Download to read offline
![Reputation of business
14/01/20207
If we supplied or
recommended and the
plant came down with
those [symptoms] the
client would not be
very happy
(Landscape
Architect/designer)
If you get a bad reputation,
you’re wrecked
(Trader)
We see and handle every
single plant our business
sells, so we can quality check
it, check it’s all okay, because
it’s all about reputation and
quality of service.
(Retailer)
you’d rather lose a few
hundred thousand
pounds worth of sales
than you would the
reputational damage that
potentially could come
with that. So, we take a
very, very stringent view
on Xylella.
(Garden Centre)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/mikeandmariellawp2-200114105725/75/Mike-Dunn-Mariella-Marzano-wp2-13-Nov-19-7-2048.jpg)
![Disruption/impact on business
14/01/20208
We have to take [ash] out
of all of the shrub and
tree mixes
(Landscape Architect)
So we’re quite conscious of
the fact that we don’t want to
remove the trees in case
we’ve got some resilience in
them but these ones, we’ve
got a road closure on. It’s
going to cost a fortune if we
don’t do it and we end up
having to remove them later
on
(Local Authority)
The nursery industry has
got the biggest burden in
terms of cost and risk
(Nursery)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/mikeandmariellawp2-200114105725/75/Mike-Dunn-Mariella-Marzano-wp2-13-Nov-19-8-2048.jpg)
![14/01/202014
[if] it’s more quality, it goes straight back. If it’s diseased, get
rid as soon as possible.
Sick plants, we currently dispose of them, depending on what the
issue is…if it’s safe to compost them we will do so, but if not we
tend to bury them…If it’s a more serious pest or disease then our
plant health inspector will advise
Innocently dead green waste skip and gets composted,
Unwanted plant material, ditto. Any of those… but suspicious
circumstances…bonfire.
Return, reuse, bury & burn](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/mikeandmariellawp2-200114105725/75/Mike-Dunn-Mariella-Marzano-wp2-13-Nov-19-14-2048.jpg)
Uploaded byForest Research
Mike Dunn & Mariella Marzano wp2 13 Nov 19
This document discusses perspectives from different stakeholders on the feasibility of an accreditation scheme for plant biosecurity practices. It summarizes findings from a survey and interviews with nurseries, retailers, landscaping businesses, local authorities, and consumers. Key concerns included threats to reputation from diseased plants and disruption to business. While some saw potential benefits to accreditation like reduced risk, others cited challenges including costs of implementation and concerns about how it would work in practice. Suggestions were provided on how to make accreditation more impactful, such as ensuring it covers multiple business types, emphasizing quality over just biosecurity, and involving industry in developing the scheme.
More Related Content
Similar to Mike Dunn & Mariella Marzano wp2 13 Nov 19
More from Forest Research
Mike Dunn & Mariella Marzano wp2 13 Nov 19
- 1. Feasibility of anaccreditation scheme Perspectives from different stakeholders 14/01/20201 Mariella Marzano Mike Dunn Gregory Valentin Tim Pettitt Work Package 2
- 2.
- 3.
- 4. 14/01/20204 Exploring Perspectives Stakeholder SurveyResponses Interviews Nurseries 55 20 Retailers 53 (garden centres) 8 Landscaping sector 38 + 115 (architects & designers), 14 (contractors) 5 (architects & designers), 4+(contractors) Local Authorities N/a 15 Consumers 1500 (general public) N/a
- 5.
- 6.
