Cebu City, Philippines, 15–17 February 2007 › 3 › a-i0458e.pdf · 2017-11-28 · FAO...
Transcript of Cebu City, Philippines, 15–17 February 2007 › 3 › a-i0458e.pdf · 2017-11-28 · FAO...
FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report No. 877 FIMA/R877 (En) ISSN 2070-6987
Report of the
FAO WORKSHOP ON INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR MAINTAINING AQUATIC ANIMAL BIOSECURITY Cebu City, Philippines, 15–17 February 2007
Copies of FAO publications can be requested from: Sales and Marketing Group Communication Division
FAO Viale delle Terme di Caracalla
00153 Rome, Italy E-mail: [email protected]
Fax: +39 06 57053360 Web site: www.fao.org
FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report No. 877 FIMA/R877 (En)
Report of the
FAO WORKSHOP ON INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR MAINTAINING AQUATIC ANIMAL BIOSECURITY
Cebu City, Philippines, 15–17 February 2007
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Rome, 2008
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. ISBN 978-92-5-106123-7 All rights reserved. Reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product for educational or other non-commercial purposes are authorized without any prior written permission from the copyright holders provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of material in this information product for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without written permission of the copyright holders. Applications for such permission should be addressed to:
Chief Electronic Publishing Policy and Support Branch Communication Division FAO Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy
or by e-mail to: [email protected]
© FAO 2008
iii
PREPARATION OF THIS DOCUMENT This document is the final report of the FAO Workshop on Information Requirements for Maintaining Aquatic Animal Biosecurity held in Cebu City, Philippines, from 15 to 17 February 2007. This activity is one part of the Aquatic Animal Biosecurity Project, funded under the Strategic Objective D-1 “Integrated Management of Land, Water, Fisheries, Forest and Genetic Resources” of FAO’s Programme Cooperation Agreement with Norway (PCA Norway 2006−2007) under field and policy activities to strengthen national capacities to promote an integrated (Biosecurity) approach to the following:
• plant health systems, including pesticide risk reduction; • food safety, in particular fish product safety and fish health systems including
aquaculture; and • domestic animal health systems.
This report was prepared by Dr M.B. Reantaso, Fishery Resources Officer and also Lead Technical Officer of the Aquatic Animal Biosecurity Project, Aquaculture Management and Conservation Service, Fisheries and Aquaculture Management Division, Fisheries and Aquaculture Department of FAO.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks are due to the Philippine Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources for hosting the meeting; the Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia and the Pacific, AusVet Animal Health Services of Australia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations for their kind support to the workshop; to S. Borghesi of FAO Aquaculture Management and Conservation Service and F. Schatto of FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Information and Statistics Service; and to E. Boutriff and M. Robson of FAO Nutrition and Consumer Protection Division for facilitating funding access.
iv
FAO. Report of FAO Workshop on Information Requirements for Maintaining Aquatic Animal Biosecurity. Cebu City, Philippines, 15−17 February 2007. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report. No. 877. Rome, FAO. 2008. 27p.
ABSTRACT
Infectious diseases are constraining the development and sustainability of the aquaculture sector through direct production losses and increased operating costs and indirectly, through restrictions on trade and impacts on biodiversity. Inadequate or poorly implemented biosecurity measures have lead to significant losses due to aquatic animal diseases in many countries around the world. Governments must implement the biosecurity obligations they have entered into under international agreements. In order to implement effective biosecurity at the national level, countries require strong global and regional coordination and interaction to identify and manage emerging risks. Information is a key element in any biosecurity programme and will be required to support national actions on surveillance and diagnostics, risk assessments for new and expanding aquaculture species, rapid response to aquatic disease emergencies, implementation of risk management measures and other national frameworks to manage biosecurity. The FAO Workshop on Information Requirements for Maintaining Aquatic Animal Biosecurity was aimed to increase awareness on general principles of biosecurity and to build capacity and deliberate on key information required for maintaining aquatic animal biosecurity focusing on aspects of risk analysis, diagnostics, health certification and quarantine, and epidemiological surveillance and reporting. The workshop was participated by a total of 37 delegates representing countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines and Thailand), South Asian countries (Bangladesh, India, Nepal), and China, and representatives from organizing and partner organizations (AusVet Animal Health Services, Philippine Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources and the Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia and the Pacific).
v
CONTENTS Page BACKGROUND 1 OPENING OF THE WORKSHOP 1 PURPOSE OF THE WORKSHOP 2 WORKSHOP PARTICIPATION 2 WORKSHOP HIGHLIGHTS – TECHNICAL SESSION 2 WORKSHOP HIGHLIGHTS – WORKING GROUP SESSION 3 CLOSING OF THE WORKSHOP 5 APPENDIXES 1. Workshop prospectus 7 2. Opening remarks by Mr Kazuyuki Tsurumi, FAO Representative to the Republic
of the Philippines 12 3. Workshop agenda 14 4. List of participants 15 5. List of presentations 19 6. Working groups 20 7. Information and capacity building requirements for maintaining aquatic animal
biosecurity 21 8. Workshop group photo 27
1
BACKGROUND 1. The Workshop on Information Requirements for Maintaining Aquatic Animal Biosecurity held from 15 to 17 February 2007 in Cebu City, Philippines was organized jointly by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia and the Pacific (NACA) and hosted by the Philippine Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR). 2. This activity is one part of the Aquatic Animal Biosecurity Project, funded under Strategic Objective D-1 “Integrated Management of Land, Water, Fisheries, Forest and Genetic Resources” of FAO’s Programme Cooperation Agreement with Norway (PCA Norway) under Field and policy activities to strengthen national capacities to promote an integrated biosecurity approach to the following:
• plant health systems, including pesticide risk reduction; • food safety, in particular fish product safety and fish health systems including
aquaculture; and • domestic animal health systems.
3. The overall objective of the Aquatic Animal Biosecurity Project is to assist FAO member governments in implementing some elements (risk analysis, information systems, quarantine, surveillance and emergency preparedness and contingency planning) of FAO’s Technical Guidelines on Responsible Fisheries: Health Management for the Responsible Movement of Live Aquatic Organisms through provision of essential information requirements and capacity and awareness building activities specifically through:
• preparation of an Aquatic Animal Quarantine Manual – its use within the frameworks of the risk analysis approach and aquatic animal biosecurity;
• updating the FAO Diagnostic Guide to Aquatic Animal Diseases; • updating of FAO’s web-based Aquatic Animal Pathogen and Quarantine
Information or AAPQIS; and • implementation of regional training/workshops on Information Requirements
for Maintaining Aquatic Animal Biosecurity and Phase III of the Molluscan Health Management Training/Workshop.
