S i tifi P l Pl t H lth (PLH)Scientific Panel on Plant ... · S i tifi P l Pl t H lth (PLH)Scientific Panel on Plant Health (PLH) Presentation to the EFSA Management Board 27 March

S i tifi P l Pl t H lth (PLH)Scientific Panel on Plant Health (PLH)

Presentation to the EFSA Management Board27 March 2008, Paphos CY

1

Jan Schans, Chair of the PLH Panel

Outline

• Positioning Plant Health (PLH)• Work of the PLH Panel• Issues• Challengesg

2

Positioning Plant Health (PLH)

Hazards of concern:– organisms potentially harmful to plants, plant products, natural

habitats or biodiversity (pests);habitats or biodiversity (pests);– Not yet present in the endangered area, or– present but with restricted distribution

Relation with food safety:Potential increase of pesticide resid es on food– Potential increase of pesticide residues on food

– Food security: reduced and instable yields– Food toxins (e.g. aflatoxin, ergot): exceptional

3

( g g )


Background for PLH at EFSA (1)

– Development of plant health risk management at DG-SANCO• Directive 2000/29/EC• Standing Committee on Plant Health• Harmonized for EU; no independent MS legislation• Covers all plants: food, ornamentals, (semi-)natural environmentp , , ( )

– Development of worldwide concept of Pest Risk Analysis • Revision of International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC)

I i l S d d f Ph i M (ISPM)• International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM)• GATT WTO; Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (WTO-

SPS)• Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

4


Background for PLH at EFSA (2)Background for PLH at EFSA (2)– Pest Risk Assessment for EC:

• Scientific justification of plant health risk managementScientific justification of plant health risk management• By Member States?

– diverse– possible national bias

• By European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO)?

– Many EPPO members are not EC Member States

N d f i d d t S i tifi C itt t EC l l– Need for an independent Scientific Committee at EC-level

– Positioned at newly created EFSA• PPR Panel

5

• PLH Panel (June 2006)


Potential impacts of plant health hazards:– Agriculture– (Semi-)natural environment

– Human healthAnimal health– Animal health

– Combinations

Main relation with food safety:– Increased use of pesticides, and their residues on food, if a new

pest becomes established

6

pest becomes established

Potato brown rot (Ralstonia solanacearum))

Impact:• Agricultural production• Agricultural production• Food security

7

Tuta absoluta

Impact:• Agricultural production• Food safety (pesticide residues)• Food security

8

Asian longhorn beetle (Anoplophoraspp.)pp )

Impact:• Agricultural production• Agricultural production• (semi-)natural environment• Not a food issue

9

Floating Pennywort (Hydrocotyle ranunculoides))

Impact:• (semi-)natural environment• (semi-)natural environment• Not a food issue

10

Oak procession moth (Thaumetopoea processionea)

Impact:• Agricultural production

(semi )natural environment• (semi-)natural environment• Human and animal health• Not a food issue

11


Major factor leading to exposure to new pests:– International trade in plants and plant products

Key element of plant health risk management:Prevention of exposure by restrictions to international– Prevention of exposure by restrictions to international trade:

• Total import ban• Import only from ‘pest free areas’• Import only if consignments have been treated• Etc.

12


When is a plant health risk unacceptable?– Two globally recognized, counteracting principles:

• Free trade (“Open, fair and undistorted competition” WTO)• Sovereign right of a country to protect plant health (IPPC, WTO-SPS)

– ‘Meeting point’:Meeting point :• potential economic impact, should a pest establish• Scientific demonstration is key criterion for justification of plant health

risk management measuresrisk management measures

– To prevent protectionist trade restrictions based on unduly plant health claims

13

Work of the PLH Panel

The PLH Panel:The PLH Panel:– Established: June 2006– 21 permanent scientific experts

• From 14 EU Member StatesFrom 14 EU Member States• 7 female experts• Wide coverage of expertise:

– Plant health disciplines (entomology, phytopathology, bacteriology, weed science, nematology, virology)nematology, virology)

– Risk assessment, agronomy, economic science– Various professional backgrounds (academia, governmental organisations,

independent consultants)– 4 permanent working groups (arthropods, fungi, bacteria, viruses)p g g p ( p , g , , )– Temporary ad hoc experts for specific questions

The PLH UnitT t l f 6 t ff b (M h 2008)

14

– Total of 6 staff members (March 2008)


Q estions concerning PLH to EFSA (1)Questions concerning PLH to EFSA (1):

• Topics:– 2 questions clearly related to food production in EC (citrus)– 4 questions on invasive alien plants– 30 questions specific for French Overseas Departments (banana q p p (

and citrus)

15


Q estions concerning PLH to EFSA (2)Questions concerning PLH to EFSA (2):

• Scientific evaluation (review) of:d i k d b h i– documents on pest risk assessments made by other parties

AND OF– The potential risk associated with the pest

• Documents provided varied in the level of detail

• Opinions of the PLH Panel vary accordingly:• Opinions of the PLH Panel vary accordingly:– Some are largely a scientific evaluation of the document– Some qualify as new, original risk assessments

16


• Evaluation procedure refers to International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM No. 2, 11)

Plant Health Food SafetyPest categorisation Hazard identificationA t f b bilit f E A tAssessment of probability of introduction and spread

Exposure Assessment

Assessment of potential economic consequences

Hazard characterisationeconomic consequencesConclusion Risk characterisation

17


• Uncertainties in evaluation procedure:– Lack of evidence

• Extrapolation, using models (e.g. Climex)

– Variability in evidence

– Series of probabilistic events leading to establishment

18


Meetings:Plenary meetings 12

Output:

Working group meetings: 65

Output:Year Adopted2006 12007 62008 25

4 (i itt d ti )

19

4 (in written adoption)


Other activities:

– Self task:• Guidance document on evaluation of pest risk assessments for

phytosanitary purposes made by third partiesFinish date: December 2008

– Scientific Colloquium, Dec 2007• > 80 experts from 28 countries (22 MS)• Methodology, availability of data, harmonisation of methodsgy, y ,• New concept: type I and type II errors of assessment

Estimated publication date: June 2008

Contributions to SC and ESCO working groups

20

– Contributions to SC and ESCO working groups


Communication with Standing Committee on Plant Health (SCPH)– SCPH is EC risk manager for Plant Health– Each EFSA opinion on PLH is presented to the SCPH– Beneficial effects:Beneficial effects:

• Increased appreciation of positions as risk assessor and risk manager

• increased mutual understanding of reasoning and argumentationg g g• Sharper formulation of ToR• Improved formulation of conclusions by EFSA

21

Issues

Plant Health Food Safety Issue:y

1 Exposure to a risk agent is not regulated, unless the

All exposure to risk agents is regulated, unless the

Assessment of potential economic

risk is shown to be unacceptable

risk is shown to be acceptable

impact

2 For each case: dedicated Straightforward Evaluation of risk2 For each case: dedicated design of risk management measures

Straightforward authorisation of risk agents with acceptable risk

Evaluation of risk management options

• Both issues are considered outside EFSA’s remit• Limitation to the scientific advice concerning plant health risks

22

g p• These issues are recognized and in discussion at EFSA

Challenges

• Contribute to effective harmonization of terminology and procedures– EFSA Scientific Panels– Other agencies and organisationsg g

• Develop guidance for scientific advice by EFSA:– When and how to consider potential economic impacts

Wh d h t l t t t ti– When and how to evaluate, ex ante, management options

• Develop and coordinate a network among MS for a flow of scientific RA information necessary for PLH risk management by the SCPH.– EFSA Article 36 Cooperation– Euphresco– FP-7

23

Thank you for your attention!

24