- 7. Reputation of business 14/01/20207 Ifwe supplied or recommended and the plant came down with those [symptoms] the client would not be very happy (Landscape Architect/designer) If you get a bad reputation, you’re wrecked (Trader) We see and handle every single plant our business sells, so we can quality check it, check it’s all okay, because it’s all about reputation and quality of service. (Retailer) you’d rather lose a few hundred thousand pounds worth of sales than you would the reputational damage that potentially could come with that. So, we take a very, very stringent view on Xylella. (Garden Centre)
- 8. Disruption/impact on business 14/01/20208 Wehave to take [ash] out of all of the shrub and tree mixes (Landscape Architect) So we’re quite conscious of the fact that we don’t want to remove the trees in case we’ve got some resilience in them but these ones, we’ve got a road closure on. It’s going to cost a fortune if we don’t do it and we end up having to remove them later on (Local Authority) The nursery industry has got the biggest burden in terms of cost and risk (Nursery)
- 9. Practices of otherplant growers/ sellers/businesses 14/01/20209 Well, the weakest link is, if you look at the… the construction industry (Landscape Architect) What worries me is that there's a lot of other potential sellers of plants out there that it's just a commodity. It's the seasonal aisle in a supermarket (Nursery) I think what worries me the most is what other people are not doing because other businesses near us could do something wrong and if we end up in the five kilometre radius, then that will affect us. So I think what worries me is not what we do, it’s what others don’t do. (Nursery)
- 10. Risk Reduction forBusinesses Perceptions of nurseries and garden centres 25% reduction in risk posed by Xylella (mean) However, 58% perceived no reduction in risk 25% reduction in risk posed by Phytophthoras (mean) However, 56% perceived no reduction in risk 14/01/202010 Landscape architects and designers 35/38 (92%) say that biosecurity and P&D issues influence the plants they specify for planting schemes
- 11.
- 12. L/S Architects &Designers 14/01/202012 “What we’ve got to start doing is writing the standards. You’ve got to be writing documents about what landscape architects should be doing”. Courtesy of Harry Watkins
- 13. Use of BiosecurityPractices 14/01/202013 * Perceived to be least costly ** Perceived to be most costly
- 14. 14/01/202014 [if] it’s morequality, it goes straight back. If it’s diseased, get rid as soon as possible. Sick plants, we currently dispose of them, depending on what the issue is…if it’s safe to compost them we will do so, but if not we tend to bury them…If it’s a more serious pest or disease then our plant health inspector will advise Innocently dead green waste skip and gets composted, Unwanted plant material, ditto. Any of those… but suspicious circumstances…bonfire. Return, reuse, bury & burn
- 15. Retailers – influentialconsumers “We’re the ones that can influence customers but also people that we buy from…if we don’t buy something because of a health risk then that supplier would do something to resolve the issue and if we don’t provide those plants to a customer then hopefully the threat wouldn’t enter the supply chain anyway” – Influencing demand & supply “There is no substitute for retailers really demanding transparency in their supply chain so if they’re dealing through a wholesaler they should be expecting that those wholesalers have got a register at any time of approved suppliers…that they’ve been inspected and that when you go to those suppliers…that you know it’s only their own product that they’ve got.” - Sourcing “To rely on quarantining and testing on arrival is not impossible but it presents some fairly major logistical and cost issues. So, we’ve got to try and do it live at source”. – Biosecurity beyond the border 14/01/202015
- 16. 3. ATTITUDES TOWARDS AHYPOTHETICAL ACCREDITATION SCHEME 14/01/202016
- 17.
- 18.
- 19. If a landscaperthat’s not accredited brings in a tree with Xylella and then plants it and they run about our nursery, our nursery could get shut down on the basis of somebody bringing a plant in. That’s not fair. So everybody who is bringing plants into the country should be accredited – Nursery I’m happy to pay that little extra if I genuinely believe that the industry is doing stuff to improve its tree stock supplies and that’s shrubs as well. - Local Authority Well, I think if it’s a join and everyone passes, everyone would join. It only has teeth if you get thrown out and you can’t operate your business. – Influential retailer 14/01/202019 Scope
- 20.
- 21.
- 22.
- 23. Concerns about accreditation 14/01/202023 Youmight learn something and get some tips, the flipside to that is, you hear the same thing for the 20th time and it’s difficult or expensive to do •- Nursery on cost/difficulty of meeting standards It has to have minimum standards in it and it’ll have to be policed and that’s, there has to be a mechanism where it catches the whole of the supply chain - L/Scape architect/designer on scope and administration •If we think we’re doing as much as any assurance scheme anyway, then why would we join in…to say we’re doing it when we know we are? - Nursery on lack of perceived benefits
- 24. Concerns about accreditation 14/01/202024 They’dall need to sign up to it basically…But we wouldn’t want to ask for something that we know that only 50% of the nurseries out there have. - Local Authority on accreditation in procurement There are just no big enough growers in the UK who can even begin to produce the volume or the quality at the price we want – Influential retailer on supply and cost of biosecure goods People have come in and said “Have you got any olive trees?” “No, no, we haven’t got any olive trees.” “When will you be getting them?” “Well we’re not stocking them currently.” Probably one in 10 will say, “Well why aren’t you stocking them anymore because I’ve seen them somewhere else? - Influential retailer on consumer demand for biosecure products •We can’t just walk away just like that because of the volumes, the responsibility. •- Influential retailer on disruption to business
- 25. Willingness to Pay 14/01/202025 MeanWTP: Nurseries = 2.5% of current business costs Garden Centres = 5.3% of current business costs
- 26. Completion of L/Sscheme 14/01/202026 Courtesy of Harry Watkins
- 27.
