Global Partnership Programme for Transboundary Animal Diseases (GPP-TAD) Opening Remarks

Dear Permanent Representatives of the Members, here in-person and online,

Dear Colleagues,

It is a critical moment. We come together to think together, design together and deliver together.

Because earlier this year, something unpredicted happened. I said so many times publicly: I am not a person who always complains - if I complain, it is a real complaint.

I always try my best to find a solution. A solution is more than complaining. When complaining, you just express your personal feelings. Sometimes it may be necessary for you to relieve yourself. But as a leader, as a manager, if you complain too much it will cause misleading thinking and misunderstanding issues.

I always aim to keep calm and do deep thinking. What is the real opportunity for us if we face a crisis, big or small?

This time, after six months – we started in May - and of course after the FAO Ministerial Conference we sped up the process – now my colleagues have the Information Note ready for you.

Why did we not say consult? Because here during the past four years there have been too many unnecessary informal consultations.

You will see the Information Note show how much it has cost during the past six years with all the sessions of Governing Bodies. We need to be more serious about efficiency and effectiveness, especially in the Governing Bodies.

The former Finance Committee Chair has now become the Independent Chairperson of the Council (ICC). So, this is a good moment to revitalize the Council to be on track, to be more efficient and more effective.

Thank you for joining us today for the presentation of the Global Partnership Programme for Transboundary Animal Diseases - GPP. This is a real partnership!

I asked DeepSeek “What is GPP?” and I was surprised to learn that there are no UN terms that use the acronym GPP.

There was only one scientific article about soil and water management which used “GPP”. So, again, surprisingly, you are the first in the UN to use GPP!

A renewed, forward-looking, and country-driven mechanism designed for today’s reality.

Reform - I always said we need a mechanism for reform. That is a real and deep reform. If you only cut or increase, that is too simple.

And founded on our shared understanding that transboundary animal diseases are now among the most urgent threats to global food security, economic stability, and One Health.

Transboundary Animal Diseases are spreading faster, further, and with greater impact than ever before.

They do not respect borders or politics, and impact on both strong and weak systems alike.

FAO’s Emergency Centre for Transboundary Animal Diseases has been our operational backbone for more than 20 years.

Thanks to the United States, during the past 20 years, they always supported with a dominant proportion of the budget, we appreciate that.

Now, it is time for you I joked with the Ambassador of France, as one of the Permanent Five (P5), and as one of the G20; together with Brazil who is here, and India also here, as well as China and Saudi Arabia who are all here.

At least as members of the G20 you should take it seriously – including the European Union who is also one of the G20.

That is the leading role you can play. If the G20 does not take ownership, why did you become a member of the G20?  India, Indonesia, Mexico, Argentina, South Africa, and of course the United States, Canada, and Japan – who are also members of the G7. Russia and Türkiye can also consider providing support.

I hope that the G20 will use this opportunity to show your leading role. Transboundary animal diseases are natural; they do not respect boundaries or politics.

We are talking about transboundary animal diseases, but also about plant and insect diseases. We will come soon with another programme - a global partnership programme for transboundary plant diseases and insects.

But recent funding cuts have placed this essential capacity at serious risk, at the same time as global threats are increasing.

We cannot afford to destroy what has taken decades to build. That is the knowledge we have accumulated. We should respect the historical contribution from the investors, from the United States and other FAO Members.

I have been to so many places in Africa and have seen how they now really have the capacity and the laboratories for the phytosanitary checks. It is our historical responsibility to keep the momentum.

We cannot wait for the next crisis to act. The cost of prevention is far lower than the cost of inaction.

That is why the Pandemic Fund now supports FAO – we got USD 124 from the Pandemic Fund!

And thanks to Assistant Director-General Thanawat Tiensin, Director of the Animal Production and Health Division, FAO is now highly recognized by the Pandemic Fund.

I should encourage all the colleagues, not only the Division of Animal Production and Health, but also others, including the Country Offices.

Now, USD 124 million is not small amount of money, and this is a critical time. So, we need to keep working to show our technical capacity and comparative advantage.

