Regulation of phytosanitary risk in South Africa

Quarantine, diagnostics, and laboratory networks support biosecurity within a global context of constrained resources. By Jenny Underhill.

“Emerging or invasive pests may cause food insecurity, limit economic growth, and lead to unemployment,” said Nolan Africander, speaking at the 2026 Hortgro Technical Symposium. “In the past, we lost market access when pests of agricultural importance entered South Africa and became established.”

Africander is the Scientific Manager for Plant Quarantine and Diagnostic Services at the National Plant Protection Organization of South Africa (NPPOZA), which falls under the Department of Agriculture.

In South Africa, phytosanitary risks are currently managed under the Agricultural Pests Act (Act 36 of 1983). This Act will be replaced by the Plant Health Phytosanitary Act (Act 35 of 2024) once supporting regulations are finalised.

Globally, the World Trade Organization (WTO) provides the framework that governs international trade and creates rules that facilitate fair trade between countries. As part of the WTO framework, the Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement allows countries to implement measures to protect human, animal, and plant health.

Phytosanitary measures must be scientifically justifiable and minimally restrict trade. The SPS Agreement recognises the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) as the standard-setting body for plant health. The IPPC develops International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs) that guide countries in managing plant pest risks.

Each government must establish a legislated National Plant Protection Organisation (NPPO) to meet its obligations under the IPPC. “The NPPOZA implements these measures in South Africa,” explained Africander. “We use phytosanitary activities such as quarantine and diagnostics to manage phytosanitary risks.”

The objectives of the NPPOZA

The NPPOZA is responsible for preventing the introduction and spread of pests in South Africa. These risks are managed as a series of integrated activities before a commodity leaves the exporting country (pre-border), at the point of entry (border), and after it enters South Africa (post-border).

“We prefer that most risks are managed on the pre-border side. As a country, we perform pest risk analyses on various commodities, which are then translated into import requirements for trade,” said Africander. “These will feature on the import permit. The exporting country must comply with these requirements before the commodity is exported.”

The import permit may state that the exporting country only needs to declare freedom from the listed pests, or it may specify testing of the commodity to demonstrate pest freedom.

When a commodity arrives at the border, it is inspected, and documentation is checked. Thereafter, consignments are either released or sent to official laboratories for testing. If the consignment is not compliant (for example, if something of quarantine importance is found), it is either returned, destroyed, or subjected to mitigation measures.

“Sometimes, importers will bring in plant propagation material that is destined for post-entry quarantine. In these instances, the material is sent to an official plant quarantine station,” said Africander. “We place the material in isolation, establish and monitor it. We then perform diagnostics to determine pest-free status.”

The NPPOZA not only assists with phytosanitary risks associated with imports but also with those associated with exports. It ensures compliance with trading partners’ import requirements, supports export programmes, and manages pest surveillance. It also supports control measures for plants and plant-related products that pose a biosecurity threat.

Benefits of plant diagnostic networks

Globally, NPPOs face constraints that make it increasingly difficult to safeguard against phytosanitary risks. These constraints include increasing trade volumes and rapid movement of commodities, the need to balance trade facilitation with phytosanitary protection, limited investment in infrastructure and laboratories, the impact of climate change on emerging pests, and a shortage of skilled diagnosticians.

“As an NPPO, we need to look at how we can work within these constraints,” said Africander. “One solution is to form plant diagnostic laboratory networks.”

Laboratory networks allow stakeholders to cooperate, improve coordination and preparedness, facilitate the sharing of expertise and reference capacity, promote standardised diagnostic methods, support proficiency testing and quality assurance, and strengthen emergency response capabilities for pest outbreaks.

Formal national and international plant diagnostic laboratory networks already exist worldwide, for example, in the United States, Australia, Europe, and Asia. One regional network links Central America with Central, East, and West Africa.

These networks have been extremely successful in helping countries respond timeously to emerging pests, develop diagnostic protocols, and improve diagnostic capacity.

“For example, in Africa, diagnostic initiatives have strengthened monitoring, especially for fall armyworm and cassava brown streak virus,” said Africander. “Early detection and coordinated responses reduce the cost of eradication and pest management, and maintain market access.”

Creating formal plant diagnostic networks

“Although we do have some informal networks in South Africa, we do not have a formalised plant diagnostic network,” said Africander. “There are various levels of diagnostic infrastructure and resources, but many of them operate in silos. By leveraging all available resources, we can create a system that is built on trust and credibility.”

At present, the NPPOZA has service-level agreements with various laboratories to support its mandate. These laboratories comply with ISPM 45 (the requirements for NPPOs to authorise other entities to perform phytosanitary actions).

The NPPOZA is also supported by the Agricultural Research Council and the National Biosecurity Hub (NBH). The NBH was established in 2022 to strengthen the management of biosecurity threats to the South African agricultural sector and food supply.

“To set up a more formal plant diagnostic network in South Africa, we will have to form government-industry collaborations and approve more laboratories based on ISPM 45,” said Africander. “It will also be necessary to standardise and validate diagnostic methods, improve communication and data sharing, and audit existing capabilities and platforms.”

Similarly, establishing global diagnostic laboratory networks is a priority, and the IPPC has named them a global agenda item.

In 2025, the IPPC appointed Africander as an expert consultant to support this agenda. He also currently represents Africa at the CPM (Commission on Phytosanitary Measures) Focus Group on Diagnostic Laboratory Networking — he is one of only two African representatives.

“No single NPPO can sustainably maintain all required technology expertise and infrastructure,” concluded Africander. “The future of phytosanitary diagnostics and quarantine is networked, digital, predictive, and multidisciplinary.”

*

Watch this presentation on the Hortgro YouTube channel.