- 28. Summary so far… 14/01/202028 Accreditationmust cover multiple businesses, or at least their stock Many nurseries will likely have to improve their biosecurity practices to become accredited Few nurseries are willing/able to incur substantial cost to become accredited What accreditation ‘looks’ like (teeth, costs and benefits) will be influential More evidence of how regulated pests and diseases could impact growers, and how biosecurity practices avert such risks needed Public driven by quality rather than biosecurity practices. Thus, quality could be emphasised to promote an accreditation scheme A requirement for large landscape contracts to use stock from accredited growers would increase demand (and therefore suppliers’ interest). Retailers willing to work with science and policy to improve practices and could serve as an important player in raising awareness
- 29.
- 30. Making Accreditation Impactful 1.Right biosecurity practices 2. Greater public awareness 3. Greater industry awareness 4. Buy-in from those contracting planting schemes (local authorities, conservation bodies etc.) 5. Low cost membership 6. Carrots for participants e.g. access to learning resources + assurance that they won’t be punished for reporting P&Ds 7. Sticks for participants e.g. penalties for failing to meet a scheme’s biosecurity standards 8. Scheme branding - emphasising healthy plants (quality) and safeguarding the wider environment + use of a recognisable logo 9. Involvement of industry in scheme’s establishment and evolution 10. Others? 14/01/202030
Editor's Notes
- #3 Good and bad practice. WP1 is demonstrating that good practice lowers P&D risk
- #4 Others are already schemes or best practice guidance to address P&D issues. Is it feasible to introduce something like this in the UK (generic scheme – not Plant Healthy!) Nursery Industry Accreditation Scheme of Australia (NIASA) California Association of Nurseries and Garden Centres’ guidance on best management practices for Phytophthora ramorum (details several recommended biosecurity practices) Acknowledge Giles Hardy and Susan Frankel
- #5 More complicated than this. Consumer survey key findings (1500 plant buyers) Obtain plants from multiple sources (Garden centres, DIY stores, supermarkets, friends and nurseries) = Need to consider supply chain, not just nurseries. When making decisions about which plants to buy and where to buy from factors such as quality, range of products offered and cost are key drivers. When asked about which sources they feel are riskiest in terms of P&Ds, we it’s clear that they are using sources they themselves would consider to be of higher risk (e.g. not specialists such as supermarkets and DIY stores). Thus, either education or promoting accredited products on the grounds of high quality healthy plants Existing purchases of non-hort products (fair trade coffee, red tractor produce) is driven by ideals or scheme, but also quality. Biggest interest comes from biggest spenders e.g. Those who spend more are more likely to travel further for accredited plant products Handout with this info, and open access article coming in Plants, people, planet.
- #7 Survey responses (ask to list up to 5 P&Ds that are of most concern) Stress that concerns – and any accreditation scheme - is not specifically about Phytophthoras Nurseries and Garden centres tend to have similar concerns, although more nurseries tend to be concerned about any given P&D. Some architects and designers share N&GC concerns e.g. Phyto and Xylella, but greatest proportion (82%) noted that ash dieback is there greatest concern. What are the reasons for concern. (next slide)
- #11 Asked N and GCs, if you intro’d a suite of biosecurity practices what impact would it have on the risks posed to your business’ by a) Phyto, b) Xyllela (responses reported together because they were so similar). Perhaps N&GCs underestimate the potential for accreditation underpinned by best biosecurity practice could have on reducing their risk. L/S architects and designers – on-site practices = n/a. but perhaps there’s a role in reducing P&D risk by making informed decisions about which plants they specify (i.e. low risk plants that aren’t hosts for more serious Phyto spp.) Almost all claim that this is the case! Perhaps this doesn’t reflect the frequency they do it or how comprehensive their assessments are – in reality it could simply mean no longer specifying ash trees.
