Grain Industry Symposium 19 th November 2013 Dennis Stephens - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Grain Industry Symposium 19th November 2013

Dennis Stephens Secretary International Grain Trade Coalition

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 1

IGTC – International Grain Trade Coalition - history

 December 2000: Montpellier, France – 1st Meeting of

Intergovernmental Committee on Cartagena Protocol

 Potential decisions could have profound impact on global grain trade  Most delegates from environmental ministries - little knowledge nor

interest in commercial implications of decisions

 NGOs had profound impact on decisions  Exporter trade associations (CGC and NAEGA) had minimal impact

 Conclusions:

 Exporters should avoid ratification of Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety  New global grain trade advocacy strategy must be developed to minimize

Protocol’s potential adverse trade impact



Trade disruptions impact both importers and exporters



New advocacy strategy must involve both importers and exporters

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 2

IGTC – International Grain Trade Coalition created

 June 2001: Vancouver, Canada – DFAIT financing – CGC

hosts meeting of sovereign importer and exporter grain trade associations

 International Grain Trade Coalition formed to advise

governments on implementation of the Biosafety Protocol to protect global biodiversity while meeting the needs of the world’s food, feed and processing industries

 IGTC scope refined in 2006 to focus existence on the goal of

avoiding disruptions in the international trade of grain,

• ilseeds, pulses and derived products

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 3

COCERAL GAFTA NAEGA, NCGA, NGFA, USGC, USW, CRA , ANIAME, APPAMEX SESPA RGU ABIOVE ANEC CEC GTA, AGEA CGC

IGTC Membership - 22 Organizations / 8000 Members / 80 Countries

CNFA CNAGS

www.igtcglobal.com

SOPA CAPECO

4

IGTC – major files

 Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety  Synchronization of event approvals/Low Level

Presence policies – international and national approaches

 IPPC – International Phytosanitary Grain Standard  Technology developer stewardship policies

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 5

Major files – Biosafety Protocol

• Article 18.2(a) scheduled for review at COP/MOP-7 September

2014 in Korea – 18.2(a) dictates shipping documentation required for transboundary movement of LMOs

• Current requirements decided in 2006 at COP/MOP-3 (Curitiba)

 Use of commercial invoice  “Contains” for IP shipments of specific event  “May contain” with list of events that may be in shipment for normal

bulk trade

 “May contain” without list of events in Party/Non-Party trade

(Mexico/US/Canada)

 Expected demands

 Stand alone documentation  No exemption for Party /Non Party trade  Bar codes for each event that may be in shipment www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 6

IGTC – COP/MOP-7 strategy?

 Key focus will be Article 18.2(a)

 Minimum objective – Maintain status quo

 Highlight benefits of Mexican corn pilot study

 Reject demands for stand alone documentation, bar codes and

removal of Party /Non Party exemption

 Maximum objective – Extend “may contain” without list of

events from Party / Non-Party to Party / Party

 Ensure other issues adopt commercially acceptable

decisions

 Liability & Redress  Risk Assessment/Risk Management  Biosafety Clearing House

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 7

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 8

Major files - LLP

High risk of detecting GMOs in imported commodities Importing countries: “zero tolerance” policy on GM Exporting countries: increasing GM commercialization

The evolving use of biotechnology and the divergent regulatory approaches to managing GM crops are threatening global food security

Types of LLP

 LLP from asynchronous approval: May occur when the country of

export has already approved a GM event for cultivation, while the country of import is in the process of authorizing it

 LLP from isolated foreign approval (often described as

asymmetric approval): May occur when the country of export approves a GM event for commercial production and in the country of import no submission for the approval is sought by the developer of the event or in which an approval is not granted for reasons falling outside food safety

 LLP from discontinued event: May occur when in the country of

import the approval of the GM event expires and the technology developer does not submit an application for the continuation of the approval

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 9

LLP policies: key objectives

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 10

Scientifically based  internationally consistent Provide for food, feed  environmental safety Viability of supply legal certainty to

• perators

Providers, producers and subsequent holders to be fully responsible Consistent with bulk handling system and manufacturing practices

LLP policy

Encourage policy harmonization  synchronization of approvals

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 11

New GMO regulatory policies must reflect differences in risk

Low levels of recombinant DNA plant materials that have passed a food safety assessment according to Codex guideline for the conduct of food safety assessment of foods derived from recombinant-DNA plants (CAC/GL 45-2003) in one or more countries but may on occasion be present in food in importing countries in which the safety of the relevant recombinant-DNA plants has not yet been determined – definition of LLP adopted by Global LLP Initiative Adventitious Presence (AP): unintentional presence of GMOs that have never been approved anyplace on the basis of the Codex international guidelines for food plant safety assessment

