1. International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) 2012
Implementation Review and Support System (IRSS) Baseline review of the Implementation of ISPM6
IPPC Secretariat
International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) 2012

2. Background Foundation activity
Provides countries with the basis for pest listing, determination of status and categorization
ISPM No. 6 Guidelines for Surveillance approved 1997
Implementation Review and Support System initiated 2011 focuses on ISPM6 as requested by Standards Committee
Developed in consultation with the Steward, Expert Working Group on Capacity Development and the APPPC
Pest surveillance is a foundation activity of National Plant Protection Organizations (NPPO’s)
Output of a pest surveillance activity provide countries with the basis for listing regulated pests, determination of pest status in an area and pest categorization all of which enable the conduct of pest risk analysis
In 1997 IPPC approves ISPM No. 6 Guidelines for Surveillance as a basis to guide NPPOs in implementing pest surveillance and in
2011 the IPPC initiates the Implementation Review and Support System (IRSS) focusing on ISPM6 as requested by Standards Committee and is also flagged the standard for review under the standard setting work programme
The ISPM6 survey was developed in consultation with the Steward, Expert Working Group on Capacity Development and the APPPC

3. Background cont’d
ISPM6 survey administered to 177 contact points in the 7 FAO regions
60% response rate - feedback received from 107 countries to-date
Questionnaire also sent to Regional Plant Protection Organizations and shared with staff of FAO
The report doesn’t stop here – global baseline analysis feeds into future capacity building activities
Serves as baseline input for upcoming APPPC ISPM 6 symposium
The ISPM6 survey was administered to 177 contact points in the 7 FAO regions, and feedbackwas received from 107 countries to-date
There was a 60% response rate with substantial participation weighted relatively evenly across all seven regions
The Questionnaire also sent to Regional Plant Protection Organizations and shared with staff of FAO
The report doesn’t stop here – this global baseline analysis will feed into the programme of work for future capacity building activities, as well as serve as preliminary baseline input for upcoming A triple P C ISPM6 symposium

4. Overview
Report presents global analysis of data captured by IRSS ISPM6 survey – includes regional analysis
Questionnaire derived from 8 major sections of the text of ISPM6
Respondents presented priority areas countries wish to see added to revised ISPM6
Survey consists of primarily yes/no, multiple choice and open-ended feedback questions
Further to the global analysis, report includes discussions from regional IRSS workshops held in January and February 2012
The report presents global information from data captured by the IRSS ISPM6 survey. The consolidated report also includes a regional analysis which will not be presented now, but whose results will be provided to RPPOs
The questionnaire was derived primarily from 8 sections of the text of ISPM6 on resources and activities that are part of pest surveillance programmes envisaged by the standard.
the 8 major sections of questionnaire cover the policy and legislative environment, organizational structure, competencies and culture, documented procedures, general surveillance, specific surveys, pest diagnostics and resources.
the survey itself consisted of primarily yes/no questions, multiple choice questions as well as open-ended feedback questions.
Further to the global analysis, the report includes discussions from the regional IRSS workshops that were held in January and February of this year

5. Methodology
Qualitative survey administered covering main sections of ISPM6
Survey data received from 107 countries
Raw data cleaned -> sorted by section and region -> transformed/coded where possible into numerical representations
Open ended data responses grouped into meaningful patterns/recurrent answers – to maintain individuality/complexity of answers
Dichotomous (Yes/No) and Multiple Choice questions throughout survey
I will briefly go over the methodology used for the analysis
Firstly, it was a qualititative survey covering the main sections of the text of ISPM6
The data was received from 107 countries
The raw data was cleaned, sorted by section and region for future analysis and was then coded where possible into numerical representations for ease of analysis
All of those open-ended data responses were grouped into any meaningful patterns and recurrent answers so as to maintain the individuality and complexity of many of the answers
For the most part, the survey consisted of dichotomous (Yes or No) questions and multiple choice questions throughout the survey

6. Methodology 8 sections of survey cover:
policy and legislative environment
organizational structure
competencies and culture
documented procedures
general surveillance
specific surveys
pest diagnostics
resources
To recall the 8 sections of the survey covered: Policies and legislative environment, organizational structure, competencies and culture, documented procedures, general surveillance, specific surveys, pest diagnostics and Available or existing resources

7. Results Policy and Legislative Environment
Salient features
NPPOs are primarily responsible for pest surveillance in the 97% of countries
Surveillance responsibilities of NPPOs not limited to regulated pests but also cover non-regulated pests and regulated pests of national concern in more than 80% of countries
65% of countries report that besides NPPOs, other agencies (public or private) are also mandated to perform pest surveillance
I will briefly go over some of the salient features of the global results under the section titled Policy and Legislative Environment
So, according to the results, NPPOs are primarily responsible for pest surveillance in the 97% of countries
The surveillance responsibilities of NPPOs are not only limited to regulated pests but also cover non-regulated pests and regulated pests of national concern in more than 80% of countries
65% of countries report that besides NPPOs, other agencies (public or private) are also mandated to perform pest surveillance
As you can see from the pie chart, 59% of respondents indicated that there are written documents in place that establish mandates, functions and responsibilities of those public/private organizations towards to the conduct of pest surveillance

