PROGRESS REPORT on Enhancing market access opportunities in the Republic of South Africa (RSA) for COMESA horticulture exporters - Phase 1
Technical report - Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Kenya and Madagascar
30 June 2013
1. PROJECT OBJECTIVE
To provide technical support to the NPPOs of South Africa, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia and Madagascar in order to fulfil all requirements for pest risk analysis and issuing of import permits.
2. TARGETED COUNTRIES AND COMMODITIES
2.1. Stone fruit from Zimbabwe to South Africa
2.2. Strawberries from Ethiopia to South Africa
2.3. Litchi from Madagascar to South Africa
2.4. Pre-packed chilli from Kenya to South Africa
3. ACTIVITIES TO BE UNDERTAKEN BY FPIA IN PHASE 1:
3.1. Inception visits to Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar and Zimbabwe: Visit to 4 COMESA countries to kick start on the agreed monitoring indicators with NPPOs.
3.2. Technical support to NPPOs / pest information package, surveillance and inspection procedures: To give technical support to COMESA countries with surveillance and inspection procedures that will input into the PRA process. The exporting country compiles a pest information package according to the requirements of the DAFF pest information questionnaire.
3.3. Technical support to the NPPOs prepare PRAs: Three of the commodities still need a PRA to be conducted. As noted, DAFF contracts an external organization, which will be funded through this project. The appropriate NPPO representative will take part in the PRA steps.
3.4. Collection of necessary data: There will be need to update the information for 3 of the cases even though information already exists. For chilies from Kenya the information needs collating from various sources.
3.5. Implementation of necessary phytosanitary measures: The required measures will be implemented, under the guidance of the NPPO who has to provide the phytosanitary certificate at export.
3.6. Contracting service providers/consultants: COMESA and TMSA will agree on subcontracts and consultancies, Terms of Reference etc.
4. TECHNICAL REPORT ON ACTIVITIES TO DATE
The Republic of South Africa is a member of the World Trade Organization, which includes the Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. South Africa is also a contracting party to the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), which the WTO SPS Agreement names as responsible for developing international standards in the phytosanitary area. Thus the procedures used by South Africa are in accordance with international agreements.
According to the International Standards for International Phytosanitary Measures No.1 of the IPPC, the importation of plants and plant products are subject to a Pest Risk Analysis (PRA) procedure to assess the risks associated with the plant products, and to establish the conditions under which the products can be imported into the country
Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests follows a process defined by three stages:
Stage 1 involves identifying the pest(s) and pathways that are of quarantine concern and should be considered for risk analysis in relation to the identified PRA area.
Stage 2 begins with the categorization of individual pests to determine whether the criteria for a quarantine pest are satisfied. Risk assessment continues with an evaluation of the probability of pest entry, establishment, and spread, and of their potential economic consequences, including environmental consequences.
Stage 3 is the risk management stage and it involves identifying management options for reducing the risks identified at stage 2. These management options are then evaluated for efficacy, feasibility and impact in order to select those that are appropriate.
In order to conduct a PRA on intended imports, the National Plant Protection Organization (NPPO) of the Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) of South Africa require certain information relating to pests associated with the commodity in the country of origin. The consultant (PhytoSolutions) has been accredited by DAFF to provide technical support to the PRA process in terms of pest risk categorisation and risk assessment.
4.1. Zimbabwe stone fruit
4.1.1. Background and preparation for the Zimbabwe market access initiative:
National consultations on the first draft stone fruit quarantine pest list was done in South Africa in December 2012. During a meeting between the consultant and DAFF in December 2012, it was confirmed that most of Stage 1 and 2 of the PRA has been concluded. During the meeting DAFF indicated that the draft quarantine pest list would be communicated to the NPPO of Zimbabwe, together with a request for additional pest status information regarding the fruit fly Bactrocera invadens, by January 2013.
