Agricultural stakeholders need a common set of metrics to evaluate plant pest impacts to facilitate transparency and harmonisation of pest management and prioritisation across spatial scales and jurisdictions. We propose a classification system that articulates, defines and classifies the magnitude of impacts (historical, current or potential) of pest species (alien and native) in plant production systems. Metrics were identified and criteria defined through consideration of economic parameters, risk assessment standards and guidance tools, discussions with pest risk assessment practitioners and recent advances in environmental impact classification schemes. Twenty metrics were identified and assigned to one of four key metric types: spatiotemporal, market-driven, primary response and mid-to long-term response. Host crop value, Market access, Feasibility of management and Reversibility were identified as disruptor metrics, likely to influence overall classification by at least twice that of other metrics. Application of the system found it was able to classify well-known pests by importance, capturing changes in impact status as the management programme progressed for one pest, and how it was influenced by the geographic scale of assessment for another. Our work demonstrates the value of integrating plant protection science with invasion biology to derive a comprehensive measure of pest impact in agroecosystems that can be utilised by all plant biosecurity stakeholders.

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Plant health was requested to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the relevant Implementing Acts as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’ (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 establishing a provisional list of high‐risk plants, plant products or other objects, within the meaning of Article 42 of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031). The current scientific opinion covers all plant health risks posed by dormant bare rooted plants for planting of Malus domestica (1–2 years old) imported from Serbia, considering the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the Plant Protection Directorate from Serbia on 27 December 2019. The relevance of an EU‐quarantine pest for this opinion was based on evidence that: (a) the pest is present in Serbia; (b) the pest uses M. domestica as a host; (c) one or more life stages of the pest can be associated with the specified commodity. The relevance for this opinion of pests not regulated in the EU was based on the following criteria: (i) the pest is present in Serbia; (ii) the pest is not present in the EU; (iii) M. domestica is a host of the pest; (iv) the pest can be associated with the commodity and (v) the pest may have an impact and can pose potential risk for the EU territory. After the assessment of 1191 potential pests, one bacterium, Erwinia amylovora, fulfilled all criteria and accordingly, was selected for further evaluation. For this bacterium, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier were evaluated. Limiting factors on the effectiveness of the measures were also considered. For the selected species, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on E. amylovora, including any uncertainties. Based on the outcomes of an Expert Knowledge Elicitation, the Panel is considering a pallet as a unit; and taking into account the uncertainties associated with the assessment, the panel is 95% sure that 9,934 or more pallets out of 10,000 will be pest free.

In order to prevent and control the emergence of biosecurity threats such as vector-borne diseases of plants, it is vital to understand drivers of entry, establishment, and spatio-temporal spread, as well as the form, timing and effectiveness of disease management strategies. An inherent challenge for policy in combatting emerging disease is the uncertainty associated with intervention planning in areas not yet affected, based on models and data from current outbreaks. Following the recent high-profile emergence of the bacterium Xylella fastidiosa in several European countries, we review the most pertinent epidemiological uncertainties concerning this bacterium dynamics in novel environments. To reduce the considerable ecological and socio-economic impacts of these outbreaks, eco-epidemiological research in a broader range of environmental conditions needs to be conducted and used to inform policy to enhance disease risk assessment, and support successful policy-making decisions. By characterising infection pathways, we can highlight the uncertainties that surround our knowledge of this disease, drawing attention to how these are amplified when trying to predict and manage outbreaks in currently unaffected locations. To help guide future research and decision-making processes, we invited experts in different fields of plant pathology to identify data to prioritise when developing pest-risk assessments. Our analysis revealed that epidemiological uncertainty is mainly driven by the large variety of hosts, vectors, and bacterial strains, leading to a range of different epidemiological characteristics further magnified by novel environmental conditions. These results offer new insights on how eco-epidemiological analyses can enhance understanding of plant disease spread and support management recommendations.

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Plant Health was requested to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the relevant Implementing Acts as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’ [Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 establishing a provisional list of high‐risk plants, plant products or other objects, within the meaning of Article 42 of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031]. The current Scientific Opinion covers all plant health risks posed by Albizia julibrissin imported from Israel, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Israel. The relevance of an EU‐regulated pest for this opinion was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel; (ii) A. julibrissin is a host of the pest and (iii) the pest can be associated with the commodity. The relevance of this opinion for other non EU‐regulated pests was based on evidence that (i) the pest is present in Israel; (ii) the pest is absent in the EU; (iii) A. julibrissin is a host of the pest; (iv) the pest can be associated with the commodity and (v) the pest may have an impact and can pose a potential risk for the EU territory. Three pests (two insects, Aonidiella orientalis and Euwallacea fornicatus; one fungus, Fusarium euwallaceae) that fulfilled all criteria were selected for further evaluation. For the three selected pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier were evaluated. Limiting factors on the effectiveness of the measures were documented. For the selected pests, an expert judgement on the likelihood of pest freedom is given taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The Panel is 95% sure that 9,950 or more units per 10,000 will be pest free from these three pests.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation EU/2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers all plant health risks posed by unrooted cuttings of Jasminum polyanthum produced in a protected environment (greenhouse) that are imported from Israel, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the NPPO of Israel by 15 March 2020. The relevance of an EU quarantine pest for this opinion was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel; (ii) Jasminum is a host of the pest; and (iii) the pest can be associated with the commodity. The relevance of any other pest, not regulated in the EU, was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel; (ii) the pest is absent in the EU; (iii) Jasminum is a host of the pest; (iv) the pest can be associated with the commodity and (v) the pest may have an impact and can pose a potential risk for the EU territory. Six species, the EU‐quarantine pest Scirtothrips dorsalis, and the EU non‐regulated pests Aonidiella orientalis,Milviscutulus mangiferae,Paracoccus marginatus,Pulvinaria psidii and Colletotrichum siamense fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Israel were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with S. dorsalis being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,958 and 10,000 bags per 10,000 would be free of S. dorsalis.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers all plant health risks posed by dormant and free of leaves, 1‐ to 3‐year‐old bare root plants for planting of Acer spp. imported from New Zealand, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by New Zealand. The relevance of an EU‐quarantine pest for this opinion was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in New Zealand; (ii) Acer spp. are hosts of the pest and (iii) the pest can be associated with the commodity. The relevance for this opinion of any other pest, not regulated in the EU, was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in New Zealand; (ii) the pest is absent from the EU; (iii) Acer spp. are hosts of the pest; (iv) the pest can be associated with the commodity and (v) the pest may have an impact and can pose a potential risk for the EU territory. Four pests (Eotetranychus sexmaculatus, Meloidogyne fallax, Oemona hirta and Platypus apicalis) that fulfilled all relevant criteria were selected for further evaluation. For the selected pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from New Zealand were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For the selected pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. Based on the outcome of Expert Knowledge Elicitation, the degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated. The mite, Eotetranychus sexmaculatus, was the pest most likely to cause plants to fail pest freedom status. The Panel is 95% sure that at least 9,240 plants per 10,000 will be free from E. sexmaculatus.

