Capacity-building for agricultural health and international trading of agricultural products Presented by May-Guri Sæthre (Norwegian Crop Research Institute) on behalf of Sarah Olembo (Inter-African Phytosanitary Council) Ranajit Bandyopadhay (International Institute of Tropical Agriculture) Emmanuel Tambo (Inter-African Bureau for Animal Resources)

Global Trade Globalization is a fact of life The global economy moves towards a free market economy and free trade It is however well known that the benefits of international trade are not equally distributed The work to reduce tariff rates, notably for processed agricultural products, has to continue Because of globalization the risk of introducing biological (quarantine) organisms is increasing

WTO – SPS & TBT  The Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the ’SPS Agreement’) was signed in 1994 and entered into force with the establishment of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 1995 –Food safety and animal and plant health regulations –Codex Alimentarius, International Office of Epizootics (OIE) and Interim Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (ICPM/IPPC) –International standards for international food trade  The Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBTs) –Technical standards, testing and certification procedures –Affect on agricultural produce is minor compared to SPS  The SPS (& TBT) agreements regulates how countries may protect food safety and animal and plant health (establish protection, for example for human, animal or plant life or the environment) without violating the WTO rules Are these agreements about to become severe and complicated non- tariff barriers to trade for developing countries? Or can these agreements become a ‘standards-as-catalyst’ for those countries taking a proactive attitude to comply with the standards?

Countries seek to protect themselves from new biological invasions as a result of international trade (SPS Agreement) Invasive species pose a serious threat to agricultural productivity and human health (financial, social and environmental costs) A country can decide to apply the SPS agreement to ensure food safety and animal and plant health The SPS agreement requires justification when SPS measures affect trade Pest Risk Analysis (PRA) has to be done An assessment of the risk underpinning the appropriateness of trade restrictions Such risk assessments are required to follow certain international standards The assessments should be carried out by independent institutions and be based on scientific standards

Global Trade & Food Safety Globalization of the agriculture and food system increasingly demands that food is produced in safe and environmentally friendly ways EU is taking a holistic food-chain approach to food safety, covering all sectors of the food chain The ‘farm to fork’ principle requires a completely different level of inspection and traceability of products, including: –Primary production on the farm: feed of animals, fertilizer & pesticide regimes in plant production, feed and water quality in fish-farming –Transport conditions from the farm –Cooling chains –Handling and processing –Storage conditions –Transport to destination

What about Africa?

Africa – SPS & TBT Implementation and compliance to international food safety standards in African countries is a must to be in a position to benefit from the international agreements that have reduced import taxes and other barriers to free trade In addition to wealth creation, a very welcomed side-effect would be improved domestic food safety and productivity Unfortunately, the SPS/TBT infrastructure are either weak, or the national SPS/TBT focal point absent Many SPS systems are yet to be upgraded in response to the SPS-agreement Where present, they are constrained by lack of transparency and clarity in the definition and application of standards Case-by-case treatment leaves room for ad-hoc and discriminatory practices Effectiveness is weak due to inadequate equipment, non-availability of highly skilled technical persons, inadequate capacity in risk assessment and a limited laboratories accreditation program Further complicated by lack of effective coordination mechanisms and inter- agency cooperation for the enforcement of regulations Inadequate regional coordination and harmonization

Africa – SPS & TBT There is low awareness about quality standards among exporters African producers find it difficult to meet the basic food safety standards demanded by the EU and other markets

Time for a Pan-African SPS-Initiative Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) measures World Trade Organisation (WTO) standards Objective: To increase Africa’s share in international Markets - Increased capacity to comply with SPS measures - Greater participation in the harmonization process of SPS measures

Time for a Pan-African SPS-Initiative Institutional Policy Technical WTO standards Adaptation of domestic legislation to international standards Capacity-building in Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) measures Harmonisation of Standards

Platform for SPS capacity building and technology transfer: IAPSC, IBAR International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) Norwegian Crop Research Institute (NCRI) Standard and Trade Development Facility (STDF, WBG) Other partners/investors SPS for Africa African Union (AU) Department of Rural Economy and Agriculture (DREA) African SPS focal point (a division in DREA): Inter-African Phytosanitary Council (IAPSC, regional organ under IPPC) Inter-African Bureau for Animal Resources, (IBAR, regional organ under OIE) Targeted capacity building and harmonizing standards in response to regional and national needs ECOWASECCASCOMESASADCUEMOA Country 1 Country n Country 1 Country n Country 1 Country n Country 1 Country n Country 1 Country n

Some institutional aspects and activities SPS for Africa Establish the platform from where the activities are to be carried out Complete the assessment of SPS status (capacity evaluation) and specific needs of member states through country or sector specific surveys Establishment of SPS focal points (where missing) Upgrading of existing SPS systems in response to the SPS agreement Establish a web-site for sharing and dissemination of SPS information Develop a framework for enhancing public-private partnerships and dialog in the SPS area

Some policy issues and activities SPS for Africa Raising awareness at different levels for the needs in standard compliance Increase the level of participation and negotiating in standard setting committees and their activities Support the countries in improving their capacities to anticipate and react to changes in standards and norms (being proactive) to gain market confidence Determine the roles of the various agencies involved in enforcing SPS measures Establish mechanisms to ensure transparency and inter-agency coordination Analyze and report on trade related norms, standards and topics relating to SPS and TBT

Some technical activities SPS for Africa Training of national quarantine services, crop protection and seed production personnel Classroom-based training of crop protection staff Laboratory demonstrations for plant quarantine officers Practical laboratory training for plant quarantine officers

Some technical activities SPS for Africa Training of national scientists in Pest Risk Assessment (PRA) Development and maintenance of pest distribution maps and regulated pest lists (both web- based and on paper) Develop field identification manuals

Some technical activities SPS for Africa Produce manuals for sanitary and phytosanitary treatments Prepare laboratory technical manuals Prepare process manuals

Some technical activities SPS for Africa Develop standards, controls and identification tools (both for training and use in the individual countries and sub- regions) Analysis of food contaminants (pesticide residues in produce, mycotoxins) Supply kits (equipment, documentation/manuals, consumables, reagents) to each trainee Development of diagnostic kits

Living local, growing global Building SPS capacity in Africa is an interdisciplinary process The process can not be stronger than its weakest disciplinary component