1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. (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

7. 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

8. 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?)

9. (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.

10. 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.

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

12. Phytosanitary Centers of Excellence
France
United States
Japan
Colombia
South Africa

13. 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

14. 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.

15. 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

16. 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.

17. 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

18. 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.

19. 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