|
|
|
PRB 05-07E
Prepared by:
Frédéric Forge
Science and Technology Division
28 July 2005
PDF (42.51 Kb, 2 pages)
It is now firmly established that 75% of the diseases that have appeared in the human population in the last two decades are animal-borne. (1) The growth of the world’s population and international trade, along with globalization, which encourages interaction and exchanges among industries and populations, have created conditions that allow diseases to spread to new communities, with a significant impact on the public health and economy of the regions affected.
In the interest of protecting their population and agriculture industries, governments are implementing monitoring and protection measures to prevent animal diseases from entering their countries. Often, however, there is a lack of uniformity in the response of importing countries when an animal disease is reported in an exporting country. A single case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or “mad cow disease” in 2003 led to the destabilization of trade between the United States and Canada, which at the time had a highly integrated beef market. Conversely, in spite of the more than 180,000 cases of BSE reported, the United Kingdom has been able to stabilize trade with its partners in the European Union, thanks to its effective methods for ensuring the safety of British beef products.
The World Organization for Animal Health (Office international des épizooties – OIE) was established to facilitate trade in animals and animal products, while protecting consumer health and preventing the spread of animal diseases.(2) Above all, the OIE is an observatory of animal health whose primary objective is to inform national veterinary services of animal diseases reported around the world. The OIE is not a regulatory agency.
The OIE also has other objectives:
The OIE is an intergovernmental organization, funded by the contributions of its member countries (167 as of May 2004). The International Committee, comprising delegates designated by member country governments, directs the organization; its main office, which is in Paris, is headed by a director general elected by the Committee. The OIE comprises elected commissions (five regional commissions, four technical commissions and one administrative commission), which help disseminate information to member countries; and regional representations, which promote disease control.
The OIE standards set out in the Terrestrial Animal Health Codeand the Aquatic Animal Health Code describe for each disease the measures required to participate in trade without compromising animal and human health. These standards are based on an international consensus developed from the available scientific information and are reviewed regularly to keep pace with advances in knowledge. For example, the standards on avian influenza and BSE were updated and approved by the OIE General Session in May 2005.
In the Terrestrial Animal Health Code, the OIE also defines the conditions and procedures required for an animal subpopulation to be declared disease-free and safe for international trade. Two processes are described:
The international standards set out in the health codes have no legal force, and the OIE has no way of ensuring compliance. The World Trade Organization (WTO) is the only body able to do so, since it may invoke these standards in its decisions. In the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement,(6) it is recommended that the OIE be consulted during the arbitration of scientific disagreements relating to international disputes. A country is thus free to apply the measures it chooses, even if they do not necessarily meet international standards, provided that the WTO has not handled a dispute or ruled on their validity.
In response to the disruption of trade following the emergence of mad cow disease in Japan, Canada and the United States, the OIE issued a press release in January 2004 stating that there are scientific standards governing the resumption of trade with countries affected by BSE, but that not all countries comply with these standards.(7) It had become customary for countries, including Canada, to close their borders to beef products from a country that had just discovered a case of BSE, regardless of the real risk, the health measures in place, or the incidence of the disease in the country. The fact that the trade barriers created as a result of BSE have never been challenged before the WTO nevertheless illustrates the need to improve the rules regarding the resumption of trade with countries where the disease has been identified.
In spite of the limitations of this system, no concrete proposal has been put forward to create another process to quickly resume trade when an animal disease occurs. The prompt updating of international standards is often cited as an essential part of this process, and some see this as a way to reform the OIE in order to give it a more trade-oriented mission.
While exporting countries approve of such a process, some regard it as an infringement on countries’ sovereignty and a threat to public health. The fact remains, however, that non-compliance with recognized scientific standards penalizes countries with an effective and transparent monitoring system that have demonstrated their ability to control the risks related to an animal disease. This could lead to reluctance to report cases of disease and an increased risk of spreading these diseases internationally.