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)
i. Status-quo
ii. Explicit inclusion of IAS plants of economic impact [direct and indirect impact on plant
health] (e.g. invasive weeds) [clarification of application] – examples here would be
Cyperus esculentus and Striga spp.;
iii. Inclusion of IAS plants with wider/ environmental impacts (habitats and ecosystems)
and/or economic impacts on wider range of stakeholders [Impact via plants on plant
health and biodiversity] (this would include aquatic plants) – examples here would be
Hydrocotyle ranunculoides, Eichhornia crassipes;
iv. Inclusion of IAS with important human health impacts [Impact via plants on human
health] - examples here would be Ambrosia artemisifolia, Thaumatopoea processionea,
and Toxicodendron radicans;
v. Inclusion of IAS vertebrae with impact on plants [moving in the direction of the DG
ENV IAS strategy] – an example here would be the grey squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis).
A key consideration in addressing IAS issues is the ability of current available CA structures
and resources to manage the risk once identified 272 . The more the options extend the scope of
the Directive the more complex the involvement of stakeholders and remits of competence of
the various CAs likely to be involved. To illustrate this point, the table below presents a
synthesis of the options, highlighting the scope of each option in terms of type of HOs and
affected stakeholders (receptors), as follows:
HOs*: Invertebrates Pathogens IAS plants Vertebrates
Receptors**:
Crops i i ii v
Forest i i ii v
Amenity i i ii v
Natural
(i) (i) iii v
Environment
Human health
iv
* Main categories indicated only.
** In some cases, stakeholders are involved either as agent (i.e. related to introduction: e.g. seed importer)
or receptors (e.g. park keeper); in some cases both.
A preliminary analysis of the various options is presented in the table below.
272 If more attention is to be paid to indirect effects and impacts on biodiversity the existing responsible official
bodies need to be strengthened and the training of staff developed accordingly (CBD guiding principle 7). The
CBD guiding principles 7 and 10 call for the establishment of authorization procedures for the intentional
introduction of alien species. The procedures should identify whether these species may be invasive and, if so,
may require specific restrictions or prohibit introduction. The CAs for such procedures should be determined.
Though the current EU system partially fulfils these requirements and the CAs are established, official
procedures will need to incorporate HOs hitherto not in Directive 2000/29/EC. This would require a substantial
development of the system. The legal basis is already established in Article 3(7) of the Directive but the details
of the regulatory framework need to be developed and the procedures (e.g. risk analysis) need to be adapted in
the NPPOs. Depending on how far the system is extended, additional communication lines with agencies
responsible for nature conservation or human health may be useful. At all levels these activities will require
additional resources within the established framework, as CBD guiding principle 7 indicates.
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 311