4. The workshop prospectus is attached as Appendix 1. OPENING OF THE WORKSHOP 5. BFAR Region VII Chief Quarantine Officer Jeffrey Cortez welcomed the guests, participants and resource experts from partner organizations. NACA’s Aquatic Animal Health Specialist C.V. Mohan stressed the importance of biosecurity in Asian aquaculture and the relevance of the workshop to the needs of the region and thanked FAO for conceptualizing and implementing the workshop. FAO consultant J. Richard Arthur highlighted the value of such workshops in creating awareness and building capacity of stakeholders and national policy makers. FAO Representative to the Philippines Kazuyuki Tsurumi, in his inaugural address (Appendix 2), emphasized the need for countries in Asia to build capacity and access information to better comply with international standards such as the World Trade Organization’s Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement to ensure sustainable aquaculture and problem-free trade in fish and fishery products. Melba Reantaso of FAO
2
presented the objectives and expected outputs of the workshop and encouraged delegates from participating countries to actively take part in the deliberations. PURPOSE OF THE WORKSHOP 6. The objectives of the workshop were to increase awareness and build capacity on general principles of biosecurity and to deliberate on key information required for maintaining aquatic animal biosecurity focussing on aspects of risk analysis, diagnostics, health certification and quarantine and epidemiological surveillance and reporting. 7. The workshop agenda is attached as Appendix 3. The workshop organizers (FAO and NACA) explained the workshop objectives, the process to be adopted, guidelines for the working group discussions, and expected outputs in detail. WORKSHOP PARTICIPATION 8. A total of 37 delegates (Appendix 4) from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries (Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines and Thailand), South Asian countries (Bangladesh, India, Nepal), and China, and representatives from organizing and partner organizations (BFAR, NACA and AusVet Animal Health Services) participated in the workshop. WORKSHOP HIGHLIGHTS – TECHNICAL SESSION 9. The workshop technical sessions were conducted as per agenda. Four technical papers were presented by resource experts (Appendix 5). These were:
• General principles of biosecurity • General principles of diagnostics, health certification and quarantine • General principles of risk analysis • General principles of epidemiological surveillance and reporting
10. In presenting the General principles of biosecurity, M.B. Reantaso of FAO emphasized that governments must implement the biosecurity obligations they have entered into under international agreements. Recent developments in biosecurity in food and agriculture call for integration of and cooperation across sectors among the different international institutions that are responsible for the implementation of these international instruments. In order to implement effective biosecurity at the national level, countries require strong global and regional coordination and interaction to identify and manage emerging risks. Information is a key element in any biosecurity programme and will be required to support national actions such as:
• surveillance programmes and diagnostic services to detect and identify the arrival and spread of pests and diseases;
• timely assessment of the threats from new or expanding species; • rapid response to eradicate new pests and diseases before they establish and
spread;
3
• standardization of science-based identification of all risk pathways and high-risk organisms, and implementation of pre-border, border and post-border measures to prevent pests and diseases from entering the country; and
• national frameworks to regulate, manage and control biosecurity. 11. In the second plenary presentation on General principles of diagnostics, health certification and quarantine, C.V. Mohan of NACA highlighted the potential impacts of aquatic animal health risks on the livelihoods of aquafarmers, national economies, trade, environment and human health. As aquaculture will continue to expand and diversify, trade of aquatic animals will be inevitable and disease will be a major limiting factor. It is thus important to reduce the risk of diseases through appropriate health management strategies. Diagnostics, health certification and quarantine are essential elements of National Strategies on Aquatic Animal Health Management and it is important to understand the principles behind these concepts and tools, their purpose, their limitations and how they can each contribute to reducing the risks of diseases in aquatic production. 12. J. Richard Arthur, FAO Consultant, in his presentation on General principles of risk analysis concluded that oftentimes the information available for a given commodity, source or country may be insufficient to permit an accurate risk estimate. In these cases, other sources/countries of better known health status should be considered. As applied to pathogen risk analysis, a precautionary approach requires that both importing and exporting nations act cautiously and conservatively to avoid the potential spread of serious pathogens. The precautionary approach provides an important option that importing countries can use to delay a decision until adequate information has become available; however, the importing country is obligated to move rapidly to obtain such information. In the meantime, where other sources are not available and crucial information is lacking, cautious interim measures can often be applied to permit limited importations to occur until acceptable less stringent measures can be defined. These may include measures such as importing surface-disinfected eggs, requiring health certificates of international standard, quarantine in the country of origin and/or receiving country, repeated health screening of stocks, contingency planning, etc., either alone or in combination. 13. J. Hutchinson of AusVet Animal Health Services elaborated on the concepts and principles of epidemiology in her presentation on General principles of epidemiological surveillance and reporting. Epidemiology is about understanding the natural history, transmission and ecology of disease – in populations. Epidemiology is also about (i) doing surveillance to detect disease and measure changes, (ii) describing disease patterns, (iii) identifying disease causes, (iv) assessing impacts of disease and (v) designing disease control strategies – in populations. The presentation emphasized the need to understand why reporting is important, what is being reported, what system is suitable for which purpose, what type of information is needed, how such information may be collected, and why farmers should report a disease. The presentation was concluded with an important note that information management is the missing link between surveillance and reporting. WORKSHOP HIGHLIGHTS – WORKING GROUP SESSION 14. Following each of the technical presentation, the organizers/resource experts facilitated discussions and interactions between the participants and resource persons and also amongst national delegates. A very informal workshop structure was adopted to encourage active participation of national delegates. In addition, delegates from all participating
4
countries were provided an opportunity to provide a national perspective on the plenary paper themes. This helped to gain a better understanding of the status of aquatic animal biosecurity in some of the countries and also to appreciate the limitations in terms of information, resources, and technical capacity. 15. The participants were then divided into three groups (see Appendix 6) to deliberate on the information and capacity building requirements of the three working group themes, namely: (a) Risk analysis, (b) Diagnostics, health certification and quarantine; and (c) Epidemiological surveillance and reporting. Annex 7 (Information and capacity building requirements for maintaining aquatic animal biosecurity) presents the outcomes of the working group deliberations divided into three sections according the working group themes. 16. The Working Group on Risk Analysis discussed the international framework and existing guidelines for conducting an import risk analysis or IRA. These include the World Trade Organization’s Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (or SPS Agreement) and existing guidelines such as the OIE Code and Diagnostic Manual of the World Animal Health Organization (formerly Office international des épizooties [OIE]), the FAO/NACA Asia regional technical guidelines, the APEC/NACA/Thailand DoF/FAO import risk analysis manual. The working group then considered the four major steps in the risk analysis process (i.e. hazard identification; risk assessment covering release, exposure and consequence assessment; risk management; and risk communication) in their deliberation. The working group recognized that the main sources of information that will be used to support an IRA include: importer, competent authority (importer and exporter), scientific institutes/organizations, electronic information, owner/source of commodity and the scientific literature. The main capacity building requirement identified is training on all aspects of risk analysis. 17. The Working Group on Diagnostics, Certification and Quarantine considered the three levels of diagnosis (i.e. Levels I, II and III) and the OIE aquatic animal disease diagnostic standards. With respect to quarantine, the working group considered pre-border, border and post-border checklist of information requirements. One of the major areas identified for capacity building is on improving communication among all sectoral players. 18. The Working Group on Epidemiological Surveillance and Reporting used as an example a case on developing a surveillance and reporting system for an emerging shrimp viral disease, infectious myonecrosis virus or IMNV and with an assumption that there is not much available information about the disease. The group listed a number of questions which need to be answered using three levels, i.e. farm level, provincial level and national level in their deliberation. Capacity building at various levels was deemed essential, i.e. at farm level to consider organization of farmers into clubs, strengthening of farmer organizations and technical capacities of field/extension workers; at the provincial level, encouraging networks of laboratories and technical personnel; at the national level, building awareness and capacity at levels of policy-makers and encouraging involvement in international activities 19. In conclusion of the working group exercise, the participants recognized that the workshop contributed towards increased awareness and capacity building of national delegates on aquatic animal biosecurity, WTO’s SPS Agreement, risk analysis, diagnostics, certification, quarantine, epidemiology, surveillance and disease reporting. In addition, this regional interaction created an additional informal network of national delegates from over 12 countries in the Asia-Pacific region, with interest in aquatic animal health, paving the way for
5
future collaborative work in the region. A CD-Rom containing risk analysis resource materials (e.g. manual on risk analysis, risk analysis case studies, etc.), workshop documentation (information papers, powerpoint presentations) and workshop photos, was distributed to all participants. CLOSING OF THE WORKSHOP 20. The workshop organizers thanked all the national delegates for their participation and excellent contributions to the workshop. The support and cooperation extended by the local hosts were acknowledged. On behalf of the local hosts, J. Cortez, thanked the organizers and participants from different the countries and formally closed the workshop.
