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 5-10: Preliminary analysis of options: Protected Zones system
Protected Zones system: preliminary analysis of each option
Option: Description Impact Advantages Disadvantages
i. Status quo (with Improvements suggested with a view to improving enforcement:
improvements)
a. Improve
surveillance
targets
Surveillance scope, coverage
and methodology to be
agreed at EC level on a case
by case based on identified
risks and implemented by
MS.
Medium Increase in costs and
required resources could be
significant. Impact depends on
approach followed in current
surveillance programmes.
These higher costs have to be
balanced against the potential
longer term savings from
effective/early detection of risks.
Medium positive impact on
effectiveness (harmonisation)
More effective, on the
condition that thresholds are
defined by resource and
statistical level of sampling
density (if only sampling
density is defined, in effect
this defines thresholds);
Improves communication
and transparency across
MSs (NPPOs and research
community).
Requires careful
implementation with extensive
surveillance [due to statistical
basis for low presence (low
threshold with high time
period leads to low stat.
confidence) – but if criteria
relaxed (e.g. density within a
certain timeframe) can get
statistically valid];
Could results in significant
costs increases in some cases.
b. Involve
stakeholders
c. Harmonised
eradication
programmes
Improve eradication targets,
by defining, at the EU level,
pan European eradication
measures and programmes.
Low positive impact on costs.
Medium negative impacts on costs
Development of eradication plans
might incur significant costs.
Positive impact on effectiveness,
and efficiency depending on model
currently followed.
Lower cost, higher
efficiency in addressing
risks at source;
Usage of private expertise
(e.g. plant breeders,
technical institutes, etc.);
More flexibility for
operators.
Coordinated eradication
activity across EU
(currently very fragmented
activities and results);
May enable systematic data
collection (significant data
gaps currently) thus
allowing comparison of
experiences and informing
May take some time to
establish optimal relationship
between public and private
actors.
Feasibility of development of
harmonised framework is
questionable at this stage, due
to significant knowledge gaps
on eradication success and
failure factors (but outlook
promising after outcome of
PRATIQUE project).
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 360