cost of treating with AM, thus reducing AMU	Tax	Differential taxes on AM sales in Denmark	Requires little information on producer marginal costs	Economic incentives are less likely to abate AMR if this arises from a very few stakeholders consuming majority of AM	Estimating the societal cost of AMR
				Provides greater incentive to innovation
Economic incentives	Encouraging alternatives treatment practices	Subsidy	-	No penalties for non-compliant producers	Specific public budget required
Economic incentives	Decreasing the benefit of treating with AM	Tradeable permit	-	Market directs AMU to highest value	Transaction costs	Establishment of property rights
						Set a maximum amount to trade
Voluntary agreements	Decreasing the occurrence of diseases and non judicious use	Preconditioning program	Beef Quality Insurance in the U.S.	Improves animal health – benefit to feedlot operator	Farmer bears the upfront costs may not recoup expense	Correction of imperfect information
		Antimicrobial stewardship program

AM, antimicrobials; AMR, antimicrobial resistance.