This document provides an outline and overview of pest risk analysis (PRA). It discusses the history and development of PRA through international conventions. The key stages and steps of conducting a PRA are described, including pest categorization, assessing the probability of entry, establishment and spread, evaluating economic consequences, and determining overall risk. The document also reviews various international standards and guidelines for PRA and provides examples of case studies and models used in risk assessment.

1. By Devina Seram
Ph.D.

2. OUTLINE
• HISTORY
• INTRODUCTION
• PURPOSE OF PRA
• STAGES OF PRA PROCESS
• STEPS IN PRA PROCESS
• RISK ASSESSMENT MODELS
• CASE STUDIES
• CONCLUSION

3.  The introduction of several pests into Europe in19th century
paved way to develop plant quarantine measures
 International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) developed to
address organisms - directly or indirectly injurious to plants
 IPPC supplies a framework of measures against invasive alien
species according to the Convention on Biological Diversity
 In 1997 revision, IPPC provides for establishment of
International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) –
WTO

4.  Standard on pest risk analysis (ISPM1996a)
 New Standard on pest risk analysis for quarantine pests
(ISPM2001)
 In US, Plant Quarantine Act – 1912
 In India –Destructive Insects and Pests Act (DIPA) – 1914
 Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage
(DPPQS) – 1946 - Faridabad
 India became a member of IPPO – 1951

5.  ISPM No. 2 (2007) - Framework for pest risk analysis
 ISPM No.4 – Requirements for the Establishment of Pest Free Areas:
Provides guidance on the establishment and maintenance of pest free areas
 ISPM No.8 – Determination of Pest Status in an Area : Provides detail about the
gathering and recording of pest record information and the categorization of pest
status
 ISPM No.10 – Requirements for the Establishment of Pest Free Places of
Production and Pest Free Production Sites
 ISPM No. 11 (2004) - Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests including analysis of
environmental risks and living modified organisms
 ISPM No. 14 (2002) - The use of integrated measures in a systems approach for
pest risk management
 ISPM No. 21 (2004) - Pest risk analysis for regulated non-quarantine pests
 ISPM No. 26 (2006) Establishment of pest free areas for fruit flies (Tephritidae)

6. • “Import Risk Analysis”
• Process of investigation,
evaluation of information
and decision making w.r.t
a certain pest, that starts once
it is known or determined that
the pest is a quarantine pest
• Evaluation of the potential of introduction of the pest
into the country

7. j
• It is a process:
- probability and the severity of impact of a particular
pest of quarantine importance identified
- means of reducing them evaluated
- possible Phytosanitary measures
taken by the Exporting Country
to exterminate the quarantine
pest from the commodity

8. • Protect the country’s agriculture,
forestry from harmful (quarantine)
pests brought in along with imported
commodities
• Prevent the likelihood of the entry,
establishment or the spread of a
quarantine pest &
the associated potential biological -
economic consequences

9. • A detailed study carried out by
the importing country after
official receipt of Technical
Information from NPPO of
exporting country OR
Calling for information from exporting country
• Process culminates with decision making to avoid or reduce the
probability of entrance or establishment of the pest into country

10. 1. Plant and - Sc. & Common name, Resistant or non-resistant varieties,
Plant product importing countries
2. Production area – Site (district/province) & Place (country) of production, Export
capacity (ton/year)
3. Cultivation - General pest surveillance and management practices; Information on
practices pest free areas; Harvest method and time; Plant protection measures
4. Pest list – Sc. & common name, Taxonomic position, Host range, Plant parts
affected & Symptoms, Distribution, Pest status, Management
practices; (A1 and A2 pest lists)
5. Packaging - Method ; Inspection procedure; Post harvest treatment;
Conditions and security of storage place
6. Export program - Trading partners; Existing procedure for issuing Phytosanitary
(policy/activity) certificates
7. Copies of relevant documents

11. Imported
commodities
To prevent introduction of invasive alien pests…….
EXPERT
CHECK
&
JUDGEMENT
N
P
P
O
I
P
P
O

12. Stages in PRA Process
Stage 1: Initiation
Stage 2: Pest Risk Assessment
Stage 3: Pest Risk Management
Stage 4: Documentation

13. Identify
quarantine
pest(s)
Estimate the
entry,
establishment
& spread
potential
Estimate the
consequences
Identify risks
that require
management
Identify risk
management
options
Evaluate risk
management
options for:
efficacy, feasibility
& impacts
Select options &
describe
uncertainty
Recommendations
List pests
associated with
commodity
Identify pathway that presents
a potential hazard,
e.g trade in a new commodity
RISK MANAGEMENT
RISK ASSESSMENT
INITIATION
DOCUMENTATION

14. PRA initiated as a result of-
1. Identification of a pathway
2. Identification of a pest
3. Review or revision of existing policy
 PRA’s most often initiated
following a request for market access

15. 1. Identification of a pathway
International trade initiated in a
new commodity
 Request for import/appearance in
trade of consignments of a commodity
 New plant species imported for
selection, scientific research purposes
 Pathway other than commodity import
identified (natural spread, mail, garbage,
passenger’s baggage etc.)

