On May 22 Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns announced that the World Organization for Animal Health (better known as the OIE from the first letters of the French words of the organization’s previous name) “has formally classified the United States as a controlled risk country for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).” This was the culmination of efforts begun in October 2006 when the USDA Animal Health and Plant Inspection Service (APHIS) applied for the classification for BSE. Secretary Johanns said, “"We will use this international validation to urge our trading partners to reopen export markets to the full spectrum of U.S. cattle and beef products.”
The U.S. seeking “validation” by an international agency on animal health issues within our own country is an example of the world in the 21st century where trade has shrunk the world and made independent validation a critical component of food safety efforts. The classification recognizes that OIE-recommended, science-based mitigation measures have been adopted to manage any possible risk of BSE in the U.S. cattle herd.
The OIE, based in Paris, France, is an intergovernmental organization created in January 1924 by 28 countries; it currently has 167 member countries. Those two numbers, 28 and 167, explain much about the new realities in food safety and trade. The OIE began as a collection of relatively well off developed countries that shared common problems associated with animal health. The OIE now represents most of the countries of the world from the wealthiest to the most economically struggling ones.
Its missions are to: 1) ensure transparency in global animal disease situations, 2) collect, analyze and disseminate veterinary scientific information, 3) provide expertise and encourage the control of animal diseases, 4) improve the legal framework and resources of national veterinary services, and 5) within its mandate under the WTO Sanitary Phyto-Sanitary Agreement, safeguard world trade by publishing health standards for international trade in animals and animal products. It is under this final mission that APHIS asked for the BSE classification. All five of these missions are critical in a world of increased trade and travel.
Delegates from the member countries meet in May each year in Paris as the International Committee. The OIE also has a World Animal Health Information Database which is a global animal diseases tracking system. It maintains relationships with international groups like the Codex alimentarius, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N., the World Health Organization and the World Veterinary Association.
Decisions made by the OIE are not without controversy. Canada is also now classified as a controlled risk country for BSE, which means the U.S. must handle Canadian cattle and beef the same as it wants other countries to deal with U.S. products. South Korea had previously indicated it would abide with the OIE decision for the U.S.; now they will need to do the same for Canada. According to USDA 18 countries have an unjustified ban on U.S. beef trade, and many others have partial restrictions.
For the U.S. and other developed countries the complex of international food safety groups can appear to be more trouble than it is worth. Science is the same regardless of where animals live and where research is conducted, but trade policy decisions often hang on perceptions of risks and political decisions that may be far removed from science. If science does not prevail, then all countries end up taking a step backward in trade relationships.
The recent problems with food and feed products from China have again highlighted the importance of individual countries being committed to following international standards. China is a member of the OIE. The issue of food safety is important enough for the U.S. that it was raised at the just completed U.S.-China Strategic Economic Dialogue in Washington, DC.
The U.S. has been a strong supporter of international standards groups, but its influence and that of other developed countries like the EU and Japan will continue to shrink as developing countries like Brazil with growing agricultures assume a larger role in international trade policy bodies. Now is the time for developed countries to prepare for the future by keeping sound science as the central focus of international standards setting bodies.
Shifting control in international groups is not unique to agriculture. Stuart Eizenstat, who held positions in the Carter and Clinton administrations, including ambassador to the EU, and Grant Aldonas, former undersecretary of commerce for international trade in the Bush administration, in the May 22 Wall Street Journal explained the need to rethink international agencies such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, the International Energy Agency and the Group of 8 Countries. All of these were started by developed countries, mostly from North America and Europe, and have played roles in the economic success of developed and developing countries since the end of World War II. Their current structures and decision making processes do not reflect the increased economic stake in the world held by Brazil, India, China and a host of other countries.
Reforms of international groups must be rooted in sound science and economic realism to build institutions that will serve another 60 years of turbulent times in trade policy and international relations. Eizenstat and Aldonas ended their thoughts with, “Only by sharing leadership with emerging nations can the U.S. and EU set the course for the new global economy -- and avoid a world that becomes increasingly protectionist and fragmented. We must choose to lead or accept being left behind.”
News 
