Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/31489
Title: Improving the methodology for rapid consequence assessment of amenity and environmental pests
Contributor(s): Hester, Susan  (author)orcid ; Mayo, Jana (author)
Publication Date: 2021-05
Open Access: Yes
Handle Link: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/31489
Open Access Link: https://cebra.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/3890547/CEBRA-20110801-Final-Report-for-web-page-updated.pdfOpen Access Link
Abstract: 

International standards and guidelines for assessing the potential consequences of pest and disease incursions work well when impacts are on horticultural and agricultural industries, particularly where the potential economic impacts of a pest or disease can be estimated and/or demonstrated. Difficulties arise, however, when impacts fall largely on the environment, social amenity, human wellbeing and infrastructure - in this context international guidance is less clear on appropriate methodology. In these scenarios the potential economic impacts are more difficult to evaluate and are usually subjective since the value placed on damage will differ between stakeholders. This is the case for an increasing range of pests intercepted at the Australian border, such as certain species of snails, spiders, beetles, millipedes and invasive ants. In addition, information about the biology and behaviour of these pests is often absent, or minimal at best, making decision-making surrounding biosecurity risks of these 'non-industry' pests extremely difficult.

Immediate action is taken to remove threats upon detection at the border, on the basis that the species is exotic and import conditions do not permit contamination of any biosecurity risk material. The potential biosecurity risks posed by these species must nevertheless be assessed, as a decision must be made on whether further action is required (i.e. does the consignment require treatment). Failure to assess the impacts of non-industry pest species in an appropriate, robust and reproducible manner may lead to: inconsistencies in pest regulation decisions; decisions resulting in damage to the Australian economy and environment; and unnecessary confusion and misunderstanding by domestic and international stakeholders. There is therefore a need for the department to be able to rapidly and consistently assess the potential impacts for pests whose impacts are largely on the non-industry sectors of the environment and economy, to support decision making and maintain Australia's favourable biosecurity status.

This project reviewed the large number of existing frameworks and tools that have been developed to identify pests and diseases that pose a high risk of damage to natural environments. Key criteria were identified and used to assess these frameworks and tools in order to select one that could be adopted by the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (the department) to rapidly assess the impacts (i.e. potential consequences) of non-industry pests. One framework and associated tool were selected, tested and slightly modified to make it fit for purpose. This report describes that process.

Publication Type: Report
Publisher: Centre of Excellence for Biosecurity Risk Analysis (CEBRA)
Place of Publication: Melbourne, Australia
Fields of Research (FoR) 2020: 410202 Biosecurity science and invasive species ecology
Socio-Economic Objective (SEO) 2020: 190205 Environmental protection frameworks (incl. economic incentives)
HERDC Category Description: R1 Report
Extent of Pages: 75
Description: Final Report for CEBRA Project 20110801
Prepared with contributions from Lydia Ayto and Brian Garms
Appears in Collections:Report
UNE Business School

Files in This Item:
1 files
File SizeFormat 
Show full item record

Page view(s)

1,700
checked on Feb 25, 2024

Download(s)

2
checked on Feb 25, 2024
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.