For the Pandemic Fund it is a small amount – compared to a total of USD 100 billion pledged. I think at the beginning they started with only USD 10 billion.

So, now they have reached about USD 500 million. So, out of USD 500 million, FAO got USD 124 million!

I really congratulate my colleagues, led by the Director of the Division of Animal Production and Health, and other FAO Senior Staff, who will continue to work day and night, and we will be reliable, deliverable and responsible.

At the same time, global demand for livestock and aquaculture products continues to rise.

I do not want to say too much about that because we will have a population of 10 billion by the end of 2050. You think this is a long time away? No, it is only 25 years away.

If you have cattle, you need three or four years before slaughtering them at 36 or 48 months. So, if you start now with beef or pork you will need 18 months. That is the lifecycle of agriculture. For fruit: some fruits would need five years, ten years, or even 20 years before you harvest. That is why we have to think in advance and prepare ourselves early.

The livestock sector today supports the livelihoods of more than 1.3 billion people — one person in five on our planet — and aquaculture provides half of the world’s seafood and freshwater fish.

I said to the Assistant Director-General of the Fisheries and Aquaculture Division, Mr Manuel Barange: fish is also an animal, but we do not want to keep the fish separate otherwise we will continue to work in small silos. Let us become One Organization, One FAO.

They can also easily get a small proportion from the Pandemic Fund if you deal with fish disease; but they could not get USD 15 million or USD 20 million on their own for fish disease control.

That is why I said you should work with the basic terminology of biology. I am so happy that ADG Manuel Barange was previously a professor who always gave lessons to the students, and now he has become the one implementing his own words.

These sectors are essential for nutrition, jobs and economic opportunity, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Even in high-income countries like Italy more and more fish is coming from aquaculture - that is the new trend, you cannot keep eating fish always from wild catch.

The biggest potential area in cutting Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (IUU) is from development.

Because if you do not change your habit of consumption, you will continue to focus on the wild catch fish. If there are no consumers, there is no driving force to incentive IUU. But Europeans always force others to stop IUU.

If you do not provide the market opportunity, then nobody will export wild catch fish to Europe because you are the most expensive continent in the world.

If you reduce eating wild catch fish by five percent, you will reduce ten percent of the wild catch and replace that with five percent of fish from aquaculture. That is the consequence of encouraging aquaculture.

Lots of people misunderstand natural growing fish. You want to eat the muscles of the fish? No, that is natural fish. You need more tender fish from aquaculture, with quality control, of course. That is science-based. People think you want natural and wild deer or goats. No, you catch the goats, breed them in the shelter for several months, and then the meat becomes more tender.

I was the Vice Governor in a Muslim province; we imported some fast-growing calf and goats from southern China and brought them to stay in Ningxia. It is a dry area. It is good because the pH value of drinking water has a high alkaline and then it changes the flavor of the mutton. It is a science-based solution.

I want to take this opportunity before your retirement Mr Barange to reduce the wild fish catch in Europe by five percent. And it will have a big impact.  

We can save lot of the bla bla, and save a lot of policy consultations, and investment. Just educate the restaurants. Tell them you do not want wild catch fish; you want fish from aquaculture.

Many restaurants buy fish from aquaculture and then sell them as wild catch; but with more trade and more animal movement and the accelerating effects of the climate crisis, the risks are increasing.

Outbreaks can wipe out years of progress in days. They can devastate smallholders, interrupt trade, burden national budgets, and increase pressure on antimicrobials. And they can spill over into human populations.

This is why FAO, together with Members, has invested so much over so many years to build strong and resilient animal health systems.

Now, we must protect those achievements, and scale them up, before the next crisis strikes – not only when it strikes and affects our daily production.

We should focus on the daily health management of animal production.

FAO has focused on the technical service to farmers, especially small farmers every day. If we do not understand transboundary animal disease like African Swine Fever, they will stop to import or export your meat. 

I can see that our Animal Production and Health Division should not use the pandemic words to scare the Members.

Maybe 10 or 20 years will pass with no outbreak - like locusts, 25 years. Does it mean we do not need people to understand locust control?

