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
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.
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