International Plant Protection Convention 12_SC_2016_Nov Recommendations for new topics to be added to the LOT Agenda item: 08.1 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NEW TOPICS TO BE ADDED TO THE LIST OF TOPICS FOR IPPC STANDARDS (TOPICS RELATED TO COMMODITY STANDARDS) (Prepared by the IPPC Secretariat in consultation with selected SC members) 1. Background 1.1 November 2015 Standards Committee (SC) meeting: [1] At their 2015 November meeting (refer to section 5 of the meeting report1), the SC discussed the concept of a commodity standard and agreed to several recommendations, which were presented to CPM-11 (2016). [2] The SC also reviewed the eleven submissions received in response to the 2015 biennial call for topics for IPPC standards (all submissions are publicly available on the IPP2). Out of these eleven submissions, five were commodity related proposals and the SC had the following discussion on these proposals for new topics for IPPC standards (extract from November 2015 SC report): 2015-002: PRA for commodities (priority 1, strategic objectives A, B, C) [243] The SC felt this was an important topic but some expressed concern in relation to the issues associated with “commodity standards”. However, given the current standard setting work programme and priorities, the SC felt that, should this topic be approved, it was unlikely to be worked on until at least 2018 by which time the issues associated with commodity standards should be resolved. Topic 2015-004: Use of systems approach in managing risks associated with the movement of wood commodities (Priority 4, strategic objectives B, C) [247] The SC considered this submission did not meet all of the core criteria. The SC did not recommend this topic for inclusion on the List of topics for IPPC standards. Topic 2015-006: International movement of apples (Priority 3, strategic objectives A, C) [251] The SC considered this submission to be important but felt it was too early to add specific commodity standards to the List of topics for IPPC standards at this time and it also lacked support from other regions. Therefore, the SC did not recommend this topic for inclusion on the List of topics for IPPC standards. Topic 2015-007: International movement of tomato fruit (Priority 4, strategic objectives A, C) [253] The SC considered this submission to be important but felt it was too early to add specific commodity standards to the List of topics for IPPC standards at this time and it also lacked support from other regions. Therefore, the SC did not recommend this topic for inclusion on the List of topics for IPPC standards. Topic 2015-009: International movement of lumber (Priority 4, strategic objectives B, C) [257] The SC considered there were some feasibility challenges, and that the submission lacked supporting information and evidence of wider strategic support. The SC also felt that the work on the draft ISPM on the International movement of wood (2006-029) should be completed first at it might address this topic. The SC did not recommend this topic for inclusion on the List of topics for IPPC standards. [3] Out of the five submissions for commodity topics listed above, the SC only recommended the inclusion of the following topic to the List of topics for IPPC standards: 2015-002: PRA for commodities (priority 1, strategic objectives A, B, C). 1 Report of the SC November 2015: https://www.ippc.int/en/publications/81824/ 2 2015 Submissions for topics: https://www.ippc.int/en/core-activities/calls-topics/ International Plant Protection Convention Page 1 of 8 12_SC_2016_Nov (08.2) Recommendations for new topics to be added to the LOT 1.2 CPM-11 (2016) meeting: [4] In April 2016 (refer to section 8.3 of the meeting report3), CPM-11 (2016) discussed the concept of a commodity standard and agreed that the development of commodity standards is no more relevant, feasible or higher priority than any other standards or implementation tools and that there is nothing in the current standard setting procedure that prevents CPs from proposing topics for standards that harmonize the management of phytosanitary risks on a particular commodity or group of commodities. [30] During this discussion, some contracting parties (CPs) stated the need to shift the focus of standard setting to include developing more commodity standards to the benefit of both importing and exporting countries. They proposed to develop as a pilot a fully-fledged commodity specific ISPM with a narrow scope that included options for specific requirements and pest management measures. The benefits and challenges of developing commodity specific standards would be obtained as a result of the process of development of such a pilot standard. They considered that there is a continuum of scopes from broad to very narrow commodity standards and that further analysis was not needed to define and apply layers for commodity standards in the Framework for