Table 8.

The Panel’s conclusions on the pest categorisation criteria defined in Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 on protective measures against pests of plants (the number of the relevant sections of the pest categorisation is shown in brackets in the first column)

Criterion of pest categorisation	Panel’s conclusions against criterion in Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 regarding Union quarantine pest	Key uncertainties
Identity of the pest ( 3.1 )	The identity of the pest is established. Taxonomic keys based on morphology of female adults exist	None
Absence/presence of the pest in the EU ( 3.2 )	The pest has a restricted distribution in the EU territory (Rhodes Island in Greece and Cyprus)	None
Regulatory status ( 3.3 )	Maconellicoccus hirsutus is not regulated as a quarantine pest in the EU; the Cypriot NPPO is taking official action	None
Pest potential for entry, establishment and spread in the EU ( 3.4 )	Maconellicoccus hirsutus is able to enter into, become established, and spread within the EU territory. The main pathways are: – plants for planting (regulated, some prohibited, some permitted) – fruits, vegetables and cut flowers (regulated, except bananas and pineapple)	None
Potential for consequences in the EU ( 3.5 )	The pests’ introduction could reduce the aesthetic value of various ornamental plants and the production of many crops	In many countries M. hirsutus is not a serious pest, possibly due to the climate being less favourable, and natural enemies reducing its population levels
Available measures ( 3.6 )	There are measures available to prevent the entry, establishment and spread of M. hirsutus within the EU. Risk reduction options include the inspections and physical treatments on consignments of fresh plant material from infested countries and the production of plants for import into the EU in pest free areas (this could be difficult due to wide distribution of the pest)	Eradication and containment actions taken in the Caribbean (for example, restricting the movement of host plant material) were unsuccessful. There is uncertainty regarding how effective risk reduction measures would be in the EU
Conclusion ( 4 )	The criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a potential quarantine pest are met
Aspects of assessment to focus on/scenarios to address in future if appropriate	Establishment, impact, and natural enemies