In 2007 African swine fever (ASF) arrived at a Black Sea harbour in Georgia and in 2014 the infection reached the European Union (EU), where it still expands its territory. ASF is a fatal viral disease affecting domestic pigs and wild boar of all ages with clinical presentations ranging from per-acute to chronic disease, including apparently asymptomatic courses. Until the detection of the first case inside the EU, infections in the current epidemic were mainly seen among pig farms with generally low biosecurity, and with incidental spill over to the wild boar population. In the EU, however, the infection survived locally in the wild boar population independently from outbreaks in domestic pigs, with a steady and low prevalence. Apart from the wild boar population and the habitat, the current epidemic recognizes humans as the main responsible for both long distance transmission and virus introduction in the domestic pig farms. This underlines the importance to include social science when planning ASF-prevention, −control, or -eradication measures. Based on experiences, knowledge and data gained from the current epidemic this review highlights some recent developments in the epidemiological understanding of ASF, especially concerning the role of wild boar and their habitats in ASF epidemiology. In this regard, the qualities of three epidemiological traits: contagiousity, tenacity, and case fatality rate, and their impact on ASF persistence and transmission are especially discussed.

The African swine fever epizootic in central and eastern European Union states has a newly identified component involving virus transmission by wild boar and virus survival in the environment. Insights led to an update of the 3 accepted African swine fever transmission models to include a fourth cycle: wild boar–habitat.

Uganda is a low‐income country with the largest pig population in East Africa. Pig keeping has a large potential, commercially and as a tool for poverty reduction, but African swine fever (ASF) is a major hurdle for development of the sector. The objective of this study was to evaluate knowledge, attitudes and practices related to ASF in the smallholder pig production value chain in northern Uganda. The study included three separate series of participatory rural appraisals (PRA), comprising purposively selected farmers and other actors in the pig production value chain. In the PRAs, various participatory epidemiology tools were used. A total of 49 PRAs and 574 participants, representing 64 different villages, were included. The results indicate that participants were well aware of the clinical signs of ASF, routes for disease spread and measures for disease control. However, awareness of the control measures did not guarantee their implementation. A majority of middlemen and butchers acknowledged having sold live pigs, carcasses or pork they believed infected with ASF. Outbreaks of ASF had a strong negative impact on participants’ socio‐economic status with loss of revenue and reversal into more severe poverty. In conclusion, lack of knowledge is not what is driving the continuous circulation of ASF virus in this setting. To control ASF and reduce its impact, initiatives that stimulate changes in management are needed. Because the behaviour of all actors in the value chain is largely influenced by the deep rural poverty in the region, this needs to be combined with efforts to reduce rural poverty.

African swine fever (ASF) was first described in 1921 as a highly fatal and contagious disease which caused severe outbreaks among settlers' pigs in British East Africa. Since then the disease has expanded its geographical distribution and is currently present in large parts of Africa, Europe and Asia and considered a global threat. Although ASF is typically associated with very high case fatality rates, a certain proportion of infected animals will recover from the infection and survive. Early on it was speculated that such survivors may act as carriers of the virus, and the importance of such carries for disease persistence and spread has since then almost become an established truth. However, the scientific basis for such a role of carriers may be questioned. With this in mind, the objective of this study was to review the available literature in a systematic way and to evaluate the available scientific evidence. The selection of publications for the review was based on a database search, followed by a stepwise screening process in order to exclude duplicates and non-relevant publications based on pre-defined exclusion criteria. By this process the number of publications finally included was reduced from the 3664 hits identified in the initial database search to 39 publications, from which data was then extracted and analysed. Based on this it was clear that a definition of an ASF virus carrier is lacking, and that in general any survivor or seropositive animal has been referred to as carrier. It was also clear that evidence of any significant role of such a carrier is absent. Two types of "survivors" could be defined: 1) pigs that do not die but develop a persistent infection, characterised by periodic viraemia and often but not always accompanied by some signs of subacute to chronic disease, and 2) pigs which clear the infection independently of virulence of the virus, and which are not persistently infected and will not present with prolonged virus excretion. There is no evidence that suggests that any of these categories of survivors can be considered as "healthy" carriers, i.e. pigs that show no sign of disease but can transmit the virus to in-contact pigs. However, localized virus persistence in lymphoid tissues may occur to some extent in any of the categories of survivors, which in theory may cause infection after oral uptake. To what extent this is relevant in reality, however, can be questioned given the virus dose generally needed for oral infection.

African swine fever (ASF) is one of the most important pig diseases, causing high case fatality rate and trade restrictions upon reported outbreaks. In Uganda, a low-income country with the largest pig population in East Africa, ASF is endemic. Animal disease impact is multidimensional and include social and economic impact along the value chain. In low-income settings, this impact keep people poor and push those that have managed to escape poverty back again. If the diseases can be controlled, their negative consequences can be mitigated. However, to successfully argue for investment in disease control, its cost-benefits need to be demonstrated. One part in the cost-benefit equations is disease impact quantification. The objective of this study was therefore to investigate the socio-economic impact of ASF outbreaks at household level in northern Uganda. In a longitudinal study, structured interviews with two hundred, randomly selected, pig-keeping households were undertaken three times with a six month interval. Questions related to family and pig herd demographics, pig trade and pig business. Associations between ASF outbreaks and economic and social impact variables were evaluated using linear regression models. The study showed that pigs were kept in extreme low-input-low-output farming systems involving only small monetary investments. Yearly incidence of ASF on household level was 19%. Increasing herd size was positively associated with higher economic output. The interaction between ASF outbreaks and the herd size showed that ASF outbreaks were negatively associated with economic output at the second interview occasion and with one out of two economic impact variables at the third interview occasion. No significant associations between the social impact variables included in the study and ASF outbreaks could be established. Trade and consumption of sick and dead pigs were coping strategies used to minimize losses of capital and animal protein. The results indicate that causality of social and economic impact of ASF outbreaks in smallholder systems is complex. Pigs are mostly kept as passive investments rather than active working capital, complicating economic analyses and further disqualifying disease control arguments based only on standard economic models.