Briefing to Permanent Representatives Risks to FAO’s Capacity for Preventing and Responding to Transboundary Animal Diseases Opening Remarks

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Dear Colleagues,

I am so happy to see you all, before the FAO Ministerial Conference.

I really appreciate all the support from Members who are working closely with us here in Rome or in the Capitals, and especially my colleagues.

Today, I welcome you to this important briefing on the growing threat to global food security, animal health, and human well-being from transboundary animal diseases, which continue to test the resilience of global agrifood systems.

But not only animals, because One Health should start from plants and soils as well, not just from animals. Although, animals are more visible because some diseases are zoonotic and are more threatening for human beings. But plant diseases are also important for food and for feed. Without high-quality feed, how can we have healthy animals?

It is the same for human beings, many people say they are ill, they should take healthy foods first. Of course, it is because they do not take their medicines. That is why food security and high-quality medicines are very important.

So, as a scientist, we should look at it in a scientific way, and FAO continues to stand by you on this important issue.

Such as by eradicating Rinderpest, limiting Avian Influenza, and helping countries recover from Lumpy Skin Disease, Foot-and-Mouth Disease, and African Swine Fever – which started in Africa, but has now reached all over the world.

In China, we found the first case in 2018.

These were not isolated victories but the result of global solidarity, technical leadership, and long-term investment.

Today, that legacy - and our shared capacity to prevent the next major animal health crisis - is at risk.

The resurgence of Avian Influenza, the spread of new strains of Foot-and-Mouth Disease, the persistence of African Swine Fever, and the re-emergence of New World Screwworm are not just warnings - they are alarms.

These diseases do not respect borders, they move through trade routes, migratory birds and a changing climate.

And their impact is severe: millions of animals lost, billions in economic damage, rural livelihoods destroyed, and pandemic threats rising.

I am pleased that the Pandemic Fund continues to support FAO and others.

Although we are living in a digital world, we should worry about real problems related to the real world. We should not worry about AI and other digital technologies too much as they are only tools. We have to fix real problems related to the real world.

For over 20 years, FAO’s Emergency Centre for Transboundary Animal Diseases has been at the heart of our response.

Thanks to the generous support of the United States, which has provided around 90% of the funding over this period, the Centre has been our frontline force,

Some Members are asking why the FAO regular budget did not increase enough? For so many years, countries like the United States, established reliable, long-term programs. And their support was taken for granted – 20 years of generous support. But then suddenly domestic policy changes and now we have to find new ways to work together, to address these changes. We need to stay positive and optimistic! It does not help to just complain.

In my opinion, from the perspective of our American friends, it is now time for the others to also show their commitment for the next 20 years, together.

It is not a question of money, but of political willingness and commitment.

Every country has its own national policy changes and readjustment, it is understandable. So, I think now it is an opportunity for other Members – countries like Germany, France, United Kingdom, Italy, Australia as well as the Republic of Korea, China, Japan and even India, to work together to solve the problem, because this is the biggest impact so far on one single program.

In China, I faced reforms five times in the past 45 years, since I started my work in 1983. The important thing is not to create panic among staff. As a good manager you need to solve the problem, keep staff informed and let them work together to build solidarity.

And you should also be responsible and accountable. As FAO Director-General, and together with my Core Leadership Team, we count on you. We are not like a local or national government - we do not have a real budget. The first time I heard the word “budget” in English I said: “FAO is different, it is not about a real budget, it is about money allocation”.

Budget means that you have to create revenue, tax and income, and then you have expenditure. If you do not have enough, you can reach for bond money from the bank. Here at FAO, money is agreed upon and then it is allocated.

FAO continues to support countries around the world with early warning systems, field surveillance, laboratory networks, risk communication, and emergency response – all of which were 90 percent supported by the United States. In fact, three years ago, they increased their support to USD 468 million for the next five years and I really appreciate it.

But today, the Centre is under immense pressure, not only due to loss of resources, but also the loss of experts, if our partners do not step up in a responsible manner. These experts gained a lot of additional experience over the past 20 years, on top of the experience they already had on transboundary animal diseases. That is something we cannot measure with money.

For example, locust experts are prepared for the next epidemic. At FAO, we need to maintain a certain level of technical capacity, otherwise we will lose our real accountability and responsibility. We have to invest for the long-term. That is the key issue.

Due to major funding losses - around USD 60 million per year – FAO’s technical capacity on prevention, control, and rapid response of transboundary animal diseases has been reduced, almost terminated.  So far, we have managed to maintain it at the minimal level. That is why it is now critical for you to step up and buy in.

We have lost over 400 highly skilled staff and with them, critical capacity to prevent, detect, and contain animal disease threats.

The cost of inaction is far higher than the cost of prevention.

We cannot wait until the next crisis.

The strong foundation we have built together, is at risk.

We all need to take quick and concrete action, together with FAO Members and all the partners.

Today, we are presenting you with scenarios, based on my guidance and following discussions with ADG Thanawat Tiensin and DDG Godfrey Magwenzi. We gave you three options: highest, medium and the lowest, minimum. We do not want to lose that capacity. We have had a lot of similar experiences in the past. I will just mention a few. For example, we would implement a project on agricultural machinery in a small unit. Now, it is very difficult to do this.  If FAO did not have agriculture machinery unit in 20 years’ time, who would be able to provide a global scenario? We cannot turn to the private sector because they have their own businesses, and we need public goods.

