Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment

Abstract This Guidance describes a two‐phase approach for a fit‐for‐purpose method for the assessment of plant pest risk in the territory of the EU. Phase one consists of pest categorisation to determine whether the pest has the characteristics of a quarantine pest or those of a regulated non‐quaran...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH), Michael Jeger, Claude Bragard, David Caffier, Thierry Candresse, Elisavet Chatzivassiliou, Katharina Dehnen‐Schmutz, Jean‐Claude Grégoire, Josep Anton Jaques Miret, Alan MacLeod, Maria Navajas Navarro, Björn Niere, Stephen Parnell, Roel Potting, Trond Rafoss, Vittorio Rossi, Gregor Urek, Ariena Van Bruggen, Wopke Van Der Werf, Jonathan West, Stephan Winter, Andy Hart, Jan Schans, Gritta Schrader, Muriel Suffert, Virag Kertész, Svetla Kozelska, Maria Rosaria Mannino, Olaf Mosbach‐Schulz, Marco Pautasso, Giuseppe Stancanelli, Sara Tramontini, Sybren Vos, Gianni Gilioli
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2018-08-01
Series:EFSA Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5350
id doaj-bf57e6e324f34e81a3f7fd4a09f02a1e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-bf57e6e324f34e81a3f7fd4a09f02a1e2021-09-09T18:00:36ZengWileyEFSA Journal1831-47322018-08-01168n/an/a10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5350Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessmentEFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH)Michael JegerClaude BragardDavid CaffierThierry CandresseElisavet ChatzivassiliouKatharina Dehnen‐SchmutzJean‐Claude GrégoireJosep Anton Jaques MiretAlan MacLeodMaria Navajas NavarroBjörn NiereStephen ParnellRoel PottingTrond RafossVittorio RossiGregor UrekAriena Van BruggenWopke Van Der WerfJonathan WestStephan WinterAndy HartJan SchansGritta SchraderMuriel SuffertVirag KertészSvetla KozelskaMaria Rosaria ManninoOlaf Mosbach‐SchulzMarco PautassoGiuseppe StancanelliSara TramontiniSybren VosGianni GilioliAbstract This Guidance describes a two‐phase approach for a fit‐for‐purpose method for the assessment of plant pest risk in the territory of the EU. Phase one consists of pest categorisation to determine whether the pest has the characteristics of a quarantine pest or those of a regulated non‐quarantine pest for the area of the EU. Phase two consists of pest risk assessment, which may be requested by the risk managers following the pest categorisation results. This Guidance provides a template for pest categorisation and describes in detail the use of modelling and expert knowledge elicitation to conduct a pest risk assessment. The Guidance provides support and a framework for assessors to provide quantitative estimates, together with associated uncertainties, regarding the entry, establishment, spread and impact of plant pests in the EU. The Guidance allows the effectiveness of risk reducing options (RROs) to be quantitatively assessed as an integral part of the assessment framework. A list of RROs is provided. A two‐tiered approach is proposed for the use of expert knowledge elicitation and modelling. Depending on data and resources available and the needs of risk managers, pest entry, establishment, spread and impact steps may be assessed directly, using weight of evidence and quantitative expert judgement (first tier), or they may be elaborated in substeps using quantitative models (second tier). An example of an application of the first tier approach is provided. Guidance is provided on how to derive models of appropriate complexity to conduct a second tier assessment. Each assessment is operationalised using Monte Carlo simulations that can compare scenarios for relevant factors, e.g. with or without RROs. This document provides guidance on how to compare scenarios to draw conclusions on the magnitude of pest risks and the effectiveness of RROs and on how to communicate assessment results.https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5350guidancequantitative pest risk assessmentrisk reduction optionmodeluncertaintyrisk communication
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH)
Michael Jeger
Claude Bragard
David Caffier
Thierry Candresse
Elisavet Chatzivassiliou
Katharina Dehnen‐Schmutz
Jean‐Claude Grégoire
Josep Anton Jaques Miret
Alan MacLeod
Maria Navajas Navarro
Björn Niere
Stephen Parnell
Roel Potting
Trond Rafoss
Vittorio Rossi
Gregor Urek
Ariena Van Bruggen
Wopke Van Der Werf
Jonathan West
Stephan Winter
Andy Hart
Jan Schans
Gritta Schrader
Muriel Suffert
Virag Kertész
Svetla Kozelska
Maria Rosaria Mannino
Olaf Mosbach‐Schulz
Marco Pautasso
Giuseppe Stancanelli
Sara Tramontini
Sybren Vos
Gianni Gilioli
spellingShingle EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH)
Michael Jeger
Claude Bragard
David Caffier
Thierry Candresse
Elisavet Chatzivassiliou
Katharina Dehnen‐Schmutz
Jean‐Claude Grégoire
Josep Anton Jaques Miret
Alan MacLeod
Maria Navajas Navarro
Björn Niere
Stephen Parnell
Roel Potting
Trond Rafoss
Vittorio Rossi
Gregor Urek
Ariena Van Bruggen
Wopke Van Der Werf
Jonathan West
Stephan Winter
Andy Hart
Jan Schans
Gritta Schrader
Muriel Suffert
Virag Kertész
Svetla Kozelska
Maria Rosaria Mannino
Olaf Mosbach‐Schulz
Marco Pautasso
Giuseppe Stancanelli
Sara Tramontini
Sybren Vos
Gianni Gilioli
Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment
EFSA Journal
guidance
quantitative pest risk assessment
risk reduction option
model
uncertainty
risk communication
author_facet EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH)
Michael Jeger
Claude Bragard
David Caffier
Thierry Candresse
Elisavet Chatzivassiliou