7
APPENDIX 1 Workshop prospectus
Background Biosecurity: definition and objectives A strategic and integrated approach that encompasses both policy and regulatory frameworks, biosecurity is aimed at analyzing and managing the risks of the sectors of food safety, animal (including aquatic animal) life and health, and plant life and health, including associated environmental risks (http://www.fao.org/biosecurity/). Food production in relation to food safety, the introduction of plant pests, animal pests and diseases and zoonoses, the introduction and release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their products and the introduction and safe management of invasive alien species – these sectors are inextricably linked and a biosecurity perspective recognizes the benefits of cross-sectoral coordination. The driving forces in the heightened interest in biosecurity include the following:
• globalization of trade in food and agricultural products and thus of the world economy coupled with
• great advancement in communications, transportation and technology; • expanding populations; • changing consumer patterns; • rising awareness of sanitary and phytosanitary issues; • greater attention to biodiversity and the environment; and • increasing consciousness on the impacts of agriculture on biodiversity and the
environment. The traditional focus of biosecurity on protection of primary production and trade has now expanded to cover human health and indigenous environments partly due to the increased awareness of biological diversity and environmental issues The general objective of biosecurity is to identify, assess and respond appropriately to all pests and diseases posing a significant threat to agriculture, forestry, horticulture, fisheries and aquaculture, native biodiversity and human health using appropriate responses such as eradication, containment and ongoing control. Biosecurity involves the management of biological risks in a comprehensive manner to achieve food safety, to protect animal and plant life and health and to preserve the environment while contributing to its sustainable use. The concept of biosecurity facilitates a food chain approach to food safety and quality by strengthening control of the primary production aspects through improved animal and plant health. Main regulatory instrument The main regulatory instrument most relevant to biosecurity is the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement). Under the SPS Agreement, the international standards for food safety, animal and plant health are governed by the following:
• Codex Alimentarius Commission (FAO/WHO) for food safety;
8
• World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) for animal (including aquatic animal) life and health; and
• International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) for plant life and health.
Another relevant instrument is the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which contains guidelines for the management of invasive alien species, as well as its supplementary agreement, the Cartagena Protocol, which addresses biosafety, i.e. protecting the environment and human health from the effects of modern biotechnology. Other treaties or international instruments that deal with aspects of biosecurity from perspectives other than human health include the following:
• Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (1971) provides the framework for the conservation of wetlands and their resources;
• International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, which came into force in 2004, seeks to ensure the conservation and sustainable management of plant genetic resources; and
• FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (1995) sets out principles and standards for the effective conservation, management and development of living aquatic resources. These agreements, organizations and programmes, among others, form part of the international framework for biosecurity.
Centered around harmonization through international standards, science-based risk assessments and minimization of interference with international trade, the WTO’s SPS Agreement provides for a common approach to biosecurity issues concerning the different sectors involved in agricultural trade. The SPS Agreement is complemented by the approach of the Cartagena Protocol, which is based on the precautionary principle. The FAO/WHO1 Codex Alimentarius and the IPPC are, together with the OIE, recognized in the SPS Agreement as the standard-setting organizations for food safety, plant and animal life and health, respectively. The IPPC standards are relevant to the management of invasive alien species under the CBD regime as well as the environmental impact of living modified organisms under the Cartagena Protocol. The most important unifying concept across each of the relevant biosecurity sectors is the coordination of risk analysis and risk management. Although risk analysis procedures may differ depending on the hazards addressed, the general principles for risk analysis in food and agriculture are the same. The basis for the establishment of sanitary and phytosanitary measures is risk analysis which makes use of the same concepts among the various sectors. Therefore the goal of biosecurity is to prevent the spread of exotic pests and pathogens through the effective implementation of risk analysis so that unnecessary barriers to trade are avoided. Aquatic animal biosecurity: risks from transboundary aquatic animal diseases Although aquaculture has surpassed capture fisheries and terrestrial farmed meat production sectors in terms of average annual growth rate, like other farming sectors, its development is threatened by a number of risks and hazards. Aquaculture faces similar risks to those of the agriculture sector. However, as aquaculture is very diverse in terms of species, culture
1 WHO – World Health Organization
9
environments, production-systems, intensity of practice and type of management, the span of hazards and perceived risks are much greater. One of the most significant risks in aquaculture is disease. Taking into consideration the global population growth, it is clear that the future demand for aquatic products, even if at the current level of per capita consumption, cannot be supplied by capture fisheries and therefore, the bulk will have to come from aquaculture. This goal will face considerable challenges, including management of aquatic animal health, which is already one of the major constraints to the development and expansion of the sector. Unless disease risks are managed and reduced, sustainable aquaculture development will be difficult to achieve, making the people who depend on it for livelihood vulnerable. Transboundary aquatic animal diseases such as white spot disease (WSD) of shrimp, koi herpes virus (KHV) of koi and common carps, and multinucleate sphere X (MSX, haplosporidiosis) disease of edible oysters are three of the most serious pathogens affecting the aquaculture sector. Increased globalization of trade in live aquatic animals and their products; the intensification of aquaculture through the translocation of broodstock, postlarvae, fry and fingerlings; the introduction of new species for aquaculture and fisheries enhancement, the development and expansion of the ornamental fish trade, the misunderstanding and misuse of specific pathogen free (SPF) stocks (e.g. shrimps); unanticipated negative interactions between cultured and wild fish populations; the enhancement of marine and coastal areas through stocking aquatic animals raised in hatcheries, climate change, and all other human mediated movements of aquaculture commodities are some of the factors contributing to the current disease situation in aquaculture. Infectious diseases are constraining the development and sustainability of the aquaculture sector through direct production losses and increased operating costs and indirectly, through restrictions on trade and impacts on biodiversity. Inadequate or poorly implemented biosecurity measures have lead to significant losses due to aquatic animal diseases in many countries around the world. In 2004, FAO sponsored a regional workshop on Emergency Preparedness and Response to Aquatic Animal Diseases in Asia that reviewed regional experiences in responding to disease emergencies as basis for identifying actions to reduce impacts of disease epizootics, as well as strengthening preparedness and response to future disease emergencies. This workshop produced FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 486 on Preparedness and response to aquatic animal health emergencies in Asia: guidelines – which provides technical guidance for establishing biosecurity arrangements that will prevent the incursions of exotic pathogens and pests. One of the major requirements to implement an effective contingency plan for disease emergencies is the availability of technical plans (e.g. control centres management manual, enterprise manual, destruction manual, disposal manual, disease strategy manual). Risk analysis, information systems, quarantine, surveillance, emergency preparedness and contingency planning are some of the important elements of FAO’s Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries: Health Management for Responsible Movement of Live Aquatic Animals. Aquatic animal health/aquatic systems biosecurity Governments must implement the biosecurity obligations they have entered into under international agreements. Recent developments in biosecurity in food and agriculture call for integration of and cooperation across sectors among the different international institutions that
10
are responsible for the implementation of these international instruments. In order to implement effective biosecurity at the national level, countries require strong global and regional coordination and interaction to identify and manage emerging risks. Information is a key element in any biosecurity programme and will be required to support national actions such as:
• surveillance programmes and diagnostic services to detect and identify the arrival and spread of pests and diseases;
• timely assessment of the threats from new or expanding species; • rapid response to eradicate new pests and diseases before they establish and spread; • standardization of science-based identification of all risk pathways and high-risk
organisms, and implementation of pre-border, border and post-border measures to prevent pests and diseases from entering the country; and
• national frameworks to regulate, manage and control biosecurity . In view of the above trends, the Aquaculture Management and Conservation Service (FIMA) of the FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department is currently implementing a project on Aquatic Animal Health/Aquatic Systems Biosecurity under the FNOP/INT/102/NOR PCA Norway 2005-2006 OBJ.D1.1 – Support to National Biosecurity Initiatives and Policies Including Countries Facing High Risks of Outbreaks of Diseases and Pests. The overall expected outcome of the Biosecurity Project is to strengthen national capacities to meet domestic and international marketing requirements, reduce risks of and increase preparedness for food system shocks (on producers and consumers) associated with disease and related outbreaks that increase the risk of market collapse. Indicators of the outcome may include the following: (a) tools and advice to assist countries in the assessment and evaluation of international policies and instruments relevant to food and fish safety, and animal and plant health; (b) field and policy activities to strengthen national capacities to promote pesticide risk reduction, fish safety and fish health systems including aquaculture; domestic animal health systems; (c) policy studies based on holistic approach related to risks of market collapse following outbreaks through analysis of production, plant, animal, fish and human health and legal systems, and advice using a holistic approach on Action Strategic Programmes to reduce risks of market collapse. Objective: The specific objective of the Aquatic Animal Biosecurity Project is to assist FAO member governments in implementing some elements (risk analysis, information systems, quarantine, surveillance and emergency preparedness and contingency planning) of FAO’s Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries: Health management for the responsible movement of live aquatic organisms through provision of essential information requirements and capacity and awareness building activities specifically through:
• preparation of an Aquatic Animal Quarantine Manual – its use within the frameworks of the risk analysis approach and aquatic animal biosecurity;
• updating of the FAO Diagnostic Guide to Aquatic Animal Diseases; • updating of FAO’s web-based Aquatic Animal Pathogen and Quarantine Information
System or AAPQIS; and • implementation of regional training/workshops on Information Requirements for
Maintaining Aquatic Animal Biosecurity and Phase III of the Molluscan Health Management Training/Workshop.
