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)
Improving prevention at import: preliminary analysis of each option
Option: Description Impact Advantages Disadvantages
Alert list).
COM: Increase in management costs
(medium-high).
MS CAs: Increase in management costs
(medium-high).
Stakeholders: Increase in responsibilities
and costs (medium-high).
Above increase in costs to be balanced
against potential benefits of prevention
/early detection (control at import).
from wider detection of risks;
iii. For emerging
risks:
commodity
pathway
analysis
Proactive approach which
entails assessing the risk
posed by all pests for a
single commodity
originating from specific
region(s) when exported to
the EU (or to specific MS)
by analysing a pathway,
usually an imported
commodity, that may
allow the introduction or
spread of quarantine pests.
This concerns particularly
new trade in plants for
planting/ propagating
material (PM).
Medium-high.
Costs will depend on implementation, in
particular whether some of the required
increase in resources for inspections could
be compensated by reduction in resource
use on lower risk products (i.e. efficiency
gains). E.g. studies in the NL suggest that
import inspection has a high marginal
benefit (each additional € on inspection
capacity decreases expected costs of pest
introduction by €18-49, while ceteris
paribus, emphasis of inspection should be
allocated to high risk pathways of
potentially most significant economic
impact 278 .
There may be additional savings in
resources, and improved efficiency in use,
if measures for higher risk products are
further strengthened according to option
iv.
Allows more targeted
prevention, from lower risk
(fresh produce; certified
products) to higher risk;
More proactive and targeted
approach than option ii;
Can optimise effectiveness
and efficiency of inspections,
if current use of resources
redirected from lower risk to
higher risk products;
Potential long term savings
from more targeted and early
detection of risks;
Depending on
implementation, process
could be made more
transparent compared to
current practice (?);
Can draw from experience of
in emergency situations using
existing and fast track PRAs.
Potentially substantial
increase in inspection costs
and additional resources
required;
Cost of pathway analysis
could be increased burden on
both trade and admin, with
relatively few tangible
benefits if trade is not
subsequently realised (e.g. US
experience: disproportionate
to value of trade);
Depending on
implementation, there may be
a risk of politicizing process:
species RA is generally more
independent than commodity
pathway analysis.
278 Source: Surkov, I. et al. (2006). Actual level of potential cost savings depends on the initial inspection capacity. Furthermore Surkov et. al (2008), shows that the
optimal allocation of a fixed inspection budget halves the cost of pest invasion compared to allocating the same budget equally over all imports. A budget increase
that enables 42% more inspection can reduce total societal costs by 81% compared to smaller, constrained budget that ignores risk differentials. In the studies the
model is applied on Dutch imports of chrysanthemum cuttings.
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 335