4.1.2. Inception visit: 24 - 25 January 2013.
On 24-25 January 2013 an inception workshop was held at the offices of the NPPO of Zimbabwe. During the workshop it was confirmed that the stone fruit initiative was a priority for exporters in Zimbabwe and that there was an interest shown for imports shown by members of the FPIA in South Africa. The status of the market access initiative was discussed and the NPPO of Zimbabwe committed to compile and provide the following additional technical information to support the PRA process to the DAFF:
· List of stone fruit cultivars produced in Zimbabwe
· Production season of stone fruit in Zimbabwe
· Expected export volumes of stone fruit per season
· List of production sites interested in export to South Africa
· Structure of potential exporters i.e. commercial farms or cooperative schemes etc
· Delimitation of production areas and map of stone fruit production areas in Zimbabwe.
· Climatic data of production areas
· Field management information relating to stone fruit production in Zimbabwe including Bactrocera invadens surveys data, IPMs/ pest control measures used at production sites, potential pest free areas or pest free production sites etc
· Location of Pack houses intended to be used for export to South Africa including pack house procedures relating to quality controls, post harvest treatments used, packing and labelling, storage conditions and consignment integrity
· Type and size of containers
· Relevant national legislation e.g. any national movement controls for Bactrocera invadens
· List of countries, and export protocols, that Zimbabwe is currently exporting stone fruit to.
It was further decided during the workshop that the consultant will in the meantime follow-up with DAFF regarding the official communication of the draft pest list for consideration and inputs by the NPPO of Zimbabwe. The consultant has scheduled a meeting with DAFF PRA manager on 6 February 2013. A potential challenge was identified as the occurrence of Bactrocera invadens in stone fruit production areas in Zimbabwe. However, within the scope of international standard there are two possible options to be considered, depending on the trapping data results in the stone fruit production areas, namely (1) the establishment of pest free areas or (2) he development of a systems approach using pest free production sites
4.1.3. Progress since the inception visit in January 2013
DAFF proceeded to extend the national consultation process to March 2013 following additional comments that was received during January and February from technical experts in the stone fruit industry in South Africa. The consultant was involved with the finalisation of the pest list on 16 May 2013 and DAFF subsequently communicated the new draft pest list to the NPPO of Zimbabwe for inputs/ agreement.
The NPPO of Zimbabwe was unable to compile technical information relating to fruit fly status in the production areas.
The NPPO of Zimbabwe was unable to submit a confirmation of pest status on the pest list that was provided in May 2013.
4.1.4. Technical meeting with NPPO of Zimbabwe on 20 June 2013:
During the meeting on 20 June 2013 the discussion started off with reference to the decisions that were taken on the way forward during the inception visit in January 2013.the following specific aspects were further discussed;
· The pest list that was provided by DAFF in May 2013 was discussed to determine whether there were any problems/ issues from the NPPO of Zimbabwe with the technical information contained in the pest list and to follow-up on the reason for not responding to DAFF. The NPPO of Zimbabwe indicated that they were not sure on how to interpret the pest list as it seems to be a general list of pests and diseases associated with the commodity and not a country specific list. The consultant explained that the list was comprehensive because the risk assessment was done without a pest information package from Zimbabwe and that the NPPO of Zimbabwe is required to indicate/ confirm to DAFF which of the pests listed are not known to occur in Zimbabwe, based on published data and also supported by detections from any surveillance data available to the NPPO of Zimbabwe. This confirmation of pest status in Zimbabwe will be incorporated into the risk assessment done by DAFF and would then support the next step in the process to finalise the bilateral quarantine pest list.
· Dr Mnguni raised a concern that the NPPO of Zimbabwe may need to do additional surveys in the production areas in order to be able to confirm pest status to DAFF. He indicated that much have changed in the agricultural sector during the past few years and that some pest outbreaks may have gone undetected. He indicated that the NPPO of Zimbabwe will need additional funding to do this.
· The NPPO of Zimbabwe was not able to compile information according to the pest information questionnaire that was provided in January 2013. Dr Mnguni again raised the issue of costs involved to (1) travel to the production areas to gather information and also (2) roll-out additional trapping in the production areas to confirm the pest status of Bactrocera invadens. The consultant reiterated that the focus should be only on the stone fruit production areas and specifically those areas and production sites that are focusing on production for future export to South Africa. It was also proposed that the current fruit fly surveillance programme could be used to support this project. The approach regarding mitigation for Bactrocera invadens will be a systems approach and any information regarding good agricultural practices, surveys, fruit fly control programmes, location of pack houses, packing requirements etc would be helpful.