16. 2. Identification of a pest
 Emergency on:
 discovery of an infestation/outbreak
- new pest - PRA area
 interception - new pest - imported commodity
 identification - new pest risk - scientific research
 pest introduced or pest reported more damaging - new area
 Audits - particular pest repeatedly intercepted
 request - import an organism
 organism identified - vector for other pests
 organism genetically altered in a way which
clearly identifies its potential as a plant pest

17. 3. Review or revision of existing policy
 A national decision taken
- review phytosanitary
regulations, requirements or operations
 A proposal made by another country or by an
international organization (FAO) is reviewed
A dispute arises on
phytosanitary measures

18. Divided into:
Step 1: Pest Categorization
Step 2: Assessment of the Probability
of Introduction
•Entry
•Establishment
•Spread
Step 3: Assessment of potential economic
consequences (including environmental

19. Step 1. Pest categorization based on
the following:
 Identify quarantine pests
 Presence or absence in PRA area
 Regulatory status (If pest present but not widely distributed in the
PRA area, should be under official control or expected to be under
official control in the near future)
 Categorise pests (do they occur in the pathway?)
 Prepare data sheet
CRYPTIC
PESTS

20. Prepare Data Sheets
• {Quarantine Pest Name}
• Species : Anthonomous grandis
• Synonyms : Mexican boll weevil
• Common name(s) : Cotton boll weevil
• Hosts : Cotton
• Plant part(s) affected : bolls
• Distribution : Mexico, USA
• Biology (life cycle) : Medium
• Epidemiology : Moderate temp. & RH
• Control : Microbial, HPR
• References : Anonymous

21. Pest
name
Pest
establishment
in PRA area
Refs Potential for
significant loss
Refs Quarantine
pest
(Yes/No)
ARTHROPOD PESTS
Pest 1 Feasible REF Significant REF Yes
Pest 2 Feasible REF Not significant REF No
PATHOGENS
Pest 3 Not feasible REF Significant REF No
Pest 4 Feasible REF Significant REF Yes
Quarantine pests are retained for further assessment

22. Conclusion for Pest categorization
If fulfilling all the
criteria for a
quarantine pest
pest has potential to
be a quarantine pest
PRA process should
continue.
On not fulfilling all
the criteria
Not a quarantine
pest
PRA process for
that pest may stop
In the absence of
sufficient
information
the gaps should be
identified
PRA process should
continue
1)
2)
3)

23. Step 2. Assessment of the Probability
of Introduction
 Probability of ENTRY
 Likelihood of a quarantine pest that will arrive in an
importing country through various pathways
 Probability of survival during transport or storage
 Probability of pest surviving existing pest management
procedures
 Probability of transfer to a suitable host

24.  Probability of ESTABLISHMENT
 Availability of suitable hosts, alternate hosts
and in the vectors - PRA area
 Climatic suitability
 Cultural practices and control measures
 Other characteristics of the pest affecting the probability
of establishment (adaptation, reproductive strategy,
method of survival, previous establishment)
At last
success
PRA Area

25.  Probability of SPREAD after establishment
Factors to be considered :
 Suitability of the environment for
natural spread of pest
 Presence of natural barriers
 Potential for movement with
commodities or transports
 Intended use of the commodity
 Potential pest vectors and natural enemies of the pest
in the PRA area

26.  Impact on productivity - quantitative & qualitative data (yield
loss, increased control cost, post-harvest disinfestation)
 Impact on trade/market access (domestic, international)
 Analysis of economic consequences (time, place factors,
analytical techniques, non-commercial & environmental
consequences)
 Services of an Economist taken for estimating economic
impact on a hypothetical situation (presuming that the pest has
been introduced)
Step 3: Assessment of potential
economic consequences

27. Conclusion for pest risk assessment
1. All or part of PRA area as an
endangered area
2. All or some of categorized pests
considered appropriate for Pest Risk Management
3. An estimate - probability of introduction of a pest and
quantitative or qualitative - economic consequences
including environmental consequences obtained and
overall rating assigned

