174
E.J. Cook et al.
analysis and risk evaluation); and (4) and treating the risks (e.g., Australian and
New Zealand Standard Risk Management AS/NZ4360:2004). This is readily
applicable to assessing pre-border biosecurity risk (e.g., microalgae import
decision-tree; Campbell 2006b) and post-border biosecurity risk in the form of
organism impact assessments (Campbell 2005, 2006a).
In an aquaculture context, risk evaluation must assess: (1) the introduced species
being imported for commercial purposes (e.g., use of abalone, Haliotis rufescens
and H. discus hannai, in Chile); (2) the mechanism of transfer to determine hitchhikers including pathogens and parasites; and (3) the feed species (e.g., Thalassiosira
wiessfloggi is fed to rotifers that are then used as aquaculture feed) imported to
sustain both native and introduced aquaculture species.
Management of imported introduced species is typically controlled with the aid
of Import Health Standards (IHS), that operate as codified rule structures that identify how, when and where a specific “risk good” can be imported, and adhere to the
World Trade Organizations (WTO) related standards (Hewitt and Campbell 2007).
IHS seeks to minimise the risk and identify appropriate management options
(Orensanz et al. 2002; DAFF 2003; Pheloung 2003).
IHS’s are often underpinned by species specific risk analyses. A decision tree
model is one example of risk analysis where a series of simple yes/no questions
progresses the assessment through the process, indicating where importation should
be rejected, approved with or without stipulations (Fig. 5.4). The model can be
qualitative, semi-quantitative or quantitative (data input dependent). Each step is
assessed against a risk mitigation context (such as a management procedure) with
the endpoint derived by the questions asked at each step in the process. The
decision-tree applies the same set of criteria to all species, ensuring a consistent,
objective and verifiable manner to assess all import requests and invariably considers specific national and international obligations.
Countries can also apply the risk evaluation embedded in the ICES Code of
Practice (ICES 2005b), or develop more individualised importation processes
(e.g., Hewitt et al. 2006). For example, a generic importation model for aquaculture species identifies risk as an integral component, followed by an economic
assessment of cost: benefit (Fig. 5.5). The model is initiated when a request to
import a non-indigenous species or non-indigenous genome occurs. Decision
makers undertake a risk evaluation that defines: unacceptable impacts, risk methods used and a-priori states the acceptable level of risk. The process is supervised
by a scientific review committee and produces contingency and action plans or
guidelines that deal with the accidental release of a non-indigenous species.
5.5 Concluding Remarks
Rapid increases in the production of non-native species and the associated risks
of unintentional introductions and pathogen and parasite transfers to native populations underscores the urgent need for concerted global action in advancing
E.J. Cook et al.
analysis and risk evaluation); and (4) and treating the risks (e.g., Australian and
New Zealand Standard Risk Management AS/NZ4360:2004). This is readily
applicable to assessing pre-border biosecurity risk (e.g., microalgae import
decision-tree; Campbell 2006b) and post-border biosecurity risk in the form of
organism impact assessments (Campbell 2005, 2006a).
In an aquaculture context, risk evaluation must assess: (1) the introduced species
being imported for commercial purposes (e.g., use of abalone, Haliotis rufescens
and H. discus hannai, in Chile); (2) the mechanism of transfer to determine hitchhikers including pathogens and parasites; and (3) the feed species (e.g., Thalassiosira
wiessfloggi is fed to rotifers that are then used as aquaculture feed) imported to
sustain both native and introduced aquaculture species.
Management of imported introduced species is typically controlled with the aid
of Import Health Standards (IHS), that operate as codified rule structures that identify how, when and where a specific “risk good” can be imported, and adhere to the
World Trade Organizations (WTO) related standards (Hewitt and Campbell 2007).
IHS seeks to minimise the risk and identify appropriate management options
(Orensanz et al. 2002; DAFF 2003; Pheloung 2003).
IHS’s are often underpinned by species specific risk analyses. A decision tree
model is one example of risk analysis where a series of simple yes/no questions
progresses the assessment through the process, indicating where importation should
be rejected, approved with or without stipulations (Fig. 5.4). The model can be
qualitative, semi-quantitative or quantitative (data input dependent). Each step is
assessed against a risk mitigation context (such as a management procedure) with
the endpoint derived by the questions asked at each step in the process. The
decision-tree applies the same set of criteria to all species, ensuring a consistent,
objective and verifiable manner to assess all import requests and invariably considers specific national and international obligations.
Countries can also apply the risk evaluation embedded in the ICES Code of
Practice (ICES 2005b), or develop more individualised importation processes
(e.g., Hewitt et al. 2006). For example, a generic importation model for aquaculture species identifies risk as an integral component, followed by an economic
assessment of cost: benefit (Fig. 5.5). The model is initiated when a request to
import a non-indigenous species or non-indigenous genome occurs. Decision
makers undertake a risk evaluation that defines: unacceptable impacts, risk methods used and a-priori states the acceptable level of risk. The process is supervised
by a scientific review committee and produces contingency and action plans or
guidelines that deal with the accidental release of a non-indigenous species.
5.5 Concluding Remarks
Rapid increases in the production of non-native species and the associated risks
of unintentional introductions and pathogen and parasite transfers to native populations underscores the urgent need for concerted global action in advancing