@article{7eba1b25cc934d7a99506a098f011caf,
title = "Options for managing the infectious animal and plant disease risks of international trade",
abstract = "Infectious animal and plant diseases introduced through international trade in goods and services are a classic example of market externality. The potential harm they do is visited on people other than those engaged in their export or import, and is not taken into account in reaching export or import decisions. The use of economic instruments to internalize market externalities has been shown to yield substantial benefits in many areas of economic activity. By confronting decision-makers with the expected damage they cause, instruments of this kind have forced decision-makers to take the wider costs of their actions into account. This paper reviews the arguments for extending the range of instruments currently used to manage trade-related pest and pathogen risks, and assesses the options for deploying new instruments in the existing regulatory environment.",
keywords = "Animal diseases, Payments for environmental services, Plant diseases, Sanitary and phytosanitary agreement, Trade",
author = "Charles Perrings",
note = "Funding Information: The management of trade-related animal and plant disease risks is currently addressed by the Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement, which implements the trade interventions allowed to protect animal and plant health under Article 20 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. The SPS Agreement is supported by three standard setting bodies: the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), the Office Internationale des {\'E}pizooties or World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), and the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC). These bodies safeguard world trade by publishing health standards for international trade in, respectively, food and food products, animals and animal products, and cultivated and wild plants. The SPS Agreement requires that trade interventions to protect animal and plant health be based on standards set by these organizations, and should be informed by a scientific assessment of the risks. The risk assessment methodology developed by the OIE, for example, is intended to establish the likelihood of the introduction, establishment and spread of disease within the territory of an importing country, and to assess its biological and economic consequences (MacDiarmid ). Funding Information: This work reported in this paper was funded by NSF grant 1414374 as part of the joint NSF-NIH-USDA Ecology and Evolution of Infectious Diseases program, and by UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council grant BB/M008894/1. Preparation and presentation of the paper at the International Conference on Global Plant Health and Consequences: Linking science, economics and policy, Fera, York, UK October 27–28 2014, was funded by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Co-operative Research Programme on Biological Resource Management for Sustainable Agricultural Systems whose financial support made it possible for most of the invited speakers to participate in the Conference. The opinions expressed and arguments employed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the OECD or of the governments of its member countries. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and International Society for Plant Pathology.",
year = "2016",
month = feb,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s12571-015-0523-0",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "8",
pages = "27--35",
journal = "Food Security",
issn = "1876-4517",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "1",
}