28. Estimating the Overall Risk Posed by a
Quarantine Pest
 For each pest, combine the likelihood of:
- entry/establishment/ spread
- consequences of entry
/establishment/spread
“Extreme” “High” “Moderate”
“Low” “Very low”

29. Stage 3:Pest Risk
Management
1. Level of risk
2. Technical information
3. Acceptability of risk
4. Identification and selection of appropriate risk
management options (options for consignments &
preventing/reducing infestation, ensure area/ place of
production to be free from pest, types of pathways,
options within importing countries, prohibition of
commodities)
5. Phytosanitary certificates and other compliance
measures

30. Stage 4:Documentation
 Purpose for the PRA
- pest, pest list, pathways, PRA area, endangered area
- sources of information
- categorized pest list
 Conclusions of risk assessment
-probability
-consequences
 Conclusion of risk management
-options identified
- options selected

31. Pests intercepted in imported commodities
Name of Pest Host Country of Origin
Erwinia carotovora Potato (T) Germany, Holland, Ireland, USA
Xanthomonas campestris pv.
campestris
Cabbage (S)
Cauliflower (S)
Holland
Albugo candida Crucufers (S) USA
Alternaria solani Tomato (S) France, Thailand
Claviceps purpurea Wheat (G) Canada, Turkey, USA
Colletotrichum falcatum Sugarcane ( C) USA
Helminthosporium oryzae Paddy (S) Fiji, USA
Fusarium oxysporum Maize (S) Tomato (S) Australia, Germany, Italy, Mexico,
Thailand, USA
Pyricularia oryzae Paddy (S) China
Rhizoctonia solani Maize, potato, soybean
(S)
Australia, Mexico, S Africa, Spain,
Thailand, UK, USA
Streptomyces scabies Potato (T) Gemany, Holland, Ireland, Scotland, USA
Leaf crinkle virus Chilli (S) Germany
Yellow mosaic virus Chicory (S) Holland

32. Name of Pest Host Country of Origin
Anguina tritici Wheat (G) Turkey
Globodera rostochiensis Potato (T) Germany, Ireland, Scotland
Meloidogyne incognita Pepper ( C) Malaysia
Radopholus similis Coconut (P) Holland, Malaysia, Sri Lanka
Rotylenchulus reniformis Malaysia, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand
Callosobruchus chinensis Blackgram
Greengram (Sc)
Myanmar, Singapore
Lasioderma serricorne Tobacco (L) Fiji, Holland, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia,
USA
Oryzaephilus surinamensis Nutmeg (N), Raw Cashewnut
(N)
Fiji, Holland, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia,
Nigeria, USA
Rhizopertha dominica Blackgram (Sc), Wheat (G) Australia, Myanmar, Turkey, USA
Tribolium castaneum Blackgram (Sc) Wheat (G) Fiji, Holland, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia,
Nigeria, Singapore, USA, Zimbabwe
Echinochloa crusgalli Wheat (G) USA
Phalaris minor Wheat (G) Australia, France

33. Plant Quarantine Department inspects materials at 3 places:
1. at place where the material is being sent
2. at place where it reaches
3. at places where it is being kept
 Quarantine laws strictly followed – beneficial insects cannot be
imported except at:
 IARI, New Delhi
 FRI, Dehradun
 IVRI, Mukteshwar, Izatnagar
 Zoological Survey of India (ZSI), Kolkata
 Commonwealth Institute of Biological Sciences (CIBS), Bangalore
 NBAII, Hebbal, Bangalore
 Complete restriction on:
 Unginned cotton from Australia, Philippines, Fiji
 Potato, garlic, onion, unmanufactured tobacco
 Unfumigated American cotton
 Sugarcane, berseem seeds, sunflower

34.  A stage in PRA process
 Depend on the type of pest
1. GPS and GIS System
2. Climate mapping
3. Climographs
4. Indices
5. Phenology factor

35.  Computer programs have been developed to handle and
analyze data and display them in map form, known as
geographical information systems (GIS)
 Facilitate assessments in PRA when large amounts of data
need to be processed and compared, eg. using weather
records to compare climates in different locations

36. Early Detection of Coconut Rhinoceros Beetle
 Coconut rhinoceros beetle (CRB, Coleoptera:
Scarabaeidae),Oryctes rhinoceros, was detected on Guam
on September 12, 2007. CRB is native to Southern Asia.
 Accidental introduction and now established on the Pacific
Islands of Palau,Fiji and Samoa.

