Copy
View this email in your browser

ISPMs underscore need for strict monitoring of international movement of seeds

The United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPA) have underscored the need to strictly follow the guidelines of the International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs) in terms of the international movement of seeds.

According to ISPM 38, one of the main reasons that seeds should be closely monitored and documented is that they present a pest risk. In transit, they may be introduced to an environment where pests associated with seeds have a high probability of establishing and spreading.

Apart from the risks they present, seeds are constantly transported internationally as part of commerce and research.

“Seed companies may have breeding and multiplication programs in several countries and may distribute seeds from these countries to many other countries. Moreover, research and breeding are conducted internationally to develop new varieties that are adapted to a range of environments and conditions. The international movement of seeds may involve small or large quantities of seeds,” it said.

The document introduces a strict requirement for the pest risk analysis of the seeds to be transported. It takes and takes into account the purpose for its movement, whether it is for commerce, research, and agriculture, the specifics covering planting conditions, whether they will be planted on a normal environment or restricted environment. 

They may then be tested for thresholds to prevent economic damage in case they prove to be carriers of pests.

“A pest risk analysis (PRA) should determine if the seeds are a pathway for the entry, establishment, and spread of quarantine pests and their potential economic consequences in the PRA area, or if the seeds are a pest themselves or a pathway and the main source of infestation of regulated non-quarantine pests,” ISPM 38 noted.

The updated document also included the international definition of seed-borne pests (pests carried by seeds externally or internally that may or may not be transmitted to plants grown from these seeds and cause their infestation) and seed-transmitted pests (seed-borne pests that are transmitted via seeds directly to plants grown from these seeds and causes their infestation).

“Contracting parties face challenges associated with the international movement of seeds that are distinct from the international movement of other types of plants for planting. For example, seeds produced in one country and exported to a second country for processing (e.g. pelleting and coating), testing, and packing may then be re-exported to numerous other destinations (including the country of origin). At the time of production of the seeds, the destination countries and their phytosanitary import requirements may not be known, especially if several years pass between production and export to the final destinations,” the document explained.

 

Why are ISPMs important?
 
The International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs) are measures prepared by the International Plant Protection Convention. They are part of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization’s global program for policy and technical assistance in plant quarantine.

As of March 2021, there are 44 adopted ISPMs, 29 Diagnostic Protocols and 39 Phytosanitary Treatments. These international standards serve to protect sustainable agriculture and enhance global food security, protect the environment, forests and biodiversity and facilitate economic and trade development.

Over the years, the ISPMs have guided many nations in planning policies in plant quarantine in their respective territories. It also serves as a benchmark for FAO member nations to craft their standards and guidelines that are tailor-fit for their industries and compliant with the standards adopted by other countries.

With the comprehensive recommendations contained in the ISPMs, policies and standards on phytosanitary measures can be harmonized internationally to prevent unjustifiable barriers to trade.

The ISPMs are crafted by experts and are subject to review and amendment any five years to take into account emerging trends and issues in the trade.

ISPMs also serve as the basis for phytosanitary measures applied by Members of the World Trade Organization under the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. Even non-contracting parties to the IPPC are encouraged to observe these standards.

“The ISPMs are indeed an essential guide for member nations on plant quarantine. It is an important reference to craft better and more informed policies to protect trade and industry on the international front. In the Philippines, we also seek to adhere to this standard to be at par with our partners from other countries,” CropLife Philippines Executive Director Edilberto de Luna said.

Phytosanitary measures focus on improving Pest Risk Analysis 

To mitigate the probability of introducing and spreading pests, the new International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs) have focused on improving pest risk analyses, or PRA.

Released in 2019, the ISPM is considered an essential move since it can minimize economic damage caused by pests on a global scale.

Among the issues that sought to be addressed by the ISPM was introducing the organisms associated with a particular pathway, such as a commodity. It cited that even though the commodity itself may not pose a risk, it could harbour organisms that are pests. By compiling the list of these through the initial stage, specific organisms may then be analyzed if they pose a risk of harm.

“If the risk is deemed unacceptable, the analysis may continue by suggesting management options that can reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Subsequently, pest risk management options may be used to establish phytosanitary regulations,” the document suggested.

The amendment also underscored the inclusion of the following areas to further improve the PRA process such as cooperation in the provision of information, minimal impact, non-discrimination, harmonization, transparency, and avoidance of undue delay.

Currently, the PRA structure consists of three stages: - Stage 1: Initiation - Stage 2: Pest risk assessment - Stage 3: Pest risk management. Information gathering, documentation, and risk communication are carried out throughout the PRA process.

The revision sought to align the content of the previous version with the 1997 revision of the IPPC which defines pests as “any species, strain or biotype of plant, animal or pathogenic agent injurious to plants or plant products.”

