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)
Table 5-4: Preliminary analysis of options: natural spread
Natural spread: preliminary analysis of each option
Option: Description Impact Advantages Disadvantages
i. Status quo MS have the obligation to
take all necessary
measures to eradicate, or if
that is impossible, inhibit
the spread of the HOs that
appear on their territory.
Solidarity regime
continues to exclude
eligibility for funding in
cases of natural spread.
Neutral.
Retains current emphasis on
control of movement, which
is main factor for
introduction/ spread in
majority of cases
Budget for solidarity regime
is kept down with the
exclusion of cases of
contamination through natural
spread
Lack of incentive to provide optimal
surveillance
Continued exclusion from solidarity
funding of cases where natural
spread is an important factor,
leading to erosion of objectives, e.g.
eradication not feasible in advanced
cases of spread (e.g. experience of
Diabrotica vv.);
Inconsistent approach in cases
where both movement and natural
spread are important factors and/or
cannot be isolated due to interaction
between the two
Despite the obligation to do so,
there is no guarantee that a MS will
take all necessary measures to
eradicate HOs of high priority to the
EU, in particular when the HO is not
ii. Explicit
inclusion in
scope of regime
of measures
concerning
presence
Pest presence (through
natural spread) to be
systematically included in
CPHR, in addition to
movement which is current
focus: provisions for the
monitoring and
eradication/ containment
of HOs whether they have
the potential to spread
naturally or not.
Medium positive impact:
increased relevance and
effectiveness of the CPHR.
Expected impact qualified as
medium due to the exclusion of
natural spread for solidarity
regime
Provides clarification of
current rules (it is argued that
natural spread is already de
facto covered by scope);
Improves consistency of
objectives (currently, if
natural spread is included in
Directive, it is explicitly
excluded from solidarity
funding);
Allows a holistic response to
pest introduction and spread
of high priority to the MS.
May dilute focus on control of
movement, as the primary factor of
introduction/spread in most cases.
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 322