38.  Technique described by Baker et al.( 2000)
 The CLIMEX program contains world metrological data for
1931- 1960, which can be used in comparing climates
worldwide
 The program shows the effects on pest biology of
introducing theoretical factors, such as climate change of
varying degree

39. WEATHER-BASED RISK MAPPING
• Bacterial leaf blight of rice (Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae)
• Risk assessment to assess the climatic favorability of the United
States for bacterial leaf blight (BLB)
 Simple prediction model based on the number of favourable
days (having a maximum temperature >30°C and average
relative humidity above 80% (Saddler, 2002)
 Risk maps were created with the NCSU APHIS Pest Forecasting
System (NAPPFAST) system (Magarey et al., 2007).

41. NAPPFAST prediction model map for favorable days for Xanthomonas
oryzae pv. oryzae infection

42.  The climatic variables can be estimated from study of
meteorological data covering areas of the pest’s
existing distribution and known abundance
 For each of these climates, data for different
significant climatic variables can be plotted against
each other to produce CLIMOGRAPHS.

43.  Key factors determined and combined mathematically in
various empirical ways to produce an index - used to
compare suitability of areas for pest/disease establishment
& their potential abundance
Eg. The use of indices for comparing climates in assessing the
risk of establishment of Karnal bunt (Tilletia indica) was
demonstrated by Stanford (1998)

44.  Phenology models are used to predict the timing of
events in an organism’s life cycle. Relationship
between the progress of events in the life cycle and
critical climatic factors, such as temperature, must be
known.
 Phenology models can be used to study aspects such
as the potential distribution or establishment of a
pest, where these are dependent on the pest or host
reaching a particular life stage

45. Likelihood of mated females of Anastrepha suspensa
(Diptera: Tephritidae) entering an area from infested
grapefruits discarded onto backyard compost piles in
Florida
• Michael K. Hennessey*, Paul E. Kendra**, Edward M. Jones*, Nancy
D. Epsky**
• *USDA-APHIS-PPQ, Plant Epidemiology & Risk Analysis Lab,
Raleigh, NC
• **USDA-ARS, Subtropical Horticulture Research Station, Miami,
Florida

46. 1. Development of improved pest risk analysis techniques for
quarantine pests, using pinewood nematode,
Bursaphelenchus xylophilus, in Portugal as a model
system, 2007
• PHRAME – Plant Health Risk And Monitoring Evaluation
• In Europe and Spain….
2. In 2008, Pest risk assessment made by France on Citrus
yellow mosaic virus or Citrus mosaic badnavirus considered
by France as harmful in the France overseas departments
of French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique and Réunion1
• Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Plant Health

47. 3. PEST RISK ANALYSIS AND QUARANTINE
OF FRUIT FLIES IN THE INDIAN OCEAN
REGION.
A Joomaye and NS Price, 1999
• Indian Ocean Regional Fruit Fly Programme
• Ministry of Agriculture, Food Technology and
Natural Resources

48. CAPRA NETWORK
• Computer software - EPPO Secretariat
• Aims to assist PRA in running the EPPO decision-
support scheme for quarantine pests and others

49.  Changes in adaptive characteristics which may increase the
potential for introduction or spread
 Adverse effects of gene flow or gene transfer
 Adverse effects on non-target organisms
 Genotypic and phenotypic instability
 Other injurious effects

50. Factors - conclusion - LMO is not a potential
pest
- genetic modification in similar or related organisms has
previously been assessed - no phytosanitary risk
- LMO is to be confined in a reliable containment system and not
be released
- evidence from research trials that the LMO is unlikely to be a
pest under the use proposed
- experience in other countries

51.  Quarantine problems cannot be looked at in isolation
 Regional and International collaboration vital – to
achieve reducing risks of pest introduction and spread

52. • Amand S. The plant quarantine order in India, FAO Corporate Document Repository
• Plant Health Department, BAHA. A handout for Importes of Plants and Plant
Poducts December, 2003 (www.baha.bz)
• Christelle R et al.(2012). A Suite of Models to Support the Quantitative Assessment
of Spread in Pest Risk Analysis, 7(10): e43366 (www.plosone.org)
• FAO, 1996. Guidelines for Pest Risk Analysis. International Standards for
Phytosanitary Measures. FAO, Rome. pp 4-9 (www.fao.org)
• Robert L G. Risk Analysis: Fundamentals and Principles, International Plant
Protection Convention, FAO, UN
• www.gov.mu
• www.phytosanitarysolution.com

53. Which is better?
Prevention of fire
Or
Fire fighting
THANK YOU