Bridging plant health policy implementation gaps

Published on October 15th, 2024

The United Nations and Food and Agriculture Organization goals and strategies for resilient plant health systems

It all starts with healthy plants. Life on land, especially agriculture and crop production, largely depends on the health of plants and planting material. Indeed, the world has various aspirational goals reflecting this. Of the 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals to be achieved by 2030 (1), agriculture is central to No Poverty (Goal 1), Zero Hunger (Goal 2), Decent Work and Economic Growth (Goal 8), Climate Action (Goal 13), and Life on Land (Goal 15). The Four Betters of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations also centre around agriculture, with the FAO aiming to use its Strategic Framework (2022–2031) to transform agrifood systems and make them more efficient, inclusive, resilient, and sustainable for better production, better nutrition, a better environment, and a better life, leaving no one behind (2). Regional policy initiatives are also underway. In Africa, for instance, agriculture accounts for about 40% of the continent’s gross domestic product (GDP), 15% of exports, and 60–80% of employment (3). Accordingly, the African Union (AU) developed and adopted the Plant Health Strategy for Africa 2022–2036 to provide a strategic framework for food security.

These policies will not be fulfilled, nor their goals achieved, without healthy plants and a significantly lowered impact of crop pests and diseases. To this end, we need to bring together science, technology, and a critical mass of skilled plant health workers. The implementation of this triad is a plausible panacea for resilient plant health systems, bridging policy and practice.

The state of plant pests and crop protection science

Despite the grand strategies and policies, invasive plant pests and diseases continue to transcend borders, significantly impacting countries—especially those with weak phytosanitary systems. Once introduced, pests such as fall armyworm (4), Xylella fastidiosa (5), Liberibacter spp. (which causes citrus greening) (6), red palm weevil (7), and fruit flies (8) reduce crop production, negatively impact the environment, and hinder regional and international agricultural trade. Globally, plant pests account for the loss of an estimated 20–40% of crop production (9). In Africa, crop yield losses due to insects are estimated at 30–60% (10). Pest infestations contribute to increasing global hunger year after year. The number of people affected by hunger increased from 811 million in 2020 to 828 million in 2021 (11). The global economic cost of plant diseases is about US$220 billion annually (9), with invasive insects adding another US$70 billion (12).

However, major scientific advances have been made to minimize the impact of plant pests. Developments during the last century include chemical control (13), integrated pest management (14), biological control (15), sterile insect technology (16), and mating disruptions (17). Other sustainable crop protection strategies are also gaining more recognition and include induced resistance in crops—as described by Flors et al. in their Frontiers in Science lead article (18). During the 21st century, pest management has also been revolutionized through advances in biotechnology, including genetically modified organism (GMO) approaches in both pests and crops—generating plants that are more tolerant and resistant to certain pests. James reported that, in 2012, GMO crops covered 170.3 million hectares in 28 countries (19).

So, what is missing?

Amidst rapid global changes, such as climate change and the corresponding pest expansion and proliferation (20), a growing population, and increasing world hunger (21), there is an urgent need for resilient phytosanitary programs. Countries need programs to provide early detection of pests and to enable public and private organizations and farmers to prepare for, respond to, and recover from plant pests in the most effective and efficient manner. Backed by strong political will at global, regional, and national levels, such programs are arguably the most practical mechanisms for achieving agricultural transformation goals. It is through such programs that the triad of science, technology, and a critical mass of a skilled plant health workforce can make a resounding difference in plant health by creating tangible outcomes in pest management and phytosanitary proficiency.

Bridging the gap

The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), an intergovernmental body of 185 contracting parties, has developed the International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs). The ISPMs provide a necessary phytosanitary framework, from pest risk analyses to pest mitigations, including prevention, pest identification and diagnostics, containment, suppression, and even eradication.

Reflecting on the state of pest problems around the world, the IPPC community recognized the need to take ISPMs to another level, from adoption to implementation. In 2017, the Implementation and Capacity Development Committee (IC) was established to develop, monitor, and oversee an integrated program to support the implementation of the ISPMs and strengthen the phytosanitary capacity of contracting parties. The IC, with support from the IPPC Secretariat, developed and disseminated ISPM implementation tools such as e-learning courses on key topics, e.g., pest risk analysis, surveillance, phytosanitary inspection, and certification. After further reflection in late 2022/early 2023, the IPPC community, including representatives from the National Plant Protection Organizations (NPPO), Regional Plant Protection Organizations, and research organizations, started to develop a vision that takes the implementation of ISPMs to an entirely different level through the first-ever Global Phytosanitary Program (GPP). The GPP is designed to empower countries to detect plant pests and diseases of regulatory, economic, and environmental significance in an effective and timely manner. Using scientific evidence, digital tools, proactive planning, and systematic execution, the GPP will position NPPOs and their cooperators and stakeholders to effectively prepare for, respond to, and recover from plant pests and diseases.

Implementation strategy

It is impractical to launch such an intensive program simultaneously across all 185 countries and seven regions of the world. Therefore, the GPP is first being launched in Africa, owing to its amplified challenges and lack of consistent phytosanitary systems, through the Africa Phytosanitary Program (APP). However, starting the APP simultaneously across all 54 African countries still presents an insurmountable challenge. Accordingly, a phased approach has been adopted: the program will commence in 10 countries during an initial 2-year pilot phase, followed by a planned expansion to 10 additional countries every 2 years, with the aim to encompass all 54 countries over 7­–8 years. Eleven countries from five subregions were nominated and selected for the pilot phase: Egypt, Morocco​ (North Africa), Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Sierra Leone​ (West Africa), Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo (Central Africa), Kenya, Uganda​ (East Africa), Zambia, and Zimbabwe ​(Southern Africa). Based on a criterion established by the IPPC Secretariat, each pilot country was tasked to identify five priority plant pests and/or diseases of regulatory, environmental, and economic significance for which survey, identification, or diagnostic protocols and digital apps were developed. Each pilot country has been provided with hands-on training and essential equipment such as tablets for proactive surveys of the selected pests.  

