2454 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

Evaluation of the Community Plant Health Regime: Final Report
DG SANCO Evaluation Framework Contract Lot 3 (Food Chain)
The EU approach to regionalisation, primarily involving PZs, is not seen as adequate by a large
majority of MS CAs responding to the general survey, on the grounds that it is extremely
difficult to effectively implement the concept.
General survey results
Q5.5 Extent to which the EU approach for regionalisation, primarily involving PZs, is adequate
7 out of 24 MS CAs and 3 out of 18 stakeholders consider the EU approach for regionalization, primarily involving
protected zones is adequate. (7 MS CAs* and 12 stakeholders do not know).
* The large number of ‗do not know‘ in this case is due to divergence of opinion within the organisation
A significant majority of respondents to the general survey are in favour of the EU PZ principle
more closely reflecting the IPPC (PFA) concept (ISPM 4). However, it is also noted that there is
significant confusion over the PZ and PFA concepts and that, strictly-speaking, the two concepts
are not necessarily alternatives and they could apply in parallel. In particular, the PFA concept
(section 3.6.3.1) is aimed at guaranteeing exports from the PFA for a specific HO (i.e. no need to
fulfil requirements of importing countries when exporting from a PFA), whereas the PZ concept
in mainly aimed at guaranteeing protection from a specific HO on imports from non PZ areas
(i.e. need to fulfil requirements when importing into the area from other parts unless products are
coming from a PFA).
Beyond the above distinction in aim between the PFA and the PZ concepts, implementation is
generally similar, in that both require extensive surveillance and have similar provisions in case
of findings. In both cases, the status is maintained in case of finding, as long as the outbreak is
―under eradication‖ and supporting evidence justifies it.
General survey results
Q5.6 Extent to which the PZ principle should more closely reflect the Pest Free Area principle of ISPM No. 4
16 out of 24 MS CAs and 4 out of 20 stakeholders consider that the PZ principle should more closely reflect the
PFA principle. (6 MS CAs and 15 stakeholders do not know)
The following advantages of brining closer the EU‘s PZ principle with the IPPC PFA principle
were listed by interviewees during the evaluation:
More clarity and uniformity. The way PZ principles are applied today discriminates
between PZs with outbreaks and non-PZs with low pest prevalence;
In some cases, exports from the PZs, and the EU more generally, to third countries would
be facilitated, as moving closer to an international standard would iron out current
confusion in third country trading partners over the PZ concept, thus leading to greater
acceptability of exports 150 ;
There is a strong perception that the PFA approach is purely based on scientific evidence
before considering and granting the status.
150 According to some interviewees, both within the EU and in the selected third countries, the terms protected zone
and pest free area may cause confusion in importing countries, thus making it more burdensome for an EU exporter
to explain the pest status of a product.
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 135