Harmonising GAP programs for fresh produce in ASEAN region

Many forces are driving the global demand for assurance that fruit and vegetables are safe to eat and of the right quality, and are produced and handled in a manner that does not cause harm to the environment and the health, safety and welfare of workers. The impact of these driving forces is that retailer requirements for suppliers to comply with Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) is increasing and governments are strengthening legal requirements for food safety, environmental protection, and worker health, safety and welfare. The implementation of GAP programs currently within the ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations) region varies, with some countries having government certified systems and others beginning the journey with awareness programs for farmers. Under a project funded by the ASEAN Australia Development Cooperation Program, a standard for ASEAN GAP has been developed to harmonise GAP Programs in the region. The goal is to facilitate trade between ASEAN countries and to global markets, improve viability for farmers, and help sustain a safe food supply and the environment. ASEAN GAP is an umbrella standard that individual member countries will benchmark their national programs against to gain equivalence. The scope of ASEAN GAP covers the production, harvesting and postharvest handling of fresh fruit and vegetables on farm and postharvest handling in locations where produce is packed for sale. ASEAN GAP consists of four modules covering food safety, environmental management, worker health, safety and welfare, and produce quality. Each module can be used alone or in combination with other modules. This enables progressive implementation of ASEAN GAP, module by module based on individual country priorities.

Novel vaccine acceptance in emerging infectious diseases: a case study of Hendra virus vaccine uptake in Australia

Background: The development of a horse vaccine against Hendra virus has been hailed as a good example of a One Health approach to the control of human disease. Although there is little doubt that this is true, it is clear from the underwhelming uptake of the vaccine by horse owners to date (approximately 10%) that realisation of a One Health approach requires more than just a scientific solution. As emerging infectious diseases may often be linked to the development and implementation of novel vaccines this presentation will discuss factors influencing their uptake; using Hendra virus in Australia as a case study. Methods: This presentation will draw on data collected from the Horse owners and Hendra virus: A Longitudinal cohort study To Evaluate Risk (HHALTER) study. The HHALTER study is a mixed methods research study comprising a two-year survey-based longitudinal cohort study and qualitative interview study with horse owners in Australia. The HHALTER study has investigated and tracked changes in a broad range of issues around early uptake of vaccination, horse owner uptake of other recommended disease risk mitigation strategies, and attitudes to government policy and disease response. Interviews provide further insights into attitudes towards risk and decision-making in relation to vaccine uptake. A combination of quantitative and qualitative data analysis will be reported. Results: Data collected from more than 1100 horse owners shortly after vaccine introduction indicated that vaccine uptake and intention to vaccinate was associated with a number of risk perception factors and financial cost factors. In addition, concerns about side effects and veterinarians refusing to treat unvaccinated horses were linked to uptake. Across the study period vaccine uptake in the study cohort increased to more than 50%, however, concerns around side effects, equine performance and breeding impacts, delays to full vaccine approvals, and attempts to mandate vaccination by horse associations and event organisers have all impacted acceptance. Conclusion: Despite being provided with a safe and effective vaccine for Hendra virus that can protect horses and break the transmission cycle of the virus to humans, Australian horse owners have been reluctant to commit to it. General issues pertinent to novel vaccines, combined with challenges in the implementation of the vaccine have led to issues of mistrust and misconception with some horse owners. Moreover, factors such as cost, booster dose schedules, complexities around perceived risk, and ulterior motives attributed to veterinarians have only served to polarise attitudes to vaccine acceptance.