320 likes | 493 Views
Background of this study. Food safety and agricultural health are challenge for participation in international tradeSanitary and Phytosanitary measures (SPS) part of WTO agreementWorld Bank SPS Action Plans: Vietnam, Laos, Armenia, Moldova Peculiarities of transition economies (CIS): shared insti
E N D
1. Moldova: Managing Food Safety and Agricultural Health An Action Plan Kees van der Meer (SPS specialist; consultant)
Agriculture and Rural Development Department
The World Bank
Presented by video conference on January 31, 2008
2. Background of this study Food safety and agricultural health are challenge for participation in international trade
Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures (SPS) part of WTO agreement
World Bank SPS Action Plans: Vietnam, Laos, Armenia, Moldova
Peculiarities of transition economies (CIS): shared institutional legacy
3. Part 1Food Safety and Agricultural Health Management in CIS Countries Part 2
Specifics for Moldova
4. Common issues in CIS countries Recovery from post-independence shock
Further growth depends increasingly on product quality and diversification
Present GOST-based system constrains competitiveness
Incompatible with international standards (WTO SPS/TBT), not recognized by OECD countries
Costly for enterprises and consumers
Sometimes stifles innovation
Food safety, animal and plant health outcomes unsatisfactory
5. Diversity: Country groups
6. GOST vs. international standards
7. Why not simply replace GOST by international standards? Difficulties
High budgetary cost
Limited technical capacity, including language especially in area of risk-based management
Need for double system (Russia and other CIS still require GOST)
Vested interest in maintaining old system
Potential impact on large informal sector
8. Reforming food safety and agricultural health management: Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and CIS Similarity:
Common heritage of GOST standards and institutions
Difference in reform objective:
CIS:
compliance with WTO principles;
compatibility with market economy;
improved food safety and agricultural health;
improved competitiveness of agro-food industry
CEE:
full adoption of EU Acquis Communautaire
9. Reform cost Reform in food safety and ag health in EU accession programs
SAPARD investment agro-processing and marketing (2000-6) for CEE
Equivalent to 2.5% of agricultural GDP annually for 7 years
EU funds under PHARE for SPS-related activities (2000-2006)
Poland: 115million (0.4% of ag GDP/year)
Lithuania: 24million (0.8% of ag GDP/year)
Action plans for SPS capacity building in Armenia and Moldova - estimated external funding (6 years)
Armenia: US$ 7.7million (0.20% of ag GDP/year)
Moldova: US$ 9.7 million (0.45% of ag GDP/year)
10. Institutional challenges In CIS: too many institutions, too many inspections; institutions (and staff) depend on income from inspections
Many GOST skills no longer needed
Experience of consolidation of services and labs
Poland
Ministry of Health labs fell from 248 to 66
Lithuania:
3 former agencies for food control merged into the State Food and Veterinary Service (SFVS) reporting directly to the Prime Minister
consolidation of SFVS labs: from 50 in 1994 to only 10 in 2001, and further consolidation anticipated (1 central and 4 regional)
11. EU accession experience: economic impact of compliance Consolidation of food industry
Bulgaria
Of 237 slaughterhouses in 1999, 144 were closed down by the middle of 2006. Only 22 of those remaining were fully in line with the EU requirements, 71 have been extended a transition period
Out of the 312 meat processing operations in 1999, 146 were closed down by the end of 2006
Out of 512 units in the milk industry in 1999, 341 were closed down by the middle of 2006
Poland
Meat industry declined from about 7,000 companies in 2001 to 3,000 in 2006
Slaughterhouses from 2,600 to 1,200
Cost for consumers may rise if informal markets are wiped out
12. Country groups: different options
13. Improving international assistance Weaknesses in donor projects
Due to absence of strategy and political leadership on demand side
Low cost-effectiveness
Poor sustainability
Recommendation for future activities
Assistance in formulating comprehensive food safety and agricultural health strategy
Better donor coordination based on strategy
Early support for analysis of risks, costs, benefits
Twinning proven effective for capacity building
14. Concluding remarks on CIS Present system and capacities form constraints on
human and agricultural health outcomes
agricultural growth, market access and competitiveness
Replacement of GOST is part of
transition to market economy
integration into the international trade system
Russias WTO accession poses challenge to small CIS countries
Careful selection of reform goals and prioritization is needed
Different options for each country, based on geographic, economic, commercial, technical, and political conditions
More effective donor support is needed
15. Part 1Food Safety and Agricultural Health Management in CIS Countries
Part 2
Specifics for Moldova
16. Moldovas Agricultural Potential Agricultural growth potential not fully realized
Exports main driver for growth
However, export performance is relatively weak in the region
18. Reasons for Weak Export Performance Late start with reforms
Many changes in policies
Poor investment climate
Moldova is member of WTO, but not yet fully benefited from international trade