That is the value of FAO as an organization: we work for 20 years to prepare our technical capacity, to offer service when it is needed. We are different from other organizations.

Europeans say they don’t have this crisis, they do not have a pandemic, and after 20 years you find that you have lost the capacity even though you have the technology, you have the first-class scientists. But no one is safe. No Member has the advantage or privilege to say they are safe.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Global Partnership Programme for Transboundary Animal Diseases responds directly to the guidance by the FAO Ministerial Conference in July this year, and to the concerns that many of you have raised.

It will help FAO continue to deliver on one of its core mandates: preventing and controlling transboundary animal diseases - not only preventing but also controlling - as a global public good.

To achieve this, the new mechanism has four essential features:

First: it is a new model of innovative partnerships. 

No country can manage these diseases alone. Through this Programme, FAO will bring together Members, development banks, regional organizations, the private sector, foundations and other international, technical partners, into one coordinated effort.

We will host the coordination secretariat here in our Animal Production and Health Division.

This is not a traditional project-by-project approach. It is a platform for solidarity, shared responsibility, and sustainable, predictable investment.

It will ensure that countries with greater resources support those with more limited capacities — and that no country is left behind.

Second: it is a catalytic, integrated system.

The Programme builds on more than two decades of FAO experience, and goes one step further by connecting early warning, anticipatory action, preparedness, and rapid response into one coherent system.

It combines FAO’s technical excellence with innovation:

• digital tools for faster detection;
• artificial intelligence for risk forecasting;
• stronger laboratory networks;
• modern bio-security or bio-safety. In English, we say biosafety, not biosecurity because for English native speakers bio-safety is different from bio-security. Bio-safety means when you have a GMO and all the related dangers, but I was a scientist and so I refer to bio-safety because bio-security is a quantitative issue, while bio-safety is a qualitative risky. That is what we defined 25 years ago or more.
• vaccination strategies; and
• new business models for public–private co-investment.

This is how we shift from reacting to diseases after they spread, to prevent them from spreading.

And also, we will have a monitoring system. Again, not only simply prevention or control. We are establishing a global monitoring system - that is the value of FAO and the value of this Programme.

Third: it is a truly country-led mechanism, based on the simple principle that countries lead, and FAO convenes and strengthens.

The Programme has three interconnected layers:

• At the National level: countries implement their own plans through National Platforms or Centers of Excellence. We have a lot of Reference Centers in the different countries. Together with the FAO-IAEA Joint Center, we can improve their capacity and training. That is also an advantage because we are the only two sister agencies in the UN System who have physical cooperating labs to improve the capacity for the developing countries that need it the most, in line with their priorities and value chains.
• At the Regional level: Regional Transboundary Animal Disease Hubs coordinate cross-border action, harmonize surveillance, and strengthen preparedness; and
• At the Global level: a new Global Coordination Mechanism, chaired by the FAO Director-General, ensures alignment, provides strategic intelligence, and mobilizes investment.

This design protects national ownership, while ensuring global coherence.

Fourth: this Global Partnership Programme has sustainable impact for Members with:

• fewer outbreaks,
• fewer disruptions to trade,
• fewer economic losses,
• fewer health risks, and
• more opportunities for sustainable growth.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

This Global Partnership Programme is about safeguarding decades of investment and helping to build agrifood systems that are more efficient, more inclusive, more resilient and more sustainable,

And that deliver on the Four Betters, including better production.

We always start with better production. If we did not control diseases, you would only talk about AMR or zoonotic diseases - it is not mainstream of animal production.

The main function of FAO’s Animal Production and Health Division, and of the Fisheries and Aquaculture Division, should be to offer more and better animal proteins, including fish.

Not through catch or wild animals. If you want to stop hunting the wild animals, then do not eat wild animal meat, and so nobody will be willing to hunt – it’s that simple!

It is our opportunity to reinforce, modernize, and secure FAO’s work on transboundary animal diseases for the next 20 years before the celebrations of the 100th Anniversary – I am not that ambitious to think that I will be here for the next 80 years! For the next 20 years it is much more reasonably predictive, more pragmatic.

