Hello again, readers. Like everyone else, I’ve spent the past few weeks thinking a lot more about how goods cross borders and how that can be disturbed at the drop of a hat – or a trade barrier. And while it would be fair to accuse me of jumping on the trade and tariffs bandwagon, as someone who has worked to facilitate international trade in key commodities for over 15 years, I know that rules and regulations to ensure biosecurity can sometimes be important and often overlooked trade barriers.
The world’s attention has been focused on the quintessential barrier – tariffs – amid the global trade friction unfolding around us. These have reignited public debate on the economic impact of tariff-based trade protectionism.
But while tariffs dominate the headlines, non-tariff barriers (NTBs) continue to have a powerful and insidious role in shaping global trade. Most often, NTBs come in the form of regulations or administrative processes. With their reciprocity more difficult to compare than a standard tariff and detailed in nature; they are easier to erect and harder to dismantle.
In the biosecurity space, NTBs frequently arise with regard to the recognition of treatments between trade partners. Even where a treatment product has been rigorously assessed and approved for use in the exporting country – with proof it works – if that proof is not recognised by the importing country, it’s as good as useless. The reasons for this mismatch are manifold and are often a combination of understaffed regulatory agencies, slow processes or diverging national priorities. Sometimes, it is good old fashioned protectionist commercial interests. Whatever the reason, the outcome is the same – trade friction, reduced market access, and, in some case, no choice but to use treatments which are less effective or carry more risks to health and the environment. These issues can in fact, pose threats to the very biosecurity they are designed to ensure.
As the global trade order resets around us, I have faith that many countries will seek new trading partners and keep borders open. But to do that, they should also take a long hard look at their respective NTBs. Harmonising regulatory frameworks for biosecurity and stored product pest treatments across borders is essential for maintaining global food security, protecting biosecurity, and facilitating smooth, predictable trade flows.
And it’s now more urgent than ever. If countries are serious about building resilient and diverse supply chains, addressing NTBs in sectors like ours shouldn’t be left on the sidelines in their trade talks.
As always, I’ll be watching how this all unfolds and keep sharing my perspectives with you.
Until next time!
Kade McConville is the Executive Director of INTRESO Group, a company focused on sustainable fumigation and biosecurity practices within the agriculture, forestry, and logistics sectors. With a background in mechanical engineering, he has led industry efforts to transition away from ozone-depleting and environmentally challenging fumigants toward safer, more environmentally responsible alternatives. Kade works closely with regulatory bodies and industry stakeholders to drive innovation and improve compliance across global supply chains. His leadership emphasizes evidence-based practices and operational efficiency, aligning fumigation technologies with international sustainability goals and emerging regulatory frameworks, particularly in the context of evolving global biosecurity challenges
Published in the May 2025 issue of Milling and Grain.