The amendment to the document also sought to harmonize the Framework for Pest Risk Analysis with other ISPMs including organisms not known beforehand to be pests in the description of the PRA process, as well as including aspects common to all PRA stages in the description of the PRA.

The amendment also underscored the inclusion of the following areas to further improve the PRA process such as cooperation in the provision of information, minimal impact, non-discrimination, harmonization, transparency, and avoidance of undue delay.

As it shone the spotlight on the importance of pest risk analysis, experts also highlighted the importance of addressing current challenges affecting the PRA process.

Considered common problems among stages are uncertainty, information gathering, and documentation, especially those that pertain to the PRA process, risk communication, and consistency.

Experts chart path for mainstreaming precision breeding and precision agriculture 

Major stakeholders have convened to pave the path for the Philippines in terms of mainstreaming precision breeding and precision agriculture.

Based on the outcome of the Thursday, May 27, 2021 multi-stakeholder dialogue on Innovation and Technology attended by Dr. Mary Ann Sayoc (Philippine Seed Industry Association), Dr. Gabriel Romero (Philippine Seed Industry Association), Edilberto de Luna (CropLife Philippines), Amy Chua (Philippines Partnership for Sustainable Agriculture)  after the National Food Security Summit 2021, the experts identified the challenges that these two interventions will face on the field and how it can effectively be promoted and adopted to further boost the food security thrusts in the country. 

The participants conceded that the complexity of the food systems and challenges in the country such as pests and diseases, climate change, digital divide, absence of tropical breeds of dairy animals, were daunting.

However, they expressed confidence that these can be addressed through collaboration and complementation of thrusts among industry players. 

Public-private collaboration in precision breeding, consultations on policies enabling precision agriculture, genome editing, landholdings, and labor concerns were some of the possible solutions discussed. 

The Philippines UNFSS Core Group, through the leadership of the National Convenor, also identified thematic areas that can be the focus in  sub-national dialogues in the Philippines. One of these thematic areas is the advancement of innovations and science-based farm production systems.

On Precision Agriculture

“Precision agriculture needs an active public-private partnership. The workshop clearly showed that there has to be an enabling policy, which may partake of a legal framework and/or mainstreaming precision agriculture in the commodity programs of the Department of Agriculture and the crafting of a roadmap. As digital agriculture is largely influenced by information technology, the workshop agreed to decentralize technology and infrastructure development. As to the matter of upscaling digital agriculture, the issue of small landholding is a concern,” the report suggested.

Also cited was the need for intensive research and development for all crops. 

It was suggested that precision agriculture must be included in the curriculum to maximize the role of the youth in promoting and adopting this strategy.

The role of the private sector was also highlighted as a potential leader in the government’s farm clustering and consolidation approach.

What is needed to promote and adopt precision agriculture in the country? 

1. Enabling policies on precision agriculture should be developed including a policy framework for a precision agriculture program; the mainstreaming of precision agriculture as a strategy of the commodity programs of the DA; and the crafting of a road map. 

2. Private sector and government to lead in upscaling precision agriculture which will involve the organization of smallholder farmers. 

3. Convergence initiatives with other agencies of the government for basic infrastructure needs for water and IT.

4. Regulations decentralized to the regions. In the case of drones, permitting and licensing are done at the National Capital Region. 

5. Inventory of rms, entities, and expert groups engaged in precision agriculture. This is needed to determine the current breadth and reach of precision agriculture adoption in the Philippines. This is an important component in road map preparation

Precision Breeding

During the breakout session on precision breeding, experts agreed on the need to scale up on the support and promotion of the method in the country, especially since the country has been dependent on imported livestock breeders from temperate regions. 

Among the recommendations include the increase in funding and investment opportunities to support the uptake of precision agriculture; and the maximization of available resources, systems, and partnerships including the existing breeding institutions, the functional biotechnology regulatory system for genome editing, and precision agriculture, and the inter-regional collaborations that respond to the high cost of laboratories, genome editing tools, and licensing.

What needs to be done? 

  1. Public-private partnerships and the establishment of a national consortium that could identify specific target areas and funding opportunities in support of mainstreaming precision breeding.
     
  2. Formulation of enabling policies and mechanisms such as the implementing rules and regulations (IRR) on genome editing that will be subjected to public consultations.
     
  3. Science communication on biotechnology should be mainstreamed through strengthened social media use among the scientific and research community. To reach out to the public, it is recommended that the simplification or translation of technical research or reports of scientists and experts be prioritized. 

Farmers warned against ‘illegal’ seeds

Over the years, CropLife Philippines has been partnering with agriculture stakeholders and the government in advocating for the use of legal and legitimate seeds.

