Pathway Risk Analysis Symposium and Workshop Summary of discussions

1. Pathway Risk Analysis Symposium and Workshop Summary of discussions Rebecca A. Lee NAPPO Technical Director

2. Pathway Risk Analysis • Relatively new concept • Before: if pest quarantine, then sufficient reason for measures • Since 1995 with IPPC framework, emphasis on risk analysis • More recently, emphasis on pathway-initiated risk analysis • This is new, so no guidelines as yet for implementation • Hence the importance of this symposium

3. Topics covered • Differences between pathway risk analysis and phytosanitary risk analysis & purpose of developing a standard • Pathway risk analysis is broader • Could include different modes of transportation, natural spread • Could help to identify risks not associated with pest(s) and mitigate unknowns • Basis for cooperation and research on pest movement into and within the NAPPO region • So could also aide in negotiations and harmonization • Opportunity to change human behavior by pathway approach • Ranking of risks encountered could lead to better use of resources to manage them • More cost effective? • More efficient with the number of pathways rising • Different ways of looking at pathways • pest vs. commodity • one pathway/multiple pests vs. one pest/multiple pathways • commodity from one country vs. from a region • risk of wasting time on lesser pests • difficulty associated with unknowns

4. Additional topics covered • Broader role of pathway risk analysis • potential impact on regulatory policies and strategies • ability to trace-back • role for decision – making on risk management • role for non-import purposes • need to include the exporting country • availability of information • risk rating • natural spread pathways • application of HACCP principles to phytosanitary risk management • Specific experiences in veterinary and marine organisms were introduced • Emphasis on high risk associated with unlicensed sales • Case studies of broad pathway risk analyses undertaken by PERAL

5. Other comments • Species traits may be predictors of behavior in a new environment, but best predictor is establishment elsewhere. (Alan McLeod) • High level of industry trade participation, very useful contribution to the process. (Paul Jacijek) • Common agreement about what a pathway RA is and is not would be useful for communication with stakeholders. • Standard should not be too prescriptive. Broad scope pathway analyses identify data gaps and inform stakeholders about what data needs to be collected in the future, where more resources are needed, program changes, system changes, and data collection (Heike Meissner). • May not estimate risk, but can help diagnose flaws in regulatory systems. Could also be called pathway characterization rather than RA (Heike Meissner).

6. Risk analysis and management could be made easier by studying the events, rather than the entire pathway Pathway Continuum Model Establishment Introduction Spread Pest prevalence Events for introduction Events for spread 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Origin Widely Distributed Inspection Detection Time From Griffin, 2010

7. GLS-2d Gray 2010 (Ecol. Applic.) Models as tools for risk evaluation Pathway Analysis Applications of the NCSU APHIS Plant Pest Forecasting System (NAPPFAST) Estimating pathway risk with GLS-2d: a geographically robust phenology model (Gray, 2010) – used by the Canadian Forestry Service Invasion process is a chain of events. Introduction does not necessarily lead to establishment. Assess probabilities of events happening at various steps in the invasion process (time of departure, pest life cycle, climate, etc)

8. Pathway Analysis Steps More models… • - Estimate national establishment rate of new forest insects that may arrive at Canadian ports of entry • - Estimate volumes and directions of pest-specific commodity flows along major roads in Canada and border crossings to the U.S. • - Develop a probabilistic pathway model to estimate likelihoods of invasive forest pests being introduced at inland locations in Canada and the U.S.A. • Generating and mapping two outputs: - Pathways of introduction (vectors) - Likelihoods of introduction at the ports of entry and inland locations (points) Inland locations Ports of entry Regionsof origin Susceptible host Globalarrival rate Establishment at inland sites Survival during transit Arrival ratesat the ports From Yemshanov (Canadian Forestry Service), 2010

9. Initiation point: when, how, why, where Communication Scope of analysis Limits to analysis Terminology Is there efficiency gained by harmonization? Does it fit with ISPM 11 criteria? Pests association or not? How is interception data used? Uniformly, or at all, to show associations? Risk management included? Human involvement in movement of pests? Natural spread Spread analysis and management plan? Need coordination and cooperation Explicit definition of uncertainty Risk quantification and qualification Data availability and data sharing issues Reliability of data Incorporation of industry practices Methodology Transparency Perception of fairness and equal treatment Discussion on key points for harmonization Questions What is the minimum required standard? Common elements needed? Acceptable level of protection for parties? Do we have a shared definition of official control?

10. uncertainty time movement pest assessment decision making data collection resources required expert judgment consultation Examples of pests known to a pathway but not always a full analysis of each pest with mitigation Identification of events associated with a pathway, establishment, spread, and associated risks (May be followed with analysis or management options of specifics) *Via the commodity Via the conveyance (include people, vehicles, mail, etc) Via natural means All pathway analyses will be quantitative or qualitative Include consequences (at least a recognition) Their most common characteristic is that they are all different (“context sensitive”) Begins with a statement of what you’re trying to assess Next: Pathway characterization step Then identify the pests associated with the pathway Discussion on factors common to all pathway analyses For this discussion: Assessment = likelihood x consequences Analysis = assessment and management and communication Broad scope pathway analysis may be weighted more toward the information gathering or pathway characterization. Answers have been very pest-centered, but we don’t need to approach it that way. Can clarify the goals up front in initiation step – then characterization, then pathway analysis or assessment. Define what the purpose and scope of the standard will be – then craft pathway analysis definitions for that use.

11. How can a standard on pathway risk analysis compliment existing guidance already available in IPPC/NAPPO standards? • Increase guidance on modes of transportation with respect to risk • Increase guidance on conditions of host commodity • Will include hitchhikers, contaminants, etc • Explicitly considers natural spread • It will consider and fill in gaps in the analysis e.g. uncertainty, risk management • Allow generalized consideration of similar invasive species based on movement • It emphasized independence with other standards and with itself • Increase focus on critical points and bottlenecks • Increased guidance on application of existing capacity e.g. inspection capacity • Increase awareness of analytical options • It can include new technologies • More and alternate treatment options • Increase opportunities to expand trade possibilities • Opportunity to include economic analysis • Harmonization • Opportunity to capture progress made since ISPM 11 was drafted • Increases and compliments opportunity to consider all aspects of the pest introduction process • Increase guidance on commodity analysis • Bring clarity to all questions about pathways

12. What should be included and excluded from the scope of a NAPPO standard on pathway risk analysis? • Evaluation/sources of uncertainty (including dependence characterization) • Specify pathway • Links to ISPM (e.g. 11 + 2) • Specify purpose • Specify pathway components and methods to quantify risks • Comparing pathways (metrics methods) • Mitigation options and control points to manage the risk from entire pathway • Examples/case studies • Data and transparency/credibility • Guidance on how to describe pathway • Consequences of introduction • All types of pathways (include/exclude commodity specific PRA’s?) • Kind of standard (concept or technical?)

13. Conclusions • So very productive, lots of ideas to sort through for committee Committee members: • AIS: Tony Koop, Vivian Brownell, Patricia Koleff, Ana Isabel González • PRA: Gary Kristjansson, Scott Redlin and Alejandra Elizalde www.nappo.org