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)
Emergency action: preliminary analysis of each option
Option: Description Impact Advantages Disadvantages
stakeholders);
On the basis of wider
cooperation, can allow
coordinated monitoring of
emerging risks, and can
improve transparency;
Potential savings longer term
from early detection of risks.
iii. Compulsory
development of
contingency
plans according
to harmonized
framework
Obligation for MS to
develop contingency
plans, according to
harmonised
framework 291 . To be
further defined whether
such contingency plans
should be generic or
pest-specific 292 , or by
commodity.
The compulsory actions
may be subject to cofinancing.
On an administrative
level, need to set up
decision-making
structures and
procedures, as well as
coordination body.
Medium-high.
COM: Development of harmonised
framework as such would be of relatively
lower cost, especially with recent
adoption of relevant EPPO standard;
there may also be cases where existing
contingency plan models (e.g. AH)
provide good basis for replication.
Also, MS who have in place contingency
plans may provide models for other MS.
Increase in resources for coordination. If
co-financing applied, low-medium
increase in funds needed for mandatory
measures.
MS CAs: Development of contingency
plans might incur more significant costs,
depending on model to be followed
(possibility of relying on existing CP as
from above). Positive impact in terms of
quick adoption of measures/early action.
Stakeholders: Depending on model to be
followed, there may be a certain degree
Coordinated preparedness for
emerging risks;
Opportunity for stakeholder
involvement in peacetime, thus
improving transparency of
action in emergency situations;
Development of plans could
stimulate increased stakeholder
involvement, paving the way
for responsibility and cost
sharing (e.g. AUS
experience)*;
Operational problems are
addressed before they arise (i.e.
definition of additional
resources needed, in terms of
staff and diagnostics, before
emergency occurs);
Recently adopted EPPO
standard on generic elements
for contingency planning
provides basis on which to
Feasibility of practical
application to depend on
model of contingency plan to
be followed.
291 The roles and responsibilities of COM vs MS vs stakeholders in plan development and implementation needs to be further defined. The Commission should
define objectives to be achieved and minimum mandatory measures to be undertake by MS.
292 ISPM No. 9 Guidelines for eradication, section 1.2, IPPC, 1998 recommends the development of pest-specific contingency plans for those pests which have a
high potential for introduction and for which an eradication plan is deemed necessary
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 348