11
FAO Workshop on Information Requirements for Aquatic Animal Biosecurity, 15−17 February 2006, Park Lane Hotel, Cebu City, Philippines Purpose: The objective of the workshop is to increase awarenesss and build capacity on general principles of biosecurity and to deliberate on key information and capacity building required for maintaining aquatic animal biosecurity focusing on aspects of risk analysis; diagnostics, health certification and quarantine; and epidemiological surveillance and reporting. Participation: Invited participants include representatives from Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries (Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Viet Nam), South Asian countries (Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka), China, and representatives from organizing and partner organizations (FAO, Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia and the Pacific [NACA], AusVet Animal Health Services). The workshop is hosted by the Philippine Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR). It is expected that the total number of participants will be 50 including local participants from BFAR Process: Plenary presentations on biosecurity and risk analysis will be followed by facilitated working group discussions to tackle information and capacity building requirements on the following: (a) risk analysis, (b) diagnostics, health certification and quarantine; and (c) epidemiological surveillance and reporting. Product: Increased awareness and capacity on aquatic animal biosecurity; workshop report; networking.
12
APPENDIX 2 Opening remarks by Mr Kazuyuki Tsurumi, FAO Representative
to the Republic of the Philippines Distinguished Delegates and Observers Representatives of Regional Fisheries Institutions Ladies and Gentlemen
It is with immense pleasure that I welcome you, on behalf of FAO, to this regional “Workshop on Information Requirements for Maintaining Aquatic Animal Biosecurity”, here in Cebu City.
FAO is grateful to the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources of the Philippine Department of Agriculture for hosting this workshop, and to the collaborating organizing and partner institutions, NACA and AusVet. I am pleased to welcome the participants from 16 countries in the region, who have taken the time to participate in this workshop, together with other institutions with areas of competence covering animal health, fisheries and biosecurity. I am convinced that with such diversity, we can expect a fruitful and meaningful dialogue over the next several days, which will lead to the achievement of our objectives. During the course of this workshop, we will deliberate on key information and capacity building required for maintaining aquatic animal biosecurity focusing on aspects of risk analysis; diagnostics, health certification and quarantine; and epidemiological surveillance and reporting. The workshop is a step in the process of not only increasing awareness of the general principles of biosecurity, but also of determining capacity building requirements for maintaining aquatic animal biosecurity. The achievement of these objectives I believe, are crucial because of their direct relevance to food safety, the conservation of the environment including biodiversity, and sustainability of agriculture, forestry and fisheries. Ladies and Gentlemen Food quality and safety is a priority issue for all governments - it is an integral part of the commitments made by FAO Member Countries, to improved food security following on from the 1996 World Food Summit. It is also an issue that presents current problems to all countries around the world.
Food and waterborne diarrhoeal diseases are leading causes of illness and death in less developed countries, killing approximately 1.8 million people annually, most of whom are children. Recent trends in global food production, processing, distribution and preparation are creating an increasing demand for food safety research in order to ensure a safer global food supply. FAO’s work in this area, addresses food safety issues along the entire food production chain – from production to consumption – using new methods of risk analysis. These methods provide efficient, science-based tools to improve food safety, thereby benefiting both public health and economic development.
13
Historically, most fisheries and aquaculture practices around the world have been pursued with significant social, economic and nutritional benefits, and with minimal environmental costs. However, the sector has also been the focus of recent public debate related to negative environmental and social impacts.
Typically, these impacts often arise from weak regulatory frameworks and the too rapid development associated with the great commercial potential of some high value species. It is our responsibility to take collective measures to improve our understanding of the real impacts and causes in order to make the aquaculture sector more environmentally sustainable and socially acceptable.
As the Philippines hosts this Workshop on Information Requirements for Maintaining Aquatic Animal Biosecurity, I hope that this event will open a window of opportunity to establish, rationalise and optimise national capacities, to make optimal use of regional resources and capacities, and to cooperate in the exchange of relevant official information among states. I also hope that over the next several days you have the opportunity to gain insights into the rich diversity of issues that relate to aquatic animal biosecurity and with these few words, it is now my pleasure to declare this workshop open and to wish you success in your discussions. I thank you and good morning.