Katharina Dehnen‐Schmutz
Jean‐Claude Grégoire
Josep Anton Jaques Miret
Alan MacLeod
Maria Navajas Navarro
Björn Niere
Stephen Parnell
Roel Potting
Trond Rafoss
Vittorio Rossi
Gregor Urek
Ariena Van Bruggen
Wopke Van Der Werf
Jonathan West
Stephan Winter
Andy Hart
Jan Schans
Gritta Schrader
Muriel Suffert
Virag Kertész
Svetla Kozelska
Maria Rosaria Mannino
Olaf Mosbach‐Schulz
Marco Pautasso
Giuseppe Stancanelli
Sara Tramontini
Sybren Vos
Gianni Gilioli
author_sort EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH)
title Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment
title_short Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment
title_full Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment
title_fullStr Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment
title_full_unstemmed Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment
title_sort guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment
publisher Wiley
series EFSA Journal
issn 1831-4732
publishDate 2018-08-01
description Abstract This Guidance describes a two‐phase approach for a fit‐for‐purpose method for the assessment of plant pest risk in the territory of the EU. Phase one consists of pest categorisation to determine whether the pest has the characteristics of a quarantine pest or those of a regulated non‐quarantine pest for the area of the EU. Phase two consists of pest risk assessment, which may be requested by the risk managers following the pest categorisation results. This Guidance provides a template for pest categorisation and describes in detail the use of modelling and expert knowledge elicitation to conduct a pest risk assessment. The Guidance provides support and a framework for assessors to provide quantitative estimates, together with associated uncertainties, regarding the entry, establishment, spread and impact of plant pests in the EU. The Guidance allows the effectiveness of risk reducing options (RROs) to be quantitatively assessed as an integral part of the assessment framework. A list of RROs is provided. A two‐tiered approach is proposed for the use of expert knowledge elicitation and modelling. Depending on data and resources available and the needs of risk managers, pest entry, establishment, spread and impact steps may be assessed directly, using weight of evidence and quantitative expert judgement (first tier), or they may be elaborated in substeps using quantitative models (second tier). An example of an application of the first tier approach is provided. Guidance is provided on how to derive models of appropriate complexity to conduct a second tier assessment. Each assessment is operationalised using Monte Carlo simulations that can compare scenarios for relevant factors, e.g. with or without RROs. This document provides guidance on how to compare scenarios to draw conclusions on the magnitude of pest risks and the effectiveness of RROs and on how to communicate assessment results.
topic guidance
quantitative pest risk assessment
risk reduction option
model
uncertainty
risk communication
url https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5350
work_keys_str_mv AT efsapanelonplanthealthplh guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT michaeljeger guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT claudebragard guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT davidcaffier guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT thierrycandresse guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT elisavetchatzivassiliou guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT katharinadehnenschmutz guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT jeanclaudegregoire guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT josepantonjaquesmiret guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT alanmacleod guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT marianavajasnavarro guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT bjornniere guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT stephenparnell guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT roelpotting guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT trondrafoss guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT vittoriorossi guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT gregorurek guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT arienavanbruggen guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT wopkevanderwerf guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT jonathanwest guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT stephanwinter guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT andyhart guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT janschans guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT grittaschrader guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT murielsuffert guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT viragkertesz guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT svetlakozelska guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT mariarosariamannino guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT olafmosbachschulz guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT marcopautasso guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT giuseppestancanelli guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT saratramontini guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT sybrenvos guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
AT giannigilioli guidanceonquantitativepestriskassessment
_version_ 1717758978371354624