19. Market Access Challenges Growth of domestic supermarkets and their requirements
Increased competition from imports
Rapid increase of international requirements
Difficulty in penetrating EU market
WTO accession of Russia and Ukraine and harmonization with EU standards
EU enlargement: reduced access to CEEC markets (example: Romania)
Market with GOST standards will decline in volume and price
20. Main Issues and Recommendations for Future Actions
21. Institutional Framework Overlap of responsibilities
Too many inspections
(Example: Vet and food safety inspection at marketplaces)
Future direction: choice from two alternatives
Delineation of responsibilities and better alignment of functions among agencies
Single food agency (as in Lithuania)
22. Regulatory Framework Laws are WTO compliant, but no implementation
GOST regulations still used in practice despite official abolition -- few regulations and standards have been developed
Recommended Actions
Train staff in risk analysis as a base for policy making and design of implementation programs
Prepare a work program for the development of new regulations and standards consistent with international standards and suitable for market economy
Prioritization based on risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis (first: main health risks and products with good export potential)
23. Certification and Accreditation Current system adds unnecessary cost of doing business
Recommended actions
Repudiate mandatory conformity assessment for food products
Ban conformity assessment at borders
Allow accredited private certification bodies to play a greater role
Seek mutual recognition between the Moldova Accreditation Center and EU
24. Inspection, Monitoring, Surveillance System still largely based on GOST not on risk assessment, cost benefit analysis
Should be better targeted on human and agricultural health and market access
Recommended actions
Redesign inspection, monitoring and surveillance programs based on priority setting and cost effectiveness
Make one agency responsible for food safety in domestic marketplace and sales points for food and beverages
25. Laboratory system Each SPS agency has a system of central and regional labs
Same testing repeated by different labs for same product waste of public resources and extra costs to private sector
Laboratories are under-funded and use outdated technologies and equipments
Recommended actions
Design a program for consolidation of lab system
Veterinary labs need to be reorganized
Provide training in lab management and testing method
Upgrade equipment
26. Border Control Border control procedures WTO-compliant or not?
Veterinary and phytosanitary services unable to keep up with the Customs upgrading of technology and efficiency
Government monopoly in fumigation
Recommended actions:
Assess border procedures and bring them into compliance with international requirements of nondiscrimination
Improve computers and ICT of veterinary and plant inspection and quarantine services at border posts
Privatize fumigation services for plant quarantine
27. Plant health Contents testing needed for pesticides in market
Recommended actions:
Assign testing of contents of pesticides to lab with best capacities
Registration policy for pesticides should accept information and registration from neighboring countries
Modernize the Central Plant Inspection and Quarantine Laboratory and district lab equipment
28. Animal health Present system of stamping out needs improvement
Restocking support should be added
Overstaffing of veterinary services
Recommended actions:
Design a better system to support the stamping out of livestock diseases; and initially focus on a limited number of diseases
Separate public and private functions in veterinary services
29. Information and Education Awareness raising and education in improving food safety and agricultural health appears to be neglected
Hygiene, botulism, mushroom poisoning are issues for education
Recommended actions:
Develop and disseminate public programs for awareness raising and education
Expand anti-parasitic disease campaigns carried out by CPM and include preventive actions with domestic animals (especially dogs) and livestock
30. Private Sector Outdated structures, technologies, practices
Small-scale, under-capitalized
Recommended actions
Develop a comprehensive plan for the convergence toward EU principles of hygiene in food processing
Provide processors with training in good manufacturing practices (GMP), HACCP, etc.
Improve water treatment for overall hygiene and food safety of processing plants
31. Summary of Action Plan A total of 32 recommended actions over 3-5 years
Estimated cost:
Public sector about US$ 9.7 million *
Private sector > US$ 3 million
Pesticides, water > US$ 5 million
Initial investment push needed with support from donors
* Tentative estimated ERR for public sector is 11-14%
32. Concluding remarks Present capacities form constraints on
market access and competitiveness
human and agricultural health
Standards reform is part of transition to market economy
Given scarce resources, careful sequencing and prioritization is needed
Regular consultation with all stakeholders required
Effective support from donors is needed
Basic principle for reform: the SPS system should be used to facilitate business and trade while protecting human and agricultural health, not to tax producers and exporters