This paper analyses farmers’ behavioural responses to Government attempts to
reduce the risk of disease transmission from badgers to cattle through badger
vaccination. Evidence for two opposing behavioural adaptions is examined in
response to the vaccination of badgers to reduce the risk of transmission to farmed
cattle. Risk compensation theory suggests that interventions that reduce risk, such as
vaccination, are counterbalanced by negative behavioural adaptions. By contrast, the
spillover effect suggests that interventions can prompt further positive behaviours.
The paper uses data from a longitudinal mixed methods study of farmers’ attitudes to
badger vaccination to prevent the spread of bovine tuberculosis, their reports of
biosecurity practices, and cattle movement data in 5 areas of England, one of which
experienced badger vaccination. Analysis finds limited evidence of spillover
behaviours following vaccination. Lack of spillover is attributed to farmers’ beliefs in
the effectiveness of biosecurity and the lack of similarity between badger vaccination
and vaccination for other animal diseases. Risk compensation behaviours are
associated with farmers’ beliefs as to who should manage animal disease. Rather
than farmers’ belief in vaccine effectiveness, it is more likely that farmers’ low sense
of being able to do anything to prevent disease influences their apparent risk
compensation behaviours. These findings address the gap in the literature relating to
farmers' behavioural adaptions to vaccine use in the management of animal disease.