8. Results Organizational Structure, competences and culture
Salient features
Organizational structure and competency to conduct pest surveillance exist in most countries to provide for engagement of relevant stakeholders
50% of countries - pest surveillance programs have well developed and compatible data systems to collect, store and report pest information
In regards to the results under Section 2 – Organizational structure, competences and culture
While results reveal that organizational structure and competency to conduct surveillance exist in most countries to engage relevant stakeholders, responses also indicated that in 50% of countries, well developed and compatible data systems to collect, store and report pest information exist.
When asked if pest surveillance programs or services have procedures to review their performance, 47% of respondents responded positively

9. Results Documented Procedures
Salient Features
Computerized retrieval system for surveillance information used by NPPOs in 51% of countries
45% of countries indicated that their NPPOs have an operational manual for general pest surveillance
Overall disparity exists among countries in the systems for information management
Under the section 3 titled Documented Procedures
Some salient features show that
NPPOs in 51% of countries are using computerized retrieval systems for surveillance information
NPPOs in 45% of countries indicated that there is an operational manual in place for general pest surveillance
58% of country NPPOs are using GIS coordinates to specify the location of pests detected during pest surveys
The global analysis under documented procedures indicates that overall disparity exists among countries in systems for information management

10. Results General Surveillance
Countries compile pest records from more or less the same kinds of sources (NPPO reports, research organizations, international databases etc.)
While 63% of countries indicated that they have national databases of plant pest records, 42% responded that databases are not easily accessible.
In regards to the results under the section titled General Surveillance
According to results, countries are compiling their pest records from more or less the same kind of resources – including NPPO reports, research organizations, international databases etc)
Though, while 63% of countries indicated that they have national databases of plant pest records, 42% of respondents indicated that these databases are not easily accessible by NPPOs.

11. Results Specific Surveys
Countries generally have more than one organization with authority to decide which crops should be surveyed
In many countries (62%), manuals are indicated to be in existence for specific surveys
The review of performance of surveys conducted according to existing manuals is uncommon as there is limited public-public and public-private partnerships in specific surveys
Under the section titled Specific Surveys
Responses indicated that countries generally have more than one organization with the authority to decide which crops should be surveyed
In 62% of countries, manuals are indicated to be in place for specific surveys
The review of performance surveys conducted according to existing manuals in uncommon as there is limited public-public and public-private partnerships in conducting specific surveys
In terms of expenditure coverage, 79% of respondents indicated that there are no agreements in place between NPPOs and industry (or private institutions) to cover expenditures

12. Results Pest Diagnostics
51% of the countries reported that pest diagnostic services are provided by entities other than the NPPO laboratories
Documented procedures for sampling, sample delivery, intermediate storage and disposal are available in 50% of countries
Verification of performance or results from NPPO laboratories with other diagnostic laboratories (inside or outside the country) is carried out in 57% of countries
Under the Section titled Pest Diagnostics
51% of the countries reported that pest diagnostic services are provided by entities other than NPPO laboratories
Results showed that documented procedures for sampling, sample delivery, intermediate storage and disposal are available in 50% of countries
The verification of performance or results from NPPO laboratories with other diagnostic laboratories (both inside or outside the country) is carried out in 57% of countries

13. Results Resources
Highly varying scenarios are presented by countries and regions concerning resources
Results show that pest surveillance is under-funded and not adequately resourced in terms of personnel, and equipment in most countries
Under funding is apparent both within the NPPO budgeting process as well as the lack of support from other public and private agencies, leaving the government as the main sponsor of surveillance activities in the majority of countries
Under the section titled Resources
There are highly varying scenarios that are presented by countries and regions concerning resources
Results do show that pest surveillance is under-funded and not adequately resourced in terms of personnel, and equipment in most countries
This under-funding is apparent both within the NPPO budgeting process as well as the lack of support from other public and private agencies, leaving the government as the main sponsor of surveillance activiities in the majority of countries

14. Results Resources cont’d
When asked what the total annual investment being made by NPPOs to conduct pest surveillance, 45% indicated the investment was under 499,000USD
When asked to estimate the total annual investment being made by other public or private organizations, agencies or departments (non NPPO), to conduct pest surveillance in the country, 48% of respondents were not in a position to respond to the question while 42% indicated the investment was under 499,000USD.

15. Results Resources cont’d
Continuing further with some Resources statistics
When asked about human resource sufficiency to carry out activities 42% of countries indicated that resources were insufficient
When asked how frequent training programmes were for staff involved in pest surveillance 40% of respondents indicated At least once per year and 34% indicated no programmed training was in place

16. Conclusions
Country feedback generally indicates an un-coordinated approach to surveillance despite the existence of organizational structures, documented mandates and strategic plans for surveillance
Little by way of a clear framework for formal liaising between NPPOs and other organizations involved in pest surveillance in regards to surveillance results
A common feature in many countries includes inadequate resource allocation and a lack of appropriate technical resources for surveillance
The overall situation weakened in most countries by policies, laws and regulations that are not aligned with contemporary global phytosanitary requirements, not explicit on essential actions to support surveillance
To conclude
Country feedback generally indicated an un-coordinated approach to surveillance despite the existence of organizational structures, documented mandates and strategic plans for survellance
As well, there seems to be little by way of a clear framework for formal liassing betweeeen NPPOs and other entities involved in pest surveillance on surveillance results
A common feature in many countries includes inadequate resource allocation and a lack of appropriate technical resources for surveillance
Finally, the overall situation is weakened for a number of countries by policies, laws and regulations that are not aligned with contemporary global phytosanitary requirements nor aligned on essential actions to support surveillance
THAT Concludes the presentation. Thank you.