Standards and Implementation. [30] Some CPs acknowledged the complexity that CPs face in dealing with commodities through ISPMs and proposed to follow the regular process for topics as they could not see the urgency to add an extra process. They suggested developing a regional standard for a specific commodity of interest as a possible way forward. However other CPs pointed out that the development of a regional standard would not provide CPs with the experience in developing a global standard. [5] The Secretariat confirmed that the SC had not recommended to the CPM any of the proposals for topics that were made for commodity specific ISPMs with a narrow scope. [6] CPM-11 (2016) reviewed the SC recommendations for new topics to be added to the List of topics for IPPC standards and had the following discussion on commodity-related proposals (refer to section 9.4 of the meeting report4): [52] Some CPs proposed the topic on PRA for Commodities should not be added to the list of topics as they felt that NPPOs needed practical knowledge and experience, which could be gained through a pilot project on one commodity standard with a narrow scope and not by working on a concept standard. [53] Another CP supported the proposed addition of the topic as the approach was consistent with other approaches taken for previous standards. They noted that such a standard could provide a policy framework and ultimately create a link between ISPM 11 (Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests) and others similar to that currently done by both ISPM 27 (Diagnostic protocols for regulated pests) and ISPM 28 (Phytosanitary treatments for regulated pests). [54] It was also proposed that, as commodity standards were considered of high priority, efforts should be made to select a topic for a pilot on a specific commodity standard by CPM in 2016, for example by selecting one of the topics proposed in the 2015 call for topics or by holding an extra call for commodity specific topics during 2016. But other CPs felt the regular standard setting procedure should be followed. [55] Another CP noted that if the intention was a standard on PRA for Commodities, it would be better to consider the re-organization of the PRA conceptual framework (ISPM 2 and 11) as well as other topics in the work program like "pest risk management". In this way if a standard on PRA for specific commodities were to be approved in the future, it could be added as an annex of this revised conceptual framework. [7] The CPM requested the SC to reconsider the topic on PRA for Commodities (2015-002) as well as other proposals for commodity standards which were made in response to the 2015 call for topics, with further input from the CP who submitted the topic. 3 Report of the CPM-11 (2016): https://www.ippc.int/en/publications/82487/ 4 Report of the CPM-11 (2016): https://www.ippc.int/en/publications/82487/ Page 2 of 8 International Plant Protection Convention Recommendations for new topics to be added to the LOT XX_SC_2016_Nov (08.2) 1.3 May 2016 Standards Committee (SC) meeting: [15] The SC had a conceptual discussion about commodity standards and what they should cover and where to include them within the Framework, in response to the CPM pointing out that there were no commodity standards listed as gaps. The following suggestions were made: - The SC should consider developing criteria for determining which proposals for commodity standards should be included in the Framework. The criteria should include elements of global concern, for instance food security, and consideration of the level of pest risks. - Whether the SC should try to work, as a first step, on developing a document, or try out developing a standard for one specific commodity, to agree on what the content of a commodity standard should be, based on which it should be easier to determine which topics to include in the Framework. - Efforts should be made to identify the actual phytosanitary issues of global concern and how best to address them (standard, treatment, implementation tool, or other). - Whether only some commodities would need internationally harmonized standards for their international movement because for many commodities there may be sufficient guidance to address the pest risk. - The SC should encourage countries to share information about their bilateral arrangements for commodities including the treatments used. [16] The SC Chairperson noted that these points would be discussed further in the SC November 2016 meeting, but suggested that it would also be valuable to examine more in detail what countries wish to achieve with commodity standards. The SC asked that the small SC- Implementation and Review Support System (IRSS) group (hereafter “small SC-IRSS group”, see also section 3.3 of this report) prepare a proposal for an IRSS survey on commodity standards; the outcomes of which would help the SC determine the criteria for this type of topic.