It is an opportunity to turn crisis into possibility — and uncertainty into renewed solidarity.

Today’s session is not only about presenting a Programme. It is an invitation for your partnership, ownership, leadership and solidarity.

Your guidance will shape its final design. Your engagement will determine its ambition. And your commitment will define its impact.

I encourage all of you to join the Programme now before mid-May 2026 because after the Regional Ministerial Conferences in the first half of next year, we will close all the applications.

I am going to keep selling these ideas at each Regional Conference. I will directly talk with your Ministers or Vice-Ministers and encourage them to take ownership and partnership together. That is the first thing.

The second is that there are four categories:

One is the SIDS, LDCs and LLDCs. Ms Xiangjun Yao is the Director of the Office of SIDS, LDC and LLDCs, which account for about 90 FAO Members. We do not want them to contribute.

Of course, Your Excellency Yaya Olaniran of Nigeria, if you ask your Minister to contribute USD 1 million a year, it is okay, you are welcome, because you are the biggest country in Africa. But you should ask your Minister to establish your own unilateral fund to address transboundary animal disease in your country. We do not want to spend any dollars from your country. You can ask the Minister of Finance and say we joined the FAO Global Partnership Programme for Transboundary Animal Diseases (GPP-TAD); we need your commitment and support to the Minister of Agriculture to monitor animal disease in Nigeria.

The first category, therefore, are the small islands, for which you may only need USD 100 000 a year from unilateral funds.

India, you are big, but not yet a middle-high income country, so you can perhaps ask for USD 1 billion for your own use. Your Minister of Agriculture should challenge your Minister of Finance. Because proportionally, you need USD 1 billion. You have 1.5 billion people: if each one invests USD 1 for the control of transboundary animal disease, which is reasonable, it will amount to USD 1.5 billion from India for unilateral funds.

The second group is the middle-high income level countries like Saudi Arabia, Brazil and China - you should contribute. Or even Mexico. I have talked with Julio Berdegué, Secretary for Agriculture and Rural Development of Mexico and former FAO Regional Representative for Latin America and the Caribbean, together with his Minister of Foreign Affairs, and we discussed USD 1 million a year for the next four years.

Why did I say four years? Because I am preparing for the new Director-General so that when he/she arrives, he/she will have some money to continue. I am the person that always builds the bridge for the next one.

Please commit to at least pay for the first two years, and then when the new Director-General arrives, you can continue for another two years.

So, for four years the middle-high income countries will have to contribute – including France and the other G20 countries, except perhaps some of the middle-low-income countries.

Because this shows solidarity, not only talk about solidarity, not only talk about the importance of it – that is the true testimony.

I will not wait until 1 June 2026; I will start already now to organize new structures on how to manage and monitor this Programme.

And for the third group, I will encourage my Director of Resource Mobilization, Mr Alexander Jones, and Mr Rein Paulsen, Director of the Office of Emergencies and Resilience, to work together with all the Core Leadership in approaching the multilateral funds and foundations. They can make voluntary contributions to support a few Members, or they can donate money to support the Coordination Hub as they wish.

That is my business model.

Thereafter, of course, we will invite the CGIAR institutions, and some big institutes like the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS), Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (EMPRABA), the French Academy of Agriculture Sciences (CNR), and others in the United States – and anyone who is willing to offer technical support.

I also want to break down the silos across the divisions, and I will take the lead myself to give a strong political signal.

Of course I will talk with Bill Gates, my friend, and give him a last chance to contribute to FAO before I leave.

And the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the African Development Bank, the Caribbean Development Bank, and others like the Italian Agricultural Bank, or the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, can put also contribute some money as a political signal.

And Members, I said that the G20 should take a leading role. Of course, not limited to that, you should report to your Capitals - I will check with your Minister. You know I am a close friend to your Ministers, especially the Minister of Agriculture.

FAO stands ready — with our global networks, our country offices, our scientific expertise, and our operational experience — to work with you to protect global animal health as a public good.

For a safer, more resilient and more foods-secure world.

Let us work together; together we can more efficiently address this global challenge.

Thank you.