Agricultural machinery, but also agronomy, tillage, conservation agriculture, these are all important when talking about the environment. You need to take measures to improve soil conditions, with effective soil management and good machinery – for this we have the Land and Water Division, but we do not have any unit taking care of agricultural equipment and the farming system. We have sadly lost these!

During my term as FAO Director-General, I will try my best to stop this historic mistake from happening. That would be a real mistake! Let us work together to maintain a minimum level on these important issues, so that maybe in two- or three-years’ time we will have a chance.

When a hurricane strikes in the United States, the people go down to the basement, they do not run away, otherwise everything will be destroyed. But if you go to the basement, you will have a safe place. That is what I learned from the Americans. In China, we do the same when a typhoon comes.

The decision is in your hands. I have always said that FAO is Member-owned, Member-led. I have said I do not have a budget. The budget we propose is based on how much money you are willing to invest.

This is a critical time, just before the FAO Ministerial Conference. You have asked us to prioritize and reprioritize. I always said that even if you have a good mother, but without money how can she cook a good meal? In Chinese we say that everyone needs to enjoy the good food, but who pays for it? Who pays for the menu? You have a choice on your menu, but who will pay for it?

You have to pay because it is YOUR organization!

I have no money; I am not a billionaire. Even if Bill Gates were to support me, he would be able to support only some areas, the areas that he feels to be more important for him. 

Your decisions are critical, that means:

• preventing the next pandemic;
• protecting trade and rural livelihoods, because transboundary diseases are not only animal diseases, it also relates to the environment, to food safety and food security, and to zoonotic diseases;
• building resilient livestock systems; and
• advancing health security and the One Health approach.

All these are technical terms prepared by my technical division, but what is your job as Members? What is the real meaning of an international organization?

It means dealing with all issues across borders, especially from a regional point of view, and from a global point of view. That is the real mandate. No matter whether it is FAO or WHO, or even WTO. Domestic trade is the responsibility of your national governments; cross-borders are international issues.

Number one: no matter if you are big or small, diseases do not respect territory.

Number two: at FAO animal transboundary diseases have their traditional roots depending on their natural environment. All their roots have a critical point. So, we need to establish a HACCP control point – a critical hazard point. We need capacity building, but not in all countries. That is my scientif assessment. We do not need to involve all 194 Members, as long as for at least some diseases we have the critical point. We need to have experts, services, and capacities to help them.

In FAO’s 80-year history, we have always worked together. During World War II, during the 1950s, every five years we had big issues to deal with. Geopolitical issues, because in the 1950s there were so many wars: the Cold War, the Hot War, that continued into the 1970s and 1980; and during the past five years, we had a pandemic, the war in Ukraine, and the crisis in Gaza. And now there are so many hotspots all around the world. We are living in a world that is not so friendly, but animal diseases should be stopped in a friendly way, in a collective way. Because from animals to human beings, it creates a problem for all of us. 

Let us reaffirm our commitment and invest in a future where disease outbreaks are detected earlier contained rapidly and prevented.

FAO remains firmly engaged to lead the transformation of global agrifood systems to be more efficient, more inclusive, more resilient and more sustainable, for better production.

When we refer to the Four Betters, why do I keep saying Better Production? At the beginning, some of you that were involved in the FAO Strategic Framework wanted to jump from production to others. I said “No, that is basic FAO.” Better Production should have healthy seeds, healthy animals, healthy stocks, and of course high-quality feed. And Better Nutrition should be clean, green and disease free, otherwise it is not nutritious food.

Let us act together efficiently, effectively and coherently, especially coherently, across borders and sectors, to ensure that our collective efforts match the scale of the threat.

And that, together, we can strengthen Global Animal Health Security and build back better for a better future ahead.

Before I end, I proposed to ADG Thanawat Tiensin, that through this programme, we could have some mechanism change. We want to establish an independent Programme Management Group with some original Members to support it, and they would then establish an Advisory Committee to look at the money, at the investment they are willing to do. If you are an original member for that Programme, you will be member of that group.

And also, we will need a certain level of minimum contribution, because it is a specific programme. If we always depend just on assessed contributions and on one or two big donors, it is too uncertain. That is the lesson we have learned.

I want to establish new mechanism to support global transborder issues, which are part of the technical capacity building work of FAO.

We just had last week a very good meeting at the UN Ocean Conference in Nice, France. They did a lot of things, some very good ones, but one of the most highly recommended and warmly accepted and appreciated was the launch of the FAO Global Assessment of Marine Fish Stocks - which looked at distribution, danger, water level, and sustainability – because it is a cross-border issue.

So, let us start this! In English the word crisis is one word, but in the Chinese culture it translates into two words: damage and opportunities. 

So, when people say it is a crisis, I say it is an opportunity! And now we have an opportunity to establish a new mechanism. It is not a question of money, it is about showing your solidarity, your visibility, your real commitment.

Let me reiterate, it is not a question of money. I would like to establish a new mechanism to address cross-border issues affecting animals, plants, and others.

Thank you.