Central to the success of this experiment is coordination and collaboration between and among key stakeholders, including the AU–Inter-African Phytosanitary Council, the Near East Plant Protection Organization, and the NPPOs—the chief constituents of the program, whose workforces receive training and tools to enhance their phytosanitary skills in pest management. Using their existing infrastructure and the additional resources, NPPOs are responsible for implementing activities in their respective countries. Regional Economic Communities provide regional program coordination and logistical support for their member countries to ensure consistent and effective program delivery and interregional cooperation. The recently formed technical working group of subject matter experts from various research institutions that represent key scientific disciplines provides the technical rigor and support for the program. 

While the APP is still in the early stages of implementation, participating countries are expected to benefit from more resilient phytosanitary systems, improved agricultural productivity, food security and safety, environmental protection, agricultural trade, and economic development.

The implementation of APP in Africa and subsequently the rest of the world (through GPP) is designed to serve as an effective delivery mechanism for global, regional, and national strategies and to provide a practical framework that harnesses ongoing science-based solutions to proactively combat plant pests and diseases of regulatory, economic, and environmental significance, hence contributing to sustainable food security, human and environmental health, and economic growth around the world.

1. United Nations. 2015. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [online] (2015). Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda

2. Food and Agriculture Organization. FAO Strategic Framework 2022-31. Rome: FAO (2021). Available at: https://www.fao.org/strategic-framework/en

3. African Union Commission (AUC). Plant health strategy for Africa 2022-2036 (2023). Available at: https://auiapsc.org/2023/04/10/plant-health-strategy-phsa-for-africa-2022-2036/  

4. Goergen G, Kumar PL, Sankung SB, Togola A, Tamò M. First report of outbreaks of the fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (JE Smith) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), a new alien invasive pest in West and Central Africa. PloS One (2016) 27;11(10):e0165632. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165632 

5. Martelli GP. The current status of the quick decline syndrome of olive in southern Italy. Phytoparasitica (2016) 44:1–10. doi: 10.1007/s12600-015-0498-6

6. Bove J. Huanglongbing: a destructive, newly-emerging, century-old disease of citrus. J Plant Pathol (2006) 88:7–37

7. Gush H. Date with disaster. The Gulf Today (1997).

8. Bateman MA. The ecology of fruit flies. Annu Rev Entomol (1972) 17:493-518. doi: 10.1146/annurev.en.17.010172.002425 

9. Agrios GN. Plant pathology (5th edition). City: Elsevier Academic Press (2005). doi: 10.1016/C2009-0-02037-6

10. Oerke EC. Crop losses to pests. J Agric Sci (2006) 144:31–43. doi: 10.1017/S0021859605005708

11. Food and Agriculture Organization, International Fund for Agricultural Development, United Nations Children’s Fund, World Food Programme, World Health Organization. The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2022 – Repurposing food and agricultural policies to make healthy diets more affordable. Rome: FAO (2022). doi: 10.4060/cc0639en

12. Bradshaw CJA, Leroy B, Bellard C, Roiz D, Albert C, Fournir A, et al. Massive yet grossly underestimated global costs of invasive insects. Nat Commun (2016) 7(12986): 1–8. doi: 10.1038/ncomms12986

13. Davies TG, Field LM, Usherwood PNR, Williamson MS. DDT, pyrethrins, pyrethroids and insect sodium channels. IUBMB Life (2007) 59 (3):151–162. doi: 10.1080/15216540701352042

14. Smith RF, Reynolds HT. Principles, definitions, and scope of integrated pest control. In: Proceedings of the FAO symposium on integrated pest control. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization (1966). 128

15. Hagen KS, Franz JM. A history of biological control. In: Smith RF, Mittler TE, Smith CN, editors. History of Entomology. San Mateo, CA: Annual Reviews (1973). 433–77

16. Klassen W, Curtis CF, Hendrichs VA. History of Sterile Insect Technique. In: Dyck VA, Hendrichs J, Robinson AS, editors. Sterile insect technique. Principles and practice in area-wide integrated pest management (2nd edition). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press (2021). 1–44

17. Cardé RT.  Principles of mating disruption. In: Ridgway RL, Silverstein RM, Inscoe MN (editors). Behavior-Modifying Chemicals for Insect Management. New York NY: Marcel Dekker (1990). 47–71

18. Flors V, Kyndt T, Mauch-Mani B, Pozo MJ, Ryu C-M, Ton J. Enabling sustainable crop protection with induced resistance in plants. Front Sci (2024) 2:1407410. doi: 10.3389/fsci.2024.1407410

19. James C. Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2012. In: ISAAA Brief No. 44. Ithaca, NY: The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (2012). Available at: https://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/44/executivesummary/default.asp

20. International Plant Protection Convention Secretariat. Scientific review of the impact of climate change on plant pests – A global challenge to prevent and mitigate plant pest risks in agriculture, forestry and ecosystems. Rome: FAO (2021). doi: 10.4060/cb4769en

21. Food and Agriculture Organization, International Fund for Agricultural Development, United Nations Children’s Fund, World Food Programme, World Health Organization. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2024 – Financing to end hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition in all its forms. Rome: FAO (2024). doi: 10.4060/cd1254en

Copyright: © 2024 [author(s)]. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in Frontiers Policy Labs is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.