14
APPENDIX 3
Workshop agenda
Date and time Activities 14 February, Wednesday Arrival of participants 15 February, Thursday 10.00−10.30 Opening Remarks from BFAR and FAO
BFAR Regional VII Chief Quarantine Officer Mr Jeffrey Cortez NACA Aquatic Animal Health Specialist Dr CV Mohan FAO Consultant Dr J.R. Arthur FAO Representative Dr Kazuyuki Tsurumi
10.30−11.00 Coffee break Introduction to Workshop Background and Objectives Dr Melba Reantaso (FAO)
11.00−12.00
Introduction of Participants Dr C.V. Mohan (NACA) and Dr Juan Albaladejo (BFAR)
12.00−13.30 Lunch break 13.30−14.30 Presentation on General Principles of Biosecurity
Dr Melba Reantaso (FAO) 14.30−15.15 Presentation on General Principles of Diagnostics, Health Certification
and Quarantine Dr C.V. Mohan (NACA)
15.15−15.45 Coffee break 15.45−16.30 Presentation on General Principles of Risk Analysis
Dr J.R. Arthur (FAO) 16.30−17.00 General Discussion and Workshop Guidelines
Dr C.V. Mohan (NACA) 16 February, Friday 08.30−09.30 Presentation on General Principles on Epidemiological Surveillance and
Reporting Dr. Jeney Hutchison (AusVet)
09.30−10.30 Working Group Breakout 10.30−11.00 Coffee break 11.00−12.30 Continue Working Group Breakout 12.30−14.00 Lunch break 14.00−18.00 Working Group Breakout 19.00 Dinner hosted by BFAR 17 February, Saturday 08.30−10.00 Preparation of Working Group Output 10.00−10.30 Coffee break 10.30−11.15 Working Group 1 Presentation and 10-min discussion 11.15−12.00 Working Group 2 Presentation and 10-min discussion 12.00−12.45 Working Group 3 Presentation and 10-min discussion 12.45−15.00 Lunch break 15.00−16.00 Presentation of Final Outcome and Recommendations
Dr Melba Reantaso and Dr C.V. Mohan 16.00−17.00 Closing Ceremony Dinner hosted by FAO/NACA 18 February, Sunday Departure of participants
15
APPENDIX 4 List of participants
BANGLADESH Yahia Mahmud Principal Scientific Officer Bangladesh Fisheries Research Institute Mymensingh 2201, Bangladesh Tel.: (880-91) 62629 880-1712566134) Fax: (880-91) 62629; 55259 E-mail: [email protected] BRUNEI DARUSSALAM Abdul Rajid Metali Department of Fisheries Ministry of Industry and Primary Resources Brunei Darussalam Tel.: (673) 2771159 (673) 238 3067 Fax: (673) 238 2069 E-mail: [email protected] Haji Ajamain Haji Sawal Department of Fisheries Ministry of Industry and Primary Resources Brunei Darussalam Tel.: (673) 277 2780 (673) 238 3067 Fax: (673) 238 2069 E-mail: [email protected] CAMBODIA Sem Viryak Department of Fisheries 86 Norodom Blvd. Phnom Penh, Cambodia Tel.: (855) 11 948 088 Fax: (855) 23 210 154 E-mail: [email protected]
Nouv Buntha Department of Fisheries 186 Norodom Blvd Phnom Penh, Cambodia Tel.: (855) 12 887 786 Fax: (855) 23 210 154 E-mail: [email protected] CHINA Zhu Zewen National Fisheries Technical Extension Center No. 18 Maizidian Street, Beijing China 100026 Tel.: (86-10) 6419 5072 Fax: (86-10) 6419 5073 E-mail: [email protected] INDIA P.K. Sahoo Central Institute of Freshwater Aquaculture Kausalyaganga, Bhubaneswar 751 002 India Tel.: (91-674) 246 5421 Fax: (91-674) 246 5407 E-mail: [email protected] T Raja Swaminathan National Bureau of Fish Genetic Resources Canal Ring Road, PO Dilkusha Lucknow, 226002, India Tel.: (91-522) 244 2440 Fax: (91-522) 244 2403 E-mail: [email protected]
16
INDONESIA Nila Widodari Jl Harsono Rm No. 3, Pasar Minggu Jakarta, Indonesia Tel.: +966-(0)1-4016666 Mob.: +966-(0)502128573 Fax: +966-(0)1-4031635 E-mail: [email protected] MALAYSIA Faazaz binti Abdul Latiff Fisheries Research Institute 11960 Batu Maung Penang, Malaysia Tel.: (60-4) 626 3925/926 Fax: (60-4) 626 2210 E-mail: [email protected] Fauzidah bte Othman Department of Fisheries Level 1-7, Block 4G2, Wisma Tani Ministry of Agriculture and Agrobase Industries Putra Jaya, Malaysia Tel.: (60-3) 8870 4614 Fax: (60-3) 8889 1130 E-mail: [email protected] Arthur Besther Sujang Department of Fisheries Malaysia Level 1-7, Wisma Tani, Menara 2, Prescint 4, Federal Government Administrative Centre, 62628 Putrajaya, Malaysia Tel.: (60-3) 8870 4000 ext 4364 Fax: (60-3) 8889 1130 E-mail: [email protected] MYANMAR U Saw Lah Pah Wah Department of Fisheries Sin-Minn Road, Ahlone Township Yangon, Myanmar Tel.: (95-01) 541 294 (office) Fax: (95-01) 228 258 (residence) E-mail: [email protected]
Daw Mar Lar Win Department of Fisheries Sin-Minn Road, Ahlone Township Yangon, Myanmar Tel.: (95-01) 541 294 Fax: (95-01) 228 258 E-mail: [email protected] NEPAL Shankar Prasad Dahal Central Fisheries Laboratory Balaju, Kathmandu Nepal Tel.: (977-1) 435 0609 (977-1) 436 0550 Fax: (977-1) 435 0833 E-mail: [email protected] PHILIPPINES Juan D. Albaladejo Fish Health Section Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources 860 Quezon Avenue, Quezon City 1103 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel.: (63-2) 3722 5055 Fax: (63-2) 372 5055 E-mail: [email protected] Edwyn B. Alesna Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources PCA Bldg, Elliptical Road Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines Tel.: (63-2) 426 6532 Fax: (63-2) 426 6532 E-mail: [email protected] Ma. Abegail A. Albaladejo Fish Health Section Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources 860 Quezon Avenue, Quezon City 1103 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel.: (63-2) 372 5055 Fax: (63-2) 372 5055 E-mail: [email protected]
17
Felipe I. Santamaria Fisheries Quarantine Service Ninoy Aquino International Airport Pasay City, Philippines Tel.: (63-2) 832 2982 (63-917) 206 7657 Fax: (63-2) 8771 3053 Mario Trio Fisheries Quarantine Service Ninoy Aquino International Airport Pasay City, Philippines Tel.: (63-2) 832 2982 (63-917) 206 7657 Fax: (63-2) 8771 3053 E-mail: [email protected] Jeffrey Cortez BFAR RFO VII (Quarantine) Arellano Blvd, Cebu City, Philippines Tel.: (63-32) 253 0661 Fax: (63-32) 253 0661 E-mail: [email protected] Nelson B. Bien Fisheries Quarantine and Regional Fish Inspector BFAR/RFO III (Quarantine) Philippines Tel.: (63-45) 963 5515 Fax: (63-45) 961 2784 E-mail: [email protected] Carmencita S. Agustin BFAR RFO III San Agustin, San Fernando, Pampanga Philippines Tel.: (63-45) 963 5515 Fax: (63-45) 961 2784 E-mail: bfar_3pltddsl.net Mercedita A. Bantaya Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources 860 Quezon Avenue, Quezon City 1103 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel.: (63-2) 372 5055 Fax: (63-2) 372 5055 E-mail: [email protected] [email protected]