YES NO NO

LLP Policies: risk management

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 12

Be consistent by providing for 3 approaches as the LLP sources Be temporary by following a process-based authorization Provide for LLP marketing threshold Biotech developers’ commitment to be fully responsible for GM commercialization

Commercially practical  feasible

Explore international process

Marketing LLP thresholds recommendations

 IGTC recommends 5%:

 With food safety concerns addressed, governments must

ensure that LLP policies do not create unintentional increases in food and feed prices

 International grain trade experience confirms that 5% levels

can be achieved with minimal cost impact within the global handling and transportation system

 International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium

study – Guillaume Gruere – “Asynchronous Approvals of GM

Products, Price Inflation, and the Codex Annex, What Low Level Presence Policy for APEC Countries?”

 “going from 0% to 5% would reduce total costs by over 70% in

both the case of maize and soybeans”

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 13

Current LLP regulatory status

• National – public consultation phase
• Canada
• Philippines
• Colombia
• International – Global LLP Initiative
• Members- Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica,

Mexico, Paraguay, Philippines, Russia, United States, Uruguay, Viet Nam;

• Observers - China, Colombia, Korea, , South Africa, EU
• 3 Meetings – Vancouver 2012, Rosario 2012, Durban 2013
• Next meeting – 4th quarter 2014
• Future – IGTC recommends FAO LLP Consultations – 2014
• Generate discussion among developing countries on potential food

security impact of LLP detection

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 14

Major files – phytosanitary grain standard

 The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) is an international

agreement on plant health signed by 179 governments to protect cultivated and wild plants by preventing the introduction and spread of pests.

 The Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (CPM) that governs IPPC agreed at

its 8th meeting in Rome in April, 2013 to the continued development of an International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) on the international movement of grain.

 The ISPMs are the standards, guidelines and recommendations recognized as the

basis for phytosanitary measures applied by the WTO under the application of the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreement (SPS Agreement). A Standards Committee develops the proposed standards that are then submitted to the CPM for approval.

15 www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com

Scope of Grain Standard

 CPM-8 requested Standards Committee

 Narrow scope of proposed specifications to phytosanitary issues and to

exclude Living Modified Organisms (LMOs), climate change, food safety and quality issues

 Determine if traceability should or should not be excluded

 IGTC supports CPM-8’s decision to exclude LMOs, climate change,

food safety and quality issues

 Standards Committee meets in Rome on 18-22 November to redraft

proposed standard for consultation by member countries. Three strategic experts from the United States, Brazil and Kenya have been named to provide “strategic advice”

 IGTC urges governments to exclude traceability from the scope of

specifications for the proposed new international phytosanitary grain standard.

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 16

IGTC recommendations

 Proposed ISPM for the international grain movement must reflect existing

industry practices, be easy and of minimal cost to implement and be designed to minimize trade disruptions. Phytosanitary risk mitigation measures must be commensurate with the risk associated with the regulated pests.

 Global bulk handling system is designed to move commodities from areas of

surplus to areas of deficit for food, feed or for processing. These shipments are not intended for intentional introduction into the environment. Grain risk mitigation measures must consider the further processing and eventual end use of the product.

• Risk mitigations methods therefore should be examined along the entire

supply chain to identify the most effective, least cost method to minimize quarantined pest risk involving both exporting and importing countries. Such processes are likely to be much more effective and significantly less costly than imposing traceability systems into an international phytosanitary grain standard.

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 17

IGTC Strategy

 Development of appropriate resource materials  Meetings by members with their respective

governments

 Meetings with members of the Strategic Experts Group

who will advise Standing Committee

 Meetings with members of Standing Committee  IGTC to seek participation on standard drafting group?

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 18

Conclusions

 IGTC faces exciting opportunities  Many challenges

 Increasingly international regulatory policies are developed outside

national governments in international processes such as Biosafety Protocol, IPPC and CODEX that require a global advocacy approach

 Reason for success

 Coalition of sovereign trade associations that develops commercial

approaches to achieve exporter, importer and government objectives on key international grain trade market access files

 IGTC members advocate consensus policies to respective governments  Grain trade interests most likely to be achieved if major trading partners

advocate similar policies

 IGTC – global approach to international market access issues

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 19

Thank you

www.igtcglobal.com - secretariat@igtcglobal.com 20