· The intended meeting with interested producers in Zimbabwe could not be arranged.
4.1.5. The way forward:
The PRA stage 3, the development of mitigation options will resume as soon as the quarantine pest list has been bilaterally agreed to and the outstanding technical information has been received and incorporated in the existing pest information package.
The NPPO of Zimbabwe undertook to confirm the pest status based on available technical data at the time and it was concluded that the NPPO of Zimbabwe will provide DAFF with a confirmation on the pest list via the official communication channels and inform the consultant when this has been done so that the consultant may proceed to follow-up with DAFF on the next part of the process.
The NPPO of Zimbabwe undertook to contact the producers for inputs and compile as much information as possible for submission to DAFF.
4.2. Ethiopia strawberries
4.2.1. Background and preparation for the Ethiopia market access initiative:
During a meeting between the consultant and DAFF in December 2012 it was confirmed that an official market access request with a pest information package was received from the NPPO in Ethiopia in July 2011 but that a PRA has not yet been initiated.
The contact person at the NPPO of Ethiopia is:
Mr Fikre Markos
Deputy Coordinator
Animal & Plant Health Regulatory Department
Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development (MoARD)
P.O. Box62347
Addis Ababa
Ethiopia
(+251) 11-6478596; mob. (+251) 911-25-06-51
(+251) 1 46 36 86
;
4.2.2.. Initiation of the pest risk analysis
The Pest Information Package was provided to the consultant in February 2013. PhytoSolutions then proceeded to evaluate and confirm the latest technical inputs from Ethiopia with DAFF and it was concluded that there will be no need for an inception visit or meeting before proceeding with the PRA as the NPPO of Ethiopia has already officially confirmed their interest in gaining market access and the technical information required for the PRA has been provided.
The PRA was initiated in April 2013 and the PRA report and draft pest list will be ready for submission to DAFF by mid July 2013. .
4.2.3. Way forward:
The PRA report and pest list will be submitted to DAFF for national consultation and subsequent communication to the NPPO of Ethiopia. As soon as the pest list is bilaterally agreed upon stage 2 and 3 of the PRA will be finalised. Draft import conditions will then be nationally consulted and finalised before official communication to the NPPO of Ethiopia for inputs and/ or bilateral agreement.
4. 3. Madagascar litchi
4.3.1. Background and preparation for the Madagascar market access initiative:
The consultant met with DAFF in December 2012 and it was confirmed that DAFF met with Dr Pakeeresamy Ramsamy, Special Councillor to the President of Madagascar () as well as Ms Murielle E. Soja, the then Trade Councillor of the Embassy of Madagascar ()in Pretoria April 2006. During the meeting in 2006 Madagascar confirmed an interest to export litchi to South Africa. Also, the Madagascar NPPO again submitted an official market access request to DAFF in 2009 but a pest information package has not yet been submitted.
In a follow-up attempt 2010 DAFF requested an information package from the Madagascar NPPO contact person:
Mr. Jean Armand Randriamampianina
Chef
Direction de la Protection des vegetaux (DPV)
Direction de la Protection des Végétaux (DPV)'
Ministère de l
BP 1042
Nanisana
Antananarivo 101
Madagascar
(+261) 34 12 173 72 , (+261) 20 22 416 78
;
4.3.2. COMESA Inception visit from 21 - 22 February 2013:
In order to proceed with this market access initiative an inception visit to Madagascar took place from 21-22 February 2013 in order to discuss the outstanding technical information package, determine what further technical support is necessary and discuss the way forward with the NPPO of Madagascar.
The COMESA delegation met with the NPPO of Madagascar as well as representatives from the Madagascan litchi industry. Interest to proceed with the market access initiative was re-affirmed and the way forward discussed in detail. The consultant provided the DAFF Pest Information Questionnaire to the NPPO of Madagascar to be completed and submitted via the official communication channels in order to proceed with the PRA. The questionnaire was discussed in detail and the NPPO of Madagascar confirmed that they would be able to complete the questionnaire within three weeks. A feasibility study for PRA was done in 2006 by the USA and Madagascar NPPO's. Much of the required technical information can be obtained from this study and will be updated to include more recent developments. The NPPO does not expect that further technical assistance in this regard will be needed but will contact the consultant directly should any questions arise.