Safeguarding Agricultural and Environmental Resources: Regional Centers of Phytosanitary Excellence An initiative to globally refocus safeguarding efforts Dr. Ron Sequeira apologizes for not being here. Several of his family members are from New Orleans and he is spending several weeks helping with rebuilding. He does however remain committed to the concept of Centers of Phytosanitary Excellence and thanks you in advance for your patience with our exploratory efforts. Most of you may have heard about variations on this topic. For us, it is very close to our hearts. In the 1970s, the disparate USDA labs working on topics that supported phytosanitary efforts were brought together under a paradigm called Centers of Excellence which was designed to provide coordinated support for domestic and international safeguarding efforts. In 2005, this paradigm lives on and is responsible for the existence of our own CPHST, The USDA’s Center for Plant Health Science and Technology. This talk will expand on the broad concept of COPE, what it means in terms of function, structure and administration and how the concept might be adapted to the specific needs of different regions. Importantly, this talk will explore how to engage and interact with international and domestic support structures including IPPC, RPPOs, and NPPOs. Ron A. Sequeira and Christina Devorshak USDA-APHIS-PPQ Center for Plant Health Science and Technology

We are in this together… US First off, I want to recognize that we are indeed in this together. Many of our interactions are often affected by trade dynamics and the sometimes contentious nature of these engagements. However, in a globalized world, increasingly we have shared problems and common goals. We see the COPEs as great way to capture these common initiatives. You-All

A Functional Hierarchy for COPEs IPPC, NPPO and COPE Leadership STANDARDS REVIEW COMMODITY RISK ANALYSIS TREATMENT PROTOCOLS SURVEY, DETECTION & DIAGNOSTICS Let me jump right in and state that we see COPEs not simply as a trade support structure or even as a group that cranks out pest risk analyses. In our discussions with our counterparts around the globe, we have identified key areas of functional engagement for a COPE. Review of International Standards to assure that IPPC products are truly representative and applicable to regional conditions. Pests and pathway risk analysis, with emphasis on commodity risk analysis Treatment technology. This is an often crucial component and it represents a highly complex task. The development or adaptation of regionally relevant treatments and systems approaches are just the beginning. 4. Survey, detection and Identification/diagnostics establish the foundation for risk analysis and safeguarding. 5. Monitoring compliance, assuring effective mitigation and the formal oversight of quality control systems are captured under the QC function 6. Finally, the last functional area recognizes the need for continued growth and development of our phytosanitary cadres. QUALITY CONTROL TRAINING

Areas of Emphasis for COPEs Export Support Develop commodity risk analyses to support U.S. exports Emergency Response Capacity Enhanced Risk Analysis Develop action plans targeting high risk pests and pathways Support streamlining risk analysis support Trade Barriers Offshore risk reduction Safeguarding Plants for Planting Develop risk analysis products to target SPS Technical Issues COPE networking and IPPC-mediated multilateral exercises Despite those high level functions, a specific COPE may have idiosyncratic problems or highly focused interests. This slide recognizes that fact and highlights some of the specific engagements in the NAPPO area. Pest and Disease Surveillance Biotechnology Provide input to pest lists and characterization of invasiveness research Risk Analysis and policy reviews Quality Assurance / Accreditation Develop accreditation or certification for oversight of targeted pathways

Managing the process: one example CPHST Director Gordon Gordh Associate Director V1 NSPL-Survey NSPL-BioTech NSPL-RA NSPL-AQI NSPL-IPM D. Fieselmann P. Berger R. Sequeira L. Zettler R. Sequeira PERAL R. Griffin Assistant Director S1 Let me clarify that we do not mean to state that our organization is the best example of a COPE. If you work for us, you already know that that is not the point of this slide. The point of this slide is to simply show one way a cope can be configured and highlight some of our experiences building such an organization. --Christina: briefly explain the CPHST structure with special attention to PERAL.-- Commodity PRA Organism PRA Pathway Analysis Intl. and Outreach Fruit and Vegetables EU Q37s Q37 NPAG Pest Lists Potato Wart,KB Mini PRAs NRC Northern Border Southern border Garbage NAPPO/IPPC Offshore Pest Info PAS Outreach Reg. Curriculum

(Pre- and post harvest phytosanitary options) Treatment Menu (Pre- and post harvest phytosanitary options) Broadcast pesticides Bait sprays Male annihilation Irradiation Planting date Host Plant Resistance Biological Control/Inundative releases Sterile Insect Release Exclusion through enclosed production Tissue culture Systems Approaches/IPM Paratransgenesis Field Sanitation Mass trapping Pheromone disruption Culling Screens/mechanical barriers Restriction to non-suitable areas Indexing Clean stock programs HACCP Steam/Vapor Heat Hot Water Chlorine dip Fungicide dip Washing Waxing Cold Treatment Cold Storage Containment/Low Prevalence Area freedom Fumigation (soil) Fumigation (commodity) Harvest timing Inspection/Rejection Photo by Ken Hammond I also mentioned that what we know as “AQI” which is better described as Treatement Technology is another fundamental building block for COPEs. Here, the critical understnaind is that whereas there may be a long, long list of phytosanitary options (as exemplified by the tiny type menu in the middle of this slide), the most important question that is first asked is whether the overall effort aims to: Exclude pests, Manage pests, or eradicate pests. Once that determination is made, then we can draw from the menu as appropriate. For example (next slide)… Strategic Analysis at COPEs Exclusion Management Eradication