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Plant Health was requested to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the relevant Implementing Acts as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’ [Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 establishing a provisional list of high risk plants, plant products or other objects, within the meaning of Article 42 of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031]. The current Scientific Opinion covers all plant health risks posed by bare rooted plants for planting of Robinia pseudoacacia (1 year old with a stem diameter of less than 2.5 cm) imported from Israel, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Israel by 26 December 2019. The relevance of an EU‐quarantine pest for this opinion was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel; (ii) R. pseudoacacia is a host of the pest, and (iii) the pest can be associated with the commodity. The relevance of this opinion for other non EU‐regulated pests was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel (ii) the pest is absent in the EU; (iii) R. pseudoacacia is a host of the pest; (iv) the pest can be associated with the commodity and (v) the pest may have an impact and can pose a potential risk for the EU territory. Two pests (one insect and one fungus, Euwallacea fornicatus and Fusarium euwallaceae) that fulfilled all criteria were selected for further evaluation. For the two selected pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Israel were evaluated. Limiting factors in the effectiveness of the measures were documented. For the selected pests an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment, therefore the Panel is 95% sure that 9,950 or more plants per 10,000 will be free from these two pests.

The EFSA Panel on Plant Health was requested to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the relevant Implementing Acts as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’ [Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 establishing a provisional list of high risk plants, plant products or other objects, within the meaning of Article 42 of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031]. The current Scientific Opinion covers all plant health risks posed by bare rooted plants for planting of Robinia pseudoacacia (1 year old with a stem diameter of less than 2.5 cm) imported from Israel, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Israel by 26 December 2019. The relevance of an EU-quarantine pest for this opinion was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel; (ii) R. pseudoacacia is a host of the pest, and (iii) the pest can be associated with the commodity. The relevance of this opinion for other non EU-regulated pests was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel (ii) the pest is absent in the EU; (iii) R. pseudoacacia is a host of the pest; (iv) the pest can be associated with the commodity and (v) the pest may have an impact and can pose a potential risk for the EU territory. Two pests (one insect and one fungus, Euwallacea fornicatus and Fusarium euwallaceae) that fulfilled all criteria were selected for further evaluation. For the two selected pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Israel were evaluated. Limiting factors in the effectiveness of the measures were documented. For the selected pests an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment, therefore the Panel is 95% sure that 9,950 or more plants per 10,000 will be free from these two pests.

Background The Siberian moth (Dendrolimus sibiricus) is a serious pest of conifers in Russia, Northern Kazakhstan, Mongolia and China. The western border of the pest’s distribution in Russia is disputed, but it is present west of the 60th meridian east. The pest has the potential to defoliate a wide range of conifers. Results The pest is not present in Norway or other European countries, except Russia. Natural spread and human mediated transport are potential pathways for the pest. Human mediated pathways considered are: Living trees for planting, coniferous wood in the rough and foliage and branches. There has been no import of living trees from Russia to Norway during the past 30 years, and there is currently no import of coniferous wood commodities containing bark from areas, where D. sibiricus occurs. Conclusions The probability of D. sibiricus entry by natural spread is unlikely, mainly because of the geographical distance and the partial sea barriers between Norway and the infested areas. The probability of entry by human mediated pathways is unlikely due to the very limited volume of the import. Should the pest enter Norway, the probability of establishment and spread is unlikely, due to the suboptimal climatic conditions, and the fact that the two dominant conifers in the country, Norway spruce (Picea abies) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris), are intermediate and poor hosts, respectively. The potential damage, should D. sibiricus enter Norway, is considered low. Keywords: Lepidoptera, Invasive species, Geographical distribution, Forest pest | publishedVersion

The geographic pattern of cropland is an important risk factor for invasion and saturation by crop-specific pathogens and arthropods. Understanding cropland networks supports smart pest sampling and mitigation strategies. We evaluate global networks of cropland connectivity for key vegetatively propagated crops (banana and plantain, cassava, potato, sweet potato, and yam) important for food security in the tropics. For each crop, potential movement between geographic location pairs was evaluated using a gravity model, with associated uncertainty quantification. The highly linked hub and bridge locations in cropland connectivity risk maps are likely priorities for surveillance and management, and for tracing intraregion movement of pathogens and pests. Important locations are identified beyond those locations that simply have high crop density. Cropland connectivity risk maps provide a new risk component for integration with other factors—such as climatic suitability, genetic resistance, and global trade routes—to inform pest risk assessment and mitigation.