Why the poultry sector needs a global pact to fight avian influenza

The sector should use international platforms such as the International Poultry Council to build coordinated solutions to ensure the resilience of the sector.

Vaccination, in particular, should be recognised as one important tool among other disease control tools. But, its effective use depends on collective international support to avoid unjustified trade barriers.

Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) has become the defining animal health challenge of our sector. What used to be treated as a series of unfortunate, localised outbreaks is now a structural, recurring threat to production, trade, and public confidence.

In recent months, we have seen renewed calls to relax trade restrictions linked to HPAI. The argument is familiar and, in many ways, legitimate: properly inspected and cooked poultry meat is a negligible pathway for HPAI transmission, and trade rules should reflect science rather than fear.

As AVEC, representing the European poultry sector, we understand this logic. We are exporters, too; we know how disruptive unjustified bans and overly rigid import conditions can be. But if our conversation stops at the relaxation of the trade restrictions, we risk missing the bigger picture – and the bigger opportunity. What we are facing with HPAI is not only a trade issue. It is a long-term structural challenge for animal health, sustainability and the credibility of our sector.

Vaccination: one important tool that requires collective support

HPAI vaccination should not be presented as the single solution to the problem. Biosecurity, surveillance, early detection, rapid response, and responsible trade rules will remain essential pillars of disease control. Vaccination is one tool among others – but it is a tool whose potential benefits cannot be fully realised unless it is supported collectively at an international level.

Today, many poultry-producing countries face a difficult dilemma: moving towards vaccination can create uncertainty about market access if trading partners are not ready to accept products from vaccinated flocks, even when these products are fully compliant with science-based standards and WOAH guidance. This risk understandably slows political and technical decision-making, even when the epidemiological situation would justify broader vaccination.

The result is a world where:

• HPAI continues to circulate at high levels,
• millions of birds are culled every year,
• enormous economic and emotional costs are imposed on farmers,
• public health concerns never really go away,
• and our sustainability credentials are undermined by repeated stamping-out campaigns and waste of resources.

If we limit our ambition to adjusting trade rules without addressing this broader dynamic, we may resolve some immediate trade frictions, but we will still be managing the consequences of a disease that remains structurally embedded in global poultry production.

Beyond trade debates: building a coordinated international approach

We need a different kind of leadership: one that looks beyond the next audit or market closure and asks what kind of HPAI regime we want to live within 5-10 years. A constructive way forward would be to work towards a commonly agreed horizon at international level, where vaccination is recognised as a normal and legitimate tool of HPAI control, implemented progressively, with appropriate safeguards and transparency. Such an approach does not mean vaccinating every bird everywhere overnight. It could realistically build on:

• targeted vaccination in the highest-risk systems (focusing on the highest risk poultry species – e.g., ducks, turkeys, egg layers and live poultry markets – and regions),
• agreed surveillance protocols and robust virological or serological DIVA strategies (to differentiate infected from vaccinated animals),
• transparent data-sharing and monitoring between countries,
• clear alignment with WOAH standards, and dialogue with the WTO to ensure that products from vaccinated flocks are not subject to unjustified restrictions.

The essential point is not that vaccination becomes an obligation, but that its use becomes collectively supported and internationally credible, so that countries choosing to vaccinate for sound animal health reasons are not penalised in trade.

The strategic role of international fora such as the International Poultry Council

This is precisely where global industry platforms play a crucial role. The International Poultry Council (IPC), together with other international bodies such as the World Egg Organization, brings together industry leaders from all major poultry-producing regions. These fora are uniquely positioned to move the discussion beyond purely national interests and to foster a shared strategic vision.

Therefore, these international platforms could increasingly be used to:

• facilitate a structured global dialogue on vaccination strategies,
• promote convergence around surveillance, certification and transparency practices,
• support alignment with WOAH standards and engagement with international institutions,
• encourage pilot projects, data sharing and mutual learning between regions,
• and articulate a unified industry voice calling for science-based acceptance of products from vaccinated populations.

If we want governments and international organisations to move towards more coherent global solutions, the poultry sector itself must first demonstrate its capacity to coordinate and to speak with clarity and responsibility. The IPC can and should be a central vehicle for this collective leadership.

Sending a clear signal to innovation and investment

A more coordinated international approach to vaccination would also send an important signal to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors. Today, vaccine developers face a fragmented landscape: different national strategies, uncertain political signals, and unclear long-term demand. Under these conditions, investment inevitably remains cautious. By contrast, if the leading poultry regions were to converge around a shared understanding that vaccination is a legitimate and increasingly important pillar of HPAI control, the message would be much clearer: safe, effective, affordable vaccines adapted to evolving virus strains will be needed at scale. Predictability encourages investment, innovation and capacity building.

This is not only about protecting economic interests. It is also about demonstrating that our sector takes its responsibilities with regard to:

• animal health and welfare, by reducing the scale of culling and suffering,
• public health, by lowering virus circulation in dense animal populations,
• sustainability, by avoiding the waste of feed and food resources embodied in culled birds,
• food security, by stabilising poultry meat and egg supply in the face of recurrent epidemics.

A call for shared responsibility and constructive leadership

As AVEC, we are ready to engage constructively with our partners worldwide on this agenda. We do not claim to have all the technical answers, nor do we underestimate the challenges of aligning different regulatory systems and market realities. But we are convinced of one thing: the long-term interests of our sector – economic, social and ethical – are better served by stronger international coordination on HPAI control, including the responsible use of vaccination, than by an endless cycle of outbreaks, emergency measures and