Jon Knight 22 nd Technical Consultation among Regional Plant Protection Organisations

Jon Knight

22nd Technical Consultation among Regional Plant Protection Organisations

PI: Richard Baker (FERA, UK)

Imperial College London Team: John Mumford, Megan Quinlan, John Holt, Adrian Leach,

Emerging approaches to phytosanitary risk management decision challenges:

PRATIQUE – a European Project

What is a Pratique?

Organised around the existing PRA scheme developed by EPPO European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation (EPPO, 1997); working with revision from 2007

Three year project (March 2008 - 2011) €4.13 million (510 person months) Funded by the European Union under FP 7 “Building the European research area of knowledge for

growth”

15 Partners 11 partners (NPPOs and universities) from 9 European countries, plus subcontracts to Russian and

Chinese institutions Partners from Australia and New Zealand, plus active observers from Canada and the United States

of America. Two international organisations as partners (EPPO and CABI Switzerland Centre)

Enhancements of Pest Risk Analysis Techniques

EU 7th Framework Call Text (ii)Key work will focus on risk assessment issues and will include:

1. identifying and integrating key national and international datasets

2. exploring new techniques and refining existing tools - especially validation of techniques that assess economic,

environmental or social impacts/costs

3. developing system approaches for pest risk management to analyse and enhance the effectiveness of Plant Health policy

4. developing novel and sustainable pest management strategies with integrated technical support for policy development in the case of emergency situations/pest outbreaks, especially those pests that are difficult to control.

PRATIQUE partners

N Partner Name Short Name Country1 Central Science Laboratory CSL UK2 Plant Protection Institute PPI Bulgaria3 Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech

RepublicIBOT Czech Republic

4 European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization

EPPO France

5 Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique INRA France6 Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche

Agronomique pour le DéveloppementCIRAD France

7 Julius Kühn-Institut JKI Germany8 University of Padova, Environmental Agronomy UPAD Italy9 Agricultural Economics Research Institute LEI Netherlands10 Wageningen University WU Netherlands11 University of Fribourg UNIFR Switzerland12 CAB International CABI UK13 Imperial College of Science Technology and Medicine Imperial UK

14 Cooperative Research Centre for National Plant Biosecurity

CRCNPB Australia

15 Lincoln University, National Centre for Advanced Bio-Protection Technologies

Bio-Protection New Zealand

PRATIQUE: Principal project objectives & Work Packages

To assemble the datasets required to construct PRAs valid for the whole of the EU (WP1)

To conduct multi-disciplinary research to enhance the techniques used in PRA for: the assessment of economic, environmental and

social impacts (WP2) standardising and summarising risk (WP3) pathway analysis and systems approaches (WP4) guiding actions during pest outbreaks (WP5)

To ensure that the PRA scheme is fit for purpose and user-friendly (WP6)

PRATIQUE Work Packages

Work package

Work package title Lead

1 Identifying and integrating key national andinternational datasets

CABI

2 Enhancing techniques for economic,environmental and social impacts

LEI, Netherlands

3 Enhancing techniques for standardising andsummarising pest risk assessments

JKI, Germany

4 Enhancing techniques for pathway analysis andsystems approaches

Imperial College

5 Developing a decision support system for theeradication and containment of pest outbreaks

University Padua

6 Project validation and dissemination with thedevelopment of a web-based PRA scheme

EPPO

7 Project coordination and management CSL

WP1: Identifying and Integrating Datasets

WP2: Assessing Impacts

WP4: Pathway

Analysis & Systems

Approaches

WP5: Action at

Outbreaks

WP6: Web-based PRA scheme, Dissemination & Validation

WP3: Standardising and Summarising Risk

Assessments

Pest risk management

Pest risk assessment

PRATIQUE: Structure

PRATIQUE: Work Packages & Stages in the PRA Scheme

Detailed pest risk assessment

needed?

Establishment

Spread

Entry

Analysis of risk management

options

Impacts

Pest/pathway risk assessment conclusions

Risk Communication

WP1 WP6

WP2

WP4

WP4 WP5

WP3

Stages in the PRA Scheme

PRATIQUE Work Package Coverage

WP 2 – Enhancing techniques for economic, environmental and social impacts

To determine the extent to which the analysis of species traits can be used to identify those species that can cause significant impacts in cultivated and uncultivated habitats

To develop a novel scoring system to assess impacts and determine thresholds for phytosanitary action

To enhance existing techniques and develop new tools for assessing economic, environmental and social impacts

To develop a generic integrated model to assess pest spread and impacts

WP 3 – Enhancing techniques for standardising and summarising pest risk assessments

To enhance the consistency and standardisation of pest risk assessments by identifying and applying appropriate criteria

To develop and test new techniques for quantifying uncertainty in pest risk assessments

To enhance techniques for mapping endangered areas taking current and future climate, land use and economic impacts into account

To develop and test new techniques for summarising and communicating overall risk in pest risk assessment

WP 4 – Enhancing techniques for pathway analysis and systems approaches

Review of current approaches to pathway analysis in PRA

Review of the current application of systems approaches in PRA

Development of a pathway risk analysis module for the PRA scheme with a protocol for the application of neural networks and methods for enhancing consistency

Development of a systems approach module for the PRA scheme

WP 5 – Developing a decision support system for the eradication and containment of pest outbreaks

To carry out a meta-analysis of the successes and failures of pest eradication and containment programmes worldwide

To provide guidance for analysing the cost-effectiveness of pest eradication and containment measures

To develop a decision support scheme to support actions to be taken following pest outbreaks

To provide recommendations for the application of pest surveillance techniques in detecting pest incursions and managing outbreaks

WP 6 – Project validation and dissemination with the development of a web-based PRA scheme

To validate the outputs from work packages 1 to 5 using independent experts and a wide range of pests and pathways

To create a web-enabled EPPO PRA scheme incorporating outputs from work packages 1 to 5

To consolidate and disseminate project outputs by providing a manual and examples of best practice with the web-enabled PRA scheme

Web-based PRA scheme

As a first step towards applying Systems Approach, section 3 questions were re-ordered as a time line,

related to Critical Control Points (CCP)

Commodity pathway 1.

