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)
The magnitude of the financial resources that should be mobilised for the CPHR in the future depends
on the impact on costs of any modification of the current regime. In this context, a range of options are
discussed in section 5, with broad preliminary anticipated qualitative estimates indicated.
The anticipated impacts are direct or indirect and may lead to an increase in costs (and resources
required) or to a decrease of costs (and resources required), as illustrated in the following table:
Table 5-14: Direction of impact on EC financial resources of modifications to the CPHR
Type of effect Increase in costs Decrease in costs
Direct effect on
costs
Intensification of current EC actions; e.g.
extension of the scope of FVO missions,
more PRA, etc.
Prioritization of current and future EC actions; e.g.
prioritization among the outbreaks eligible for
Solidarity Funding
Indirect effect on
costs
Extension of current EC actions; e.g.
extension of the scope of the CPHR;
extension of the scope of the Solidarity
Regime; inclusion of new actions such as
general surveillance, etc.
New EC actions; e.g. general surveillance,
leading to increased effectiveness and
therefore more findings of HO and
therefore increased demand for EC cofinancing
Improvement of current EC actions, e.g. more rapid
decision making in case of emergency, leading to
increased effectiveness and therefore reduced
eradication costs and demand for EC co-financing
New EC actions, e.g. action for awareness-raising or for
better sharing of experience between MS, leading to
increased effectiveness and therefore reduced
eradication costs and demand for EC co-financing
Source: developed by the FCEC
This table highlights the potential direction of the impact on costs of any modification of the current
EC intervention on a static basis. Comparable analysis can be done on a dynamic basis for the impacts
on EC costs (mainly eradication costs funded under the Solidarity Regime) of:
1. Any modification of the intervention at the level of the MS (e.g. risk-targeting inspection leading
to more frequent interceptions of HOs); and,
2. Any modification in the general context (e.g. expanding trade in plant material leading to increased
risk of introduction of HOs).
Therefore, it clearly appears that a large range of factors positively or negatively impact on the amount
of financial resources that should be mobilized for the future CPHR. Estimating the amount in
monetary terms is a separate exercise that needs to be carried out in the context of an impact
assessment for specific options and under specific scenarios. For a selection of options for the future,
we provide under section 5 a qualitative estimation of their financial impact and – where this is
possible - a quantitative estimation on an exemplary basis.
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 379