Stemming the tide through ports of entry… or taking the battle offshore…? Citrus Canker SOD SBR EAB Ralstonia CLB Larch Canker Fruit flies Port insp Giant African Snail NPPO means “No plant pest opposed” ALB Gypsy Moth This is far from an American problem. Whereas, our own issues are well known to us, we are also well aware that even more dramatic invasions are being experienced abroad. The approach rate of invasives is quickly outstripping our ability to respond. Another dimension is represented by the increased rigor required by importing countries in terms of management requirements. Clearly, what we need is an infrastructure that will allow us to share resources, share information without at the same time disrupting or becoming burdensome to host countries and contributing groups. PSB Grasshopper/Mormon Cricket Plum Pox KB

Safeguarding (Countermeasures) Continuum DETER DETECT DESTROY MANAGE DENY DECIDE CONTAIN RECOVER PREVENT PREEMPT RESPOND MITIGATE RESTORE This slide insists on the fact that our collective agencies currently focus their attention on rapid response and recovery (not a bad thing) but in the long term, it is better to move towards the left of this slide (prevention) through stronger international collaboration and understanding of our mutual issues and concerns. Where we need to be… Where we were (are?)

(another look at Offshore Hazard and Risk Management) Desiderata (another look at Offshore Hazard and Risk Management) Offshore risk management based on regional partnerships SPS Capacity building Phytosanitary Centers of Excellence Offshore risks information and alert systems IPPC Portals GPDD/OPIS IS “safeguarding officers” Preclearance CPHST risk analysts Trade Facilitation Export/Import Specific desiderata will depend on each RPPO. For our case, this slide outlines some of our areas of focus.

This is the current IPPC structure. It may be the hardest working group here, but its size and structure is unequal to the task of leading global COPEs. Still, many of us believe that this structure is key and must be further developed. for that we may want to look at other models.

Best Practices Approach The OIE Model OIE regional representations OIE regional commissions

Phytosanitary Centers of Excellence France United States Japan Colombia South Africa

SPS Capacity Building For Africa SPS Seminar Series APHIS Risk Assessment Advisors Regional SPS Resource Centers and Laboratories Center of Phytosanitary Excellence (COPEs) Explain where we’re currently at and what is currently being funded. PRA Center SPS Lab Training Center Building National and Sub-Regional Capacity Preclearance Programs Infrastructure Strengthening

Seminar Series WTO/Policy Risk Assessment Training Public/Private Sector Dialogue Don’t forget to mention our upcoming Central Africa work. Risk assessment was only an introduction to the subject. Our current risk assessment activities came out of voiced needs during this seminar series.

APHIS PRA Technical Advisors One Risk Assessment Advisor placed at each US Trade Hub (Gaborone, Kampala, Accra) Additional short-term technical assistance Cochran training (market analysis and risk assessment) Status of placing long-term advisors in Africa. The role of advisors doing PRA work and training in PRAs. Short-term TA (Zambia, SA, Uganda, Tanzania, Namibia) Up-coming Cochran Program training

Regional SPS Resource Centers and Laboratories PRA Center SPS Laboratory Training Center Conduct PRAs for countries and exporting agribusinesses Pest mapping Compile and store pest data Conduct mitigation trials Risk Analysis PPQ Issues SPS Infrastructure Building Want to create regional centers of expertise in association with regional economic/trade institutions. PRA Center – PRA shop (regional experts) SPS Lab – creating the scientific foundation for risk analysis and mitigation Training Center – General training on risk analysis, PPQ issues as they come up, and the necessary components of a functioning plant health and safety infrastructure. The training center would also conduct SPS infrastructure assessments of countries in the regions and design targeted training and technical assistance to help strengthen areas of particular need. It is also very important to mention that we envision this center to be self-sustaining via service fees, membership dues, and maybe a core grant for an endowment.

Measuring success Enhanced export opportunities Protecting borders and territories Emergency response and recovery Detect and assess new pests Respond as needed Protect national resources Demonstrate NPPO effectiveness Provide assurance to trading partners

The Colombia CEF APHIS Attaché/Colombia, John Shaw, and APHIS PPQ’s Ron Sequeira created a local/regional center that conducts PRAs and mitigation research. Using this model could help us replicate the work of the three risk assessment advisors currently in Sub-Saharan Africa.

R. A. Sequeira and Christina Devorshak Centers of Phytosanitary Excellence R. A. Sequeira and Christina Devorshak USDA-APHIS-PPQ Center for Plant Health Science and Technology