Illegal seeds are products that are not properly regulated and/or distributed or sold legally. Examples of illegal seeds include seeds that have been stolen during the production and distribution process, seeds stolen from commercial trials, unknown seeds in counterfeit packaging, and online seed trading through unlicensed dealers.

Seeds sold as conventional seeds, but which possess GM traits and are subject to strict regulation and stewardship, are also classed as illegal.

CLP noted that while farmers may believe that they saved money from purchasing these illegal seeds, they still do not get their money’s worth because of the substandard quality of these seeds.

“In the end, they will be the losers because their hard work on their farmlands will not yield the best results,” according to CLP Executive Director Edilberto De Luna. “This is why we have been prioritizing the education of our farmers on illegal seeds. We are advocating also stricter penalties for distributing counterfeit products.”

He said that illegal and counterfeit seeds can also be harmful to the industry “because these (seeds) often do not perform to the level that the brands claim.”

“They can cause damage to the reputation of legitimate companies, and even cause damage to the livelihood of the farmers,” De Luna said.

Studies showed that in Eastern and Southern Africa alone, the illegal seed trade grows by 5 percent every year. In some countries, as much as 75 percent of farmers have experienced planting illegal seeds at a time.

Not all of them knowingly engage in supporting illegal seed traders. While some opt for the cheaper seeds, some are victimized by false labeling. Substandard seeds are marketed as genuine products from reputed brands.

“Again, we appeal to our stakeholders to be more vigilant against these illegal traders,” de Luna cautioned.

These are some tips for purchasing genuine and high-quality seeds: 

  • Only buy seeds from a recognized and trustworthy dealer. Never purchase through non-recognized sources in the black market. 
     
  • Get the right paperwork. Check whether the invoices contain the product name and seed varieties purchased. 
     
  • Be wary of products that sell at surprisingly low prices or those with only foreign labels
     
  • Ensure that packaging is properly received.

CropLife reclassifies process of empty pesticide containers for recycling 

CropLife Philippines has begun the reclassification process of empty pesticide containers from hazardous to non-hazardous wastes for recycling.

According to Croplife Executive Director Edilberto de Luna, empty pesticide container management has become “one of the biggest challenges” in the Philippines.

Under the Pesticide Regulatory Policies Implementing Guidelines (2020 Edition), the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA) considered it a “shared responsibility” of all stakeholders – the pesticide companies, the network of dealers, farmers and their associations, plantation owns, local government units, accredited waste generators, transporters, treatment stories, and disposal entities.

The FPA has mandated that all used empty pesticides need to be decontaminated before disposal, following the World Health Organization-Food and Agriculture Organizations (WHO-FAO) guidelines, which advocates as options the adoption of triple rinsing and pressure rinsing. The old practice of burying empty containers and their packaging was prohibited.

Right now, de Luna said that the procedures and processes remain complicated. The FPA considered recycling as an option while the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) classified them as hazardous which needed to be destroyed. 

Sixty percent of local empty pesticide containers are estimated to be recyclable. This provides an opportunity for the wastes to be converted to usable items but subject to specific restrictions. The remaining 40 percent which cannot be recycled can then be programmed for destruction. 

But before recycling can be done, CLP initiated in June 2021 the preliminary scientific studies, starting with the reclassification of recycling containers from hazardous to non-hazardous materials.

The CLP-led Crop Science industry project involves two phases – reclassification followed by either the recycling of empty containers by end-users or the destruction of non-recycled containers.

The project’s objectives involve:

  • Generating local data to advance advocacy on reclassification
     
  • Helping regulatory agencies to reclassify recyclable empty container waste based on established protocols
     
  • Laying down the basis and parameters for recycling empty containers with workable participation of stakeholders in the supply ad value chain

For starters, the CLP began experimental procedures, where sample containers of 10 active ingredients being used by Filipino farmers based on the FPA’s advice were being tested in Calauan, Laguna. The sizes of these containers were 500 ml, 1-liter bottles, and 4 little bottles.


After being triple-rinsed, the rinsate samples from the rinsed containers (first to the third rinse) were collected, along with the 4th rinsate for analysis reference.

The rinsate samples were then transported to the Jefcor Laboratory for residue analysis, confirming the US-EPA methods. The independent laboratory is nationally recognized for analysis and testing by many regulatory agencies in the country, among them the DENR, FPA, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 

The analysis and interpretation of completed data will then be submitted to the regulators before the second phase – the recycling program which is expected to start March 22 – will now involve different stakeholders. 
Facebook
Website
CropLife PH YouTube
Copyright © 2021, CropLife Philippines, All rights reserved.

Our mailing address is:
Unit 5E Mapfre Bldg. Acacia Ave. Madrigal Business Park,
Ayala, Alabang, Muntinlupa City 1780, Philippines
Tel. (02) 772-3992 to 93
secretariat@croplife.org.ph

Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.