- #13 One step beyond that influencing the plants specified, is to include P&D precautions in the specifications (for contractors). E.g. they might outline that particular species should be used, or in future, they may advise that plants are obtained from an accredited grower. Appears to be happening to some degree (around half always/often include P&D precautions). However, a limitation of the role of architects and designers in the P&D conundrum is that there’s no guarantee that the trees and plants they specify will actually be planted in the way they intended or outlined.
- #14 Practices we’ve looked at are most relevant to nurseries, placed towards the start of the supply chain. One step beyond that influencing the plants specified, is to include P&D precautions in the specifications (for contractors). E.g. they might outline that particular species should be used, or in future, they may advise that plants are obtained from an accredited grower. Appears to be happening to some degree (around half always/often include P&D precautions). However, a limitation of the role of architects and designers in the P&D conundrum is that there’s no guarantee that the trees and plants they specify will actually be planted in the way they intended or outlined. = only 4 of the practices are used by a majority of the nurseries. BUT some opportunities to improve biosecurity at little cost (vehicle & boot washing stations) *Quarantining/holding facility and water treatment and reliance on UK supplies = perceived to be most costly **Boot washing, disinfecting stations and vehicle washing stations = perceived to be least costly
- #15 BUT, not all nurseries biosecurity practices are carried out in the same way E.g. – variation in how nurseries deal with unhealthy plants.
- #16 Influencing demand and supply Sourcing Biosecurity beyond the border
- #18 Strong agreement from both nurseries and garden centres in a) an accreditation scheme better ensuring the quality of trees/plants sold to consumers And b) safeguarding the wider environment from the spread of P&Ds So, clearly some perceived benefits – essentially agreement that accreditation would fulfil some very important aims.
- #19 However, in terms of Nurseries and Garden Centres interest in joining a hypothetical scheme we got a mixed response. Garden centres = normal distribution Nurseries = even distribution Both more slightly negative than positive, but most largest response categories are in the middle (50/50). = Hypothetical scheme we aren’t providing any detail on how it would work and what it would cost. Later we’ll be running an exercise to consider which factors you think are most important for an accreditation to be successful.
- #22 After asking Nurseries about what practices they do use, we asked them why don’t’ you use the others. Offered a range of options… Inappropriate for site of business model . Perception that ‘we don’t need those practices’ is perhaps the biggest barrier. More so than cost! Again, that the importance of these practices in P&D prevention may not be fully appreciated.
- #23 Similar levels of cynicism among Ns and GCs about a) insufficient growers being interested b) Insufficient consumers being interested c) Costs of a scheme for growers and consumers (investment by industry passed on to consumer)
- #26 Asked about WTP for the business and the stock to become accredited, relative to their existing business costs (% premium). Striking is that the largest response category for Ns and Gs is 0%. However, if it can be kept low, say 1% then 64% of Ns (and 60% of GCs) would be prepared to pay. 3 Nurseries in the sample reported to be involved in the HTA’s plant healthy scheme, reportedly cost them between 1 and 5% of their existing business cost (mean 2.3%) so not unthinkable to have a majority of Ns and GCs willing to pay.
- #27 For Landscape designers and architects, their impact is limited because the schemes they specify for aren’t always carried out as they describe. Going forward, the option to specify that L/S contractors should attain plants from accredited buyers might be possible. though real change could require those procuring contracts to put biosecurity concerns ahead of other factors (how timely or cheaply a site can be planted) If this were the case, demand for accredited products would increase, and interest in becoming accredited or stocking accredited tree/plant products would likely increase.
- #29 Nurseries 5th most used source for obtaining trees/plants (among plant-buying public) 2) Given that many nurseries feel that some practices are inappropriate for their business or site, they may well need support in this endeavour 3) Although nurseries recognised the benefits of the scheme, they are right to hold scepticism about interest from other nurseries and consumers. 4) Interest from nurseries driven by consumer demand, so how to increase this… raising awareness on wider environment (intangible to public) + emphasise quality 5) E.g. local authorities, conservation bodies could specify that landscapers must use accredited businesses/stock. 6) E.g. presence of notifiable pests and diseases leads to operations being halted and stock being destroyed (no insurance). Also, demonstrate that best biosecurity practice can help to reduce this threat.
- #31 the biosecurity practices which underpin P&D prevention, but also awareness campaigns, a logo, an assurance policy for participants so they don’t stand to lose from participating, considerations about who oversees a scheme, cost of membership etc.