Ligaya P. Cabrera BFAR 4A 2nd Floor, ICC Bldg NIA Compound EDSA, Quezon City, Philippines Regional Fishery Laboratory – BFAR 4A South Harbor, Port, Metro Manila, Philippines Carolina Lopez BFAR RFO VII/Philippines Port Area, Arellano Blvd Cebu City 6000, Philippines Tel.: (63-32) 256 2772 (63-32) 253 0661 Fax: (63-32) 256 2773 E-mail: [email protected] Tomas Cuyos BFAR RFO VII/Philippines Port Area, Arellano Blvd Cebu City 6000, Philippines Tel.: (63-32) 256 2772/253 0661 Fax: (63-32) 256 2773/256 2776 E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] Madeleine Navarce Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources R. Magsaysay Avenue Davao City, Philippines Tel.: (63-82) 224 5085 (63-919) 456 0360 Fax: (63-82) 224 5085 E-mail: [email protected] THAILAND Temdoung Somsiri Inland Aquatic Animal Health Research Institute Department of Fisheries Jatujak, Bangkok 10900, Thailand Tel.: (66-2) 579 4122 Fax: (66-2) 561 3993 E-mail: [email protected]
18
Puttharat Baoprasertkul Department of Fisheries 39 Moo 1, Tumbon Klong 5 Pathum Thani 12120, Thailand Tel.: (66-2) 577 5059 to 60 Fax: (66-2) 577 5062 E-mail: [email protected] AUSVET ANIMAL HEALTH SERVICES Jenny Hutchison 124 Perry Drive Australia Tel.: (61-2) 6287 4483 Fax: (61-2) 6287 4468 E-mail: [email protected] NETWORK OF AQUACULTURE CENTRES IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC (NACA) CV Mohan Aquatic Animal Health Specialist Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific Suraswadi Bldg, Department of Fisheries Kasetsart University Compound Ladyao, Jatujak, Bangkok 10900, Thailand Tel.: (66-2) 561 1728 ext 106 Fax: (66-2) 561 1727 E-mail: [email protected] Wiratee Udomlarp Administrative & Finance Officer Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific Suraswadi Bldg, Department of Fisheries Kasetsart University Compound Ladyao, Jatujak, Bangkok 10900, Thailand Tel.: (66-2) 561 1728 ext 101 Fax: (66-2) 561 1727 E-mail: [email protected]
SOUTHEAST ASIAN FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CENTER (SEAFDEC) AQUACULTURE DEPARTMENT Celia L. Pitogo Fish Health Section SEAFDEC Aquaculture Department Tigbauan 5021, Iloilo, Philippines Tel.: (63-33) 336 2965 Fax: (63-33) 335 1008 E-mail: [email protected] FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (FAO) James Richard Arthur FAO Consultant PO Box 1216 Barriere, British Colombia Canada V0E 1E0 Tel.: +1-250-6720221 E-mail: [email protected] Melba B. Reantaso Fishery Resources Officer (Aquaculture) Aquaculture Management and Conservation Service (FIMA) Fisheries and Aquaculture Department Viale delle Terme di Caracalla 00153 Rome, Italy Tel.: +39-0657054843 Fax: +39-0657053020 E-mail: [email protected] Kazuyuki Tsurumi FAO Representative in the Philippines PO Box 7285 DAPO Domestic Airport Road Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines E-mail: [email protected]
19
APPENDIX 5 List of presentations
M.B. Reantaso: Introduction to workshop background and objectives M.B. Reantaso: General principles of biosecurity C.V. Mohan: General principles of diagnostics, health certification and quarantine J.R. Arthur: General principles of risk analysis J. Hutchinson: General principles on epidemiological surveillance and reporting C.V. Mohan: Working group guidelines
20
APPENDIX 6 Working groups
Working Group 1: Risk analysis Chairperson: J. Somga Rapporteur: M. Trio Presentor: S. Viryak Members: A. Albaladejo, M. Bantaya, T. Cuyos, A.R. Metali, F.A. Latiff, Daw Mar Lar, P. Baopresertkul Resource person: M.B. Reantaso Working Group 2: Diagnostics, health certification and quarantine Chairperson: F. Othman Rapporteur: T. Raja Swaminathan Presentor: J.D. Albaladejo Members: E. Alesna, P. Santamaria, U Saw Lah Pah Wah, N. Brien, Haji Ajamain Haji Sawal, J. Cortes, T. Somsiri Resource person: J.R. Arthur Working Group 3: Surveillance and reporting Chairperson: Z. Zeman Rapporteur: A.B. Sujang Presentor: P. Sahoo Members: C. Lopez, L. Cabrera, C. Agustin, M. Navarse, N. Buntha, S. Dahal, N. Widodari Resource persons: C.V. Mohan, C. Lavilla-Pitogo
21
APP
EN
DIX
7
Info
rmat
ion
and
capa
city
bui
ldin
g re
quir
emen
ts fo
r m
aint
aini
ng a
quat
ic a
nim
al b
iose
curi
ty
1. R
isk
anal
ysis
In
form
atio
n re
quire
men
ts
Cap
acity
requ
irem
ents
H
azar
d id
entif
icat
ion
mod
e of
tran
smis
sion
(bio
logi
cal p
athw
ay, v
ertic
al/h
oriz
onta
l) In
cide
nce
outb
reak
dat
a O
IE a
quat
ic a
nim
al d
isea
se re
port
, FA
O/N
AC
A Q
AA
D,
AA
PQIS
, sci
entif
ic li
tera
ture
, gov
ernm
ent r
epor
ts
expe
rt o
pini
on o
n vi
rule
nce
and
infe
ctiv
ity
host
fact
ors/
susc
eptib
le s
peci
es
crite
ria
for h
azar
d id
entif
icat
ion
pa
thog
en d
escr
iptio
n (g
row
th/s
urvi
val,
incu
batio
n pe
riod
, ot
her e
nvir
onm
enta
l fac
tors
requ
irem
ents
) he
alth
stat
us o
f the
com
mod
ity
eval
uatio
n of
the
com
pete
nt a
utho
rity
diag
nost
ic c
apab
ility
tr
aini
ng i
n m
icro
biol
ogy,
epi
dem
iolo
gy,
path
olog
y, p
aras
itolo
gy,
viro
logy
, ris
k as
sess
men
t la
bora
tory
faci
lity
and
equi
pmen
t co
nsul
tanc
y
acce
ss to
sci
entif
ic li
tera
ture
/ref
eren
ces
field
inve
stig
atio
n/su
rvey
fu
nd s
ourc
ing
Risk
ass
essm
ent
(Rel
ease
and
Exp
osur
e A
sses
smen
t)
path
way
s (bi
olog
ical
and
phy
sica
l)
mod
e of
tran
smis
sion
(bio
logi
cal p
athw
ay, v
ertic
al/h
oriz
onta
l) ho
st fa
ctor
s/su
scep
tible
spe
cies
na
tive
susc
eptib
le s
peci
es
dest
inat
ion
(in e
xpor
ting
coun
try)
trai
ning
on
risk
ana
lysi
s
Risk
ass
essm
ent
(con
sequ
ence
as
sess
men
t)
sect
or o
verv
iew
(ind
ustr
y)
soci
o-ec
onom
ics l
oss
af
fect
ed
sect
ors a
nd s
peci
es
ecol
ogic
al
dis
plac
emen
t co
st o
f con
tain
men
t con
trol
and
er
adic
atio
n m
easu
res
trai
ning
on
the
colle
ctio
n an
d ev
alua
tion
of s
ocio
-eco
nom
ic d
ata
on
loss
and
oth
er im
pact
s to
the
sect
or a
nd o
ther
rele
vant
sec
tors
Risk
man
agem
ent
st
rate
gies
or p
roce
dure
s fo
r c
onta
inm
ent/
cont
rol/
erad
icat
ion
anal
ysis
of
di
seas
e su
rvei
llanc
e (a
ctiv
e &
pa
ssiv
e)
an
d m
onito
ring
dat
a
resu
lts o
f la
bora
tory
test
s di
seas
e re
port
s
mov
emen
t dat
a (d
omes
tic a
nd in
tern
atio
nal)
upda
ted
trai
ning
on
dise
ase
repo
rtin
g, h
ighe
r de
tect
ion
tec
hniq
ues
and
late
st re
gula
tion
tr
aini
ng in
all
aspe
cts o
f ris
k an
alys
is
22
dise
ase
prev
entio
n (e
.g. v
acci
natio
n)
affe
cted
and
una
ffect
ed a
rea
(dis
ease
-free
are
a)
oper
atio
nal
proc
edur
es
for
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
a
loca
l co
ntin
genc
y pl
an
quar
antin
e m
anag
emen
t m
easu
res
(pre
, bo
rder
, po
st)
diag
nost
ics
(tech
nica
l com
pete
nce
of
man
pow
er, f
acili
ties
and
tech
niqu
es)
aqua
cultu
re in
sura
nce
assi
stan
ce
over
-all
valu
e o
f the
sec
tor
cost
s of
m
anag
emen
t m
easu
res
(e
.g.
prev
entio
n st
rate
gy,
erad
icat
ion)
hu
man
res
ourc
es a
nd c
apac
ity w
ithin
the
con
text
of
over
-all
impl
emen
tatio
n of
the
risk
man
agem
ent m
easu
res
fu
ndin
g so
urce
s and
ava
ilabi
lity
Risk
com
mun
icat
ion
W
hat?
ri
sk,
risk
m
anag
emen
t, le
gisl
atio
n an
d en
forc
emen
t, be
nefit
s, co
ntin
genc
y pl
an, p
repa
redn
ess
Who
? St
akeh
olde
rs: f
arm
ers,
trad
ers
and
feed
mill
ers,
net
wor
k of
fish
erie
s of
ficer
s, In
tern
atio
nal (
OIE
), R
egio
nal (
NA
CA
) an
d na
tiona
l age
ncie
s H
ow?
publ
ic
cons
ulta
tions
, m
eetin
g,
se
min
ars,
trai
ning
, pu
blic
atio
ns,
mas
s m
edia
, web
site
W
hen?