Plants for planting pathway for potential weeds 1.

Conveyances pathway 1. Dunnage etc pathway 1.

Natural Spread pathway 1.

Checklist of risk management policy

Significant probability of Entry

Significant probability of establishment

Existing management practices on pathway (1.7) or existing management practices in Importing country prevents entry or establishment of organism (1.21)

Yes

No

Is the pest under official control? Is produce from pest free areas?

Is place of production low prevalence?Are there other targeted activities that may

be equivalent?

Are existing measures sufficient and acceptable to the importer?

Agreement on data requirements Monitoring & surveillance(3.25 3.26 3.27 3.28)

What is the pest status at origin of the pathway? (present, absent, confined under official control, low prevalence)

Absent

Identify any reasons for revision

Low uncertainty(high confidence)

High uncertainty(Low confidence)

Confirmatory surveys in exporting country

None found

Present under official control, pest free areas or place of production or

low prevalence

Pest found

Agreement on data requirements Monitoring & surveillance

(3.25 3.26 3.27 3.28)

3.21 Preventable by cultivars/Resistant cultivars

3.22 Preventable by growing conditionsGlasshouses, sterilized soil , cultivation practices etc.

3.24 Preventable by production certification scheme(Pest free planting material or specified phytosanitary status)

3.20 Preventable by treatment of crop

3.23 Preventable by choice of harvesting times(maturity level, season, growth stage etc.)

List available choices (3.30)

Commodity pathway (1, 2, 3 etc)

3.18 Preventable by packing & handling methodsPreventable by removal of non-required parts (3.17)

Chlorine wash, controlled atmosphere, shrink wrap, etc

3.16 Controlled by treatments (chemical etc)

Auditing (system review)Traceability established

3.13, 3.14 Detectable by visual inspection or tests&

3.43 Issue of phytosanitary certificateSafeguarding to prevent subsequent infestation

(clean storage and conveyances)Maintenance of consignment integrity

Post harvest(preclearance)

On Farm

Post entry

3.19 Conditional import , Limited distribution, Limited period of entry, Designated use e.g. processing, Advance notification

3.7 Post-entry control possible, Effective containment/eradicationpost entry (also 3.29)

3.15 Post entry quarantine(Detention at a designated place pending measures) 3.13, 3.14 Detectable by visual inspection or tests

3.29 Targeted surveillance measures in importing countriesTrapping, surveys, public reporting systems etc.

Go to risk managers checklist

Seasonal or periodic inspection of growing area

Elimination of alternative hosts and/or creation of buffer zones

Destruction or re-export

Developing trade opportunities: an integrated systems approach

for pest risk management

STDF Proposal Preparation Grant

Focus on S E Asia sub-region

Beyond Compliance

Problems (Benefits): Failure of single/rigid measures can be disruptive to trade (less risk in

multiple measure/adaptive systems, more flexibility from Systems Approach (SA), reduced interceptions in export markets); limitations of current measures (improved performance, availability, cost, quality impacts, practicality)

Rigid measures may be applied without regard to risk from real pest challenge, control options and without benefit of local knowledge and decision making skills (broader stakeholder involvement, cost and responsibility sharing, more ownership of risk management, more stakeholder control over process)

Asymmetric relations in trade: lack of confidence in negotiations especially for the more complex SA examples (SA defined and understood, SA implemented or planned, market access started/in discussion, better opportunities for less active exporter countries in the Region by Regional SA); reactive relations with trading partners (more control over system in negotiation)

Rationale

Pest risk management imposed by importing country NPPOs will be more transparent, consistent and justified as proportional to the estimated risk.

Measures combined in the new approach will be more widely applied without unnecessary redundancy.

National goals to reduce use of chemical-based end point treatments will be advanced.

Exporting countries with fewer resources will have the capacity to more confidently negotiate equivalence agreements to use measures better suited to their own conditions.

Anticipated Outputs1. A description of pest risk management evaluation and

design in the region

2. Case studies of priority trade opportunities using Systems Approach for pest risk management. (7 cases identified)

3. Demonstration and evaluation of quantification and analytical tools (specifically control points and Bayesian Nets) to support use of Systems Approach

4. Establishment of a competency base with the methodology in the SE Asian subregion

5. A plan for a harmonised framework (possibly leading to an RSPM)

Beyond Compliance - activities

Output: Demonstration and evaluation of quantification and analytical tools

(Control Points and BBN)

1.Development of the tool

2.Demonstration of the tool

3.Validation of the tool

…for each of the case studies.

Thank you

Any questions?

www.pratiqueproject.eu

Beyond Compliance – case studies1. Import of fresh produce (not rubber plants) as a

pathway of SALB from countries not free of SALB to the region [Malaysia leads, e.g. Brazil]

2. Import of oil palm tissue culture, seedlings from outside subregion [Thailand leads, from CR]

3. Vietnam Dragon fruit to S Korea and Taiwan

4. Philippines mangosteen and avocado to USA

5. Indonesia mangosteen to Australia

6. Malaysia jackfruit to China and Australia

7. Thailand orchid cut flowers to Europe