Fig 1.
Map of Georgia showing study areas, African swine fever outbreaks and swine density.
Study areas are delimited by a blue line; Politically disputed regions are depicted in light green.
Table 1.
Summary of questionnaires’ implementation in pig farmers and butchers in four regions of Georgia, in 2012.
Fig 2.
Pig production seasonality graphs in four regions Georgia: A) Proportion of pig scavenging by region per month by region (%); B) Proportion of pig transactions per month (%).
Fig 3.
Distribution of reported African swine fever compatible outbreaks in four regions in Georgia by year/region (A) and by month (B); 2012 data are not presented, since questionnaires were conducted in September-October 2012.
Fig 4.
Seasonality of home-slaughtering and pigs sold by butchers in four regions in Georgia (%).
Table 2.
Variables (names and meanings) included in two FAMDs computed from data collected on questionnaires implemented to pig farmers and butchers in four regions of Georgia, in 2012.
Fig 5.
Map of individuals (farmers) and related clusters chosen during a hierarchical clustering on principal components based on the gain in within-inertia.
Each round dot represents a farmer. Clusters were formed according to the similarities in answers in the collected variables of the questionnaire; thus, the closer the dots are, the more similar the answers of those farmers were. Each square dot represents the centroid of each specific cluster.
Fig 6.
Contribution of the variable Region to the first two dimensions of the farmers’ FAMD.
Dimension one explains 15.68% of the variability, whereas dimension two explains 12.33%. Each round dot represents a butcher. The closer the dots are, the more similar the answers of those farmers were. This figure indicates that butchers living within the same region (coloured) had similar answers to the questionnaire.
Fig 7.
Distribution of ASF occurrence in the individual plot of the farmers’ FAMD.
Each round dot represents a farmer. The closer the dots are, the more similar the answers of those farmers were. This figure indicates that farmers that reported African swine fever outbreaks had similar answers to the questionnaire, as they are represented in the figure as being closer together.
Table 3.
Description of the most influencing qualitative variables in the selection of clusters of a hierarchical cluster analysis.
Fig 8.
Map of individuals (butchers) and related clusters chosen during a hierarchical clustering on principal components based on the gain in within-inertia.
Each round dot represents a butcher. Clusters were formed according to the similarities in answers in the collected variables of the questionnaire; thus, the closer the dots are, the more similar the answers of those butchers were. Each square dot represents the centroid of each specific cluster.
Table 4.
Description of the most influencing qualitative variables in the selection of clusters of a hierarchical cluster analysis.