Fre
quen
cy
A ri
sk c
omm
unic
atio
n st
rate
gy is
requ
ired
trai
ning
on
all a
spec
ts o
f ris
k an
alys
is
23
2. D
iagn
ostic
s,
heal
th c
ertif
icat
ion
and
quar
antin
e
Info
rmat
ion
requ
irem
ents
C
apac
ity b
uild
ing
requ
irem
ents
Dia
gnos
tics
diag
nost
ic s
uppo
rtin
g in
form
atio
n (i.
e. Q
AA
D,
AA
PQIS
, OIE
) •
case
his
tory
•
clin
ical
sign
s •
met
hod
of s
ampl
ing
(i.e
. OIE
Sta
ndar
ds)
• la
bora
tory
exa
min
atio
n (
Leve
l I, I
I, an
d III
) •
dia
gnos
is
• d
isea
se re
port
ing
qual
ified
per
sonn
el
adeq
uate
labo
rato
ry i
nfra
stru
ctur
e
stan
dard
pro
toco
ls/t
echn
ique
s (ha
rmon
izat
ion
SOPs
) ASE
AN
bi
late
ral/
mul
tilat
eral
m
inim
um re
quir
emen
ts o
f qua
rant
ine
and
hold
ing
faci
lity
be
tter
com
mun
icat
ion
bet
wee
n co
mpe
tent
aut
hori
ties
(CA
s) (
i.e.
info
rmat
ion
tech
nolo
gy o
r IT
netw
orki
ng)
in
form
atio
n co
mm
unic
atio
n fo
r con
cern
ed s
ecto
rs
Hea
lth c
ertif
icat
ion
host
com
mod
ity in
form
atio
n
purp
ose
of c
ertif
icat
ion
re
quir
emen
ts o
f im
port
ing
coun
trie
s
spec
ies
nu
mbe
r of a
nim
al p
er sp
ecie
s lif
e st
age
of a
quat
ic a
nim
al
loca
tion
of s
ourc
e (fa
rm/w
ild)
tr
ansp
orta
tion/
tran
sshi
pmen
t dat
a
port
of e
ntry
/exi
t di
seas
e in
form
atio
n (e
xpor
ting
and
impo
rtin
g co
untr
ies)
la
bora
tory
exa
min
atio
n
met
hod
of
diag
nosi
s
com
pete
nt a
utho
rity
com
plet
e ad
dres
s
date
of i
ssue
va
lidity
of h
ealth
cer
tific
ate
si
gnat
ure
of C
A w
ith o
ffici
al se
al o
r st
amp
good
com
mun
icat
ion
betw
een
CA
s, tr
ader
s (im
port
er/e
xpor
ter)
C
A
labo
rato
ries
-
trai
ning
/per
sonn
el
deve
lopm
ent
and
bette
r in
fras
truc
ture
IT
Com
mun
icat
ion
equi
pmen
ts (n
etw
orki
ng)
24
Qua
rant
ine
chec
klis
t of p
re-b
orde
r req
uire
men
ts:
stri
ngen
cy o
f qua
rant
ine
to b
e a
pplie
d (b
ased
on
risk
ana
lysi
s or
in
form
atio
n on
the
aqua
cultu
re s
peci
es
to b
e im
port
ed.
to c
onsi
der
the
follo
win
g:
natio
nal
list
of p
atho
gens
, r
isk
asse
ssm
ent,
risk
man
agem
ent,
risk
com
mun
icat
ion,
con
tinge
ncy
plan
, em
erge
ncy
resp
onse
, g
ood
heal
th m
anag
emen
t pra
ctic
es,
list
of r
egis
tere
d qu
aran
tine
pr
emis
es,
man
ual o
n qu
aran
tine
(i.e.
OIE
sta
ndar
ds)
chec
klis
t of b
orde
r re
quir
emen
ts:
docu
men
tary
exa
min
atio
n va
lidat
ion
of tr
avel
doc
umen
ts
air
way
bill
s im
port
per
mit
heal
th c
ertif
icat
ion
spec
ies d
ocum
enta
tion
vi
sual
exa
min
atio
n
num
ber o
f aqu
atic
ani
mal
s si
ze a
nd sp
ecie
s of
aqu
atic
ani
mal
sa
mpl
e co
llect
ion
lis
t of r
elev
ant d
iagn
ostic
s tes
ts
deci
sion
-mak
ing
actio
n (e
.g.
rele
ase
of
aqua
tic
anim
al
to
impo
rter
, re
turn
to
the
coun
try
of o
rigi
n/qu
aran
tine
faci
lity)
pr
oper
dis
posa
l pro
cedu
res
post
-bor
der r
equi
rem
ents
: po
st e
ntry
mon
itori
ng
heal
th in
spec
tion
di
spos
al o
f pro
duct
s he
alth
reco
rds
data
man
agem
ent
bette
r com
mun
icat
ion
betw
een
regu
lato
ry a
genc
ies
harm
oniz
ed g
uide
lines
for
qua
rant
ine
im
plem
enta
tion
of q
uara
ntin
e ru
les a
nd re
gula
tions
ad
equa
te tr
aini
ng
deve
lopm
ent o
f inf
rast
ruct
ure/
hold
ing
faci
lity
ad
equa
te le
gal
supp
ort
adeq
uate
logi
stic
sup
port
av
aila
bilit
y of
ade
quat
e d
ispo
sal f
acili
ty (e
.g. i
ncin
erat
ors/
land
fill)
25
3. S
urve
illan
ce a
nd
repo
rtin
g
Info
rmat
ion
requ
irem
ents
C
apac
ity b
uild
ing
requ
irem
ents
Farm
leve
l
sim
ple,
eas
y to
und
erst
and
dise
ase
info
rmat
ion
in lo
cal
lang
uage
s (e
.g.
broc
hure
s, d
isea
se c
ards
, po
ster
s co
ntai
ning
pi
ctur
es, w
ebsi
te a
ddre
sses
)
mod
el
form
at
(rec
ordi
ng
sh
eet)
fo
r re
cord
ing
dise
ase
info
rmat
ion
for
the
purp
ose
of s
urve
illan
ce a
nd r
epor
ting
(e.g
. w
hen,
whe
re, w
hat,
whi
ch, e
tc.)
lis
t of a
utho
rize
d pe
rson
s/or
gani
zatio
ns a
t vill
age,
dis
tric
t and
pr
ovin
cial
leve
ls to
be
cont
acte
d, a
s app
ropr
iate
pr
even
tion
and
cont
rol m
easu
res i
nclu
ding
ear
ly w
arni
ng
orga
niza
tion
of
farm
ers
into
cl
ubs/
asso
ciat
ions
/soc
ietie
s st
reng
then
ing
of
exis
ting
farm
ers
orga
niza
tions
(e
.g.
min
imum
la
bora
tory
faci
lity)
tr
aini
ngs/
awar
enes
s pr
ogra
mm
es o
n di
seas
e/pr
oble
m r
ecog
nitio
n,
reco
rdin
g, r
epor
ting,
ear
ly r
espo
nse
and
exis
ting
legi
slat
ion
in
supp
ort o
f rep
ortin
g
trai
ning
on
reco
rd k
eepi
ng a
nd c
omm
unic
atio
n
trai
ning
of
volu
ntar
y or
gov
ernm
ent
field
/ext
ensi
on o
ffice
rs i
n di
seas
e re
cogn
ition
, rec
ordi
ng a
nd re
port
ing
Pr
ovin
cial
leve
l
impo
rtan
t sp
ecie
s an
d di
seas
es a
t th
e pr
ovin
ce a
nd n
atio
nal
leve
l di
seas
e in
form
atio
n at
a h
ighe
r le
vel (
e.g.
cau
satio
n, d
iagn
osis
, et
c) in
clud
ing
dise
ases
of n
atio
nal
and
inte
rnat
iona
l con
cern
m
odel
reco
rdin
g sh
eet f
or u
se a
t pro
vinc
ial l
evel
for t
he p
urpo
se
of s
urve
ys a
nd s
urve
illan
ce
sta
ndar
d
diag
nost
ic
proc
edur
es
(e.g
. O
IE
Aqu
atic
C
ode)
m
etho
ds
for
valid
atio
n an
d co
nfir
mat
ion
of
dise
ase
repo
rt
exis
ting
or p
ropo
sed
zoni
ng p
rogr
amm
es in
the
coun
try
de
sign
ing
surv
eilla
nce
prog
ram
mes
an
d da
ta a
naly
sis
(e.g
. su
rvey
tool
box
, epi
dem
iolo
gy, s
tudy
des
ign)
co
mm
unic
atio
n st
rate
gy to
be
used
(e.g
. agr
eed
com
mun
icat
ion
pa
thw
ays (
from
farm
– p
rovi
nce
– na
tiona
l and
vic
e ve
rsa)
data
han
dlin
g, a
naly
sis
and
deve
lopi
ng o
utpu
ts (
e.g.
Epi
-info
)
cont
inge
ncy
plan
ning
/mea
sure
s
list
of o
ther
sou
rces
of
dis
ease
inf
orm
atio
n av
aila
ble
at t
he
prov
inci
al
leve
l (e
.g.
gove
rnm
ent
labo
rato
ries
, pr
ivat
e la
bora
tori
es,
hatc
heri
es,
inho
use
labo
rato
ry,
rese
arch
la
bora
tori
es, t
rade
rs,
etc.
)
wor
ksho
p/tr
aini
ng a
t hi
gher
lev
el t
o bu
ild t
echn
ical
cap
acity
(e.
g.
diag
nosi
s, di
seas
e co
ntro
l)
stre
ngth
enin
g of
labo
rato
ry fa
cilit
ies
for
dise
ases
of n
atio
nal c
once
rn
(e.g
. tra
de a
nd n
atio
nal e
cono
my)
es
tabl
ishi
ng la
bora
tory
net
wor
ks
trai
ning
to b
uild
cap
acity
in th
e co
nduc
t of t
arge
ted
surv
eilla
nce
26
Nat
iona
l lev
el
di
seas
es o
f
natio
nal a
nd in
tern
atio
nal
con
cern
(e.
g. O
IE li
st,
NA
CA
) in
tern
atio
nal
regu
latio
ns a
nd c
ompl
ianc
e re
quir
emen
ts
list
of
expe
rtis
e/la
bora
tori
es
avai
labl
e na
tiona
lly
and
in
tern
atio
nally
; co
mm
unic
atio
n st
rate
gy (i
nfor
mat
ion
on a
gree
d co
mm
unic
atio
n pa
thw
ay)
legi
slat
ion
and
regu
latio
n re
quir
emen
ts
(e.g
. ba
nned
spe
cies
);
valid
atio
n/co
nfir
mat
ion
lik
ely
impa
ct
of
dise
ases
on
th
e na
tiona
l ec
onom
y an
d in
tern
atio
nal t
rade
in
tern
atio
nal
repo
rtin
g an
d th
e na
tiona
l di
ssem
inat
ion
mec
hani
sms
es
tabl
ishi
ng a
nd m
aint
aini
ng n
atio
nal
aqua
tic a
nim
al d
isea
se
data
base
da
ta h
andl
ing
and
anal
ysis
(e.g
. Epi
-info
)
deve
lop
natio
nal d
isea
se tr
acki
ng sy
stem
m
etho
ds o
f dis
ease
loss
est
imat
ions
/pre
dict
ions
lis
t of
oth
er s
ourc
es
of d
isea
se i
nfor
mat
ion
avai
labl
e at
the
na
tiona
l lev
el (r
esea
rch
labo
rato
ries
, uni
vers
ities
, etc
.)
capa
city
an
d aw
aren
ess
build
ing
at
high
er
leve
l (e
.g.
polic
y w
orks
hop,
par
ticip
atio
n in
nat
iona
l an
d in
tern
atio
nal
mee
tings
, re
gist
erin
g fo
r onl
ine
cour
ses)
st
reng
then
ing
of
labo
rato
ry
fa
cilit
ies
for
dise
ases
of
na
tiona
l co
ncer
n;
netw
orki
ng o
f lab
orat
orie
s and
exp
erts
tr
aini
ng in
epi
dem
iolo
gy, s
tudy
des
ign,
dat
abas
e de
velo
pmen
t, an
d da
ta a
naly
sis
tr
aini
ng
on
deve
lopi
ng
and
man
agin
g na
tiona
l su
rvei
llanc
e pr
ogra
mm
es
trai
ning
on
deve
lopi
ng o
utpu
ts f
rom
nat
iona
l da
taba
se (
e.g.
OIE
re
port
s, Q
AA
D r
epor
ts,
natio
nal
dise
ase
cont
rol
stra
tegi
es,
etc)
tr
aini
ng fo
r onl
ine
repo
rtin
g
27
A t
otal
of
37 d
eleg
ates
fro
m t
he A
ssoc
iatio
n of
Sou
thea
st A
sian
Nat
ions
(A
SEA
N)
coun
tries
(B
rune
i D
arus
sala
m,
Cam
bodi
a, I
ndon
esia
, M
alay
sia,
Mya
nmar
, Ph
ilipp
ines
and
Tha
iland
), So
uth
Asia
n co
untri
es
(Ban
glad
esh,
Indi
a, N
epal
), an
d C
hina
, and
repr
esen
tativ
es fr
om o
rgan
izin
g an
d pa
rtner
org
aniz
atio
ns (B
FAR
, N
AC
A a
nd A
usV
et A
nim
al H
ealth
Ser
vice
s) p
artic
ipat
ed in
the
FAO
Wor
ksho
p on
Info
rmat
ion
Req
uire
men
ts
for
Mai
ntai
ning
Aqu
atic
Ani
mal
Bio
secu
rity
held
fro
m 1
5 to
17
Febr
uary
200
7 in
Ceb
u C
ity, P
hilip
pine
s. FA
O R
epre
sent
ativ
e K
azuy
uki
Tsur
umi,
BFA
R R
egio
n V
II,
Chi
ef Q
uara
ntin
e O
ffic
er J
effr
ey C
orte
z,
C.V
. Moh
an o
f NA
CA
,and
FA
O c
onsu
ltant
J. R
icha
rd A
rthur
gra
ced
the
open
ing
of th
e w
orks
hop.
APP
EN
DIX
8
Wor
ksho
p gr
oup
phot
o
The Workshop on Information Requirements for Maintaining Aquatic Animal Biosecurity was convened by FAO to increase awareness on general principles of biosecurity
and to build capacity and deliberate on key information required for maintaining aquatic animal biosecurity focusing on aspects of risk analysis, diagnostics, health certification and quarantine
and epidemiological surveillance and reporting. In order to implement effective biosecurity at the national level,
countries require strong global and regional coordination and interaction to identify and manage emerging risks. Information is a key element in any biosecurity programme and will
be required to support national actions on surveillance and diagnostics, risk assessments for new and expanding aquaculture species, rapid response to aquatic disease emergencies,
implementation of risk management measures and other national frameworks to manage biosecurity.
9 7 8 9 2 5 1 0 6 1 2 3 7
TR/M/I0458E/1/11.08/1600
ISBN 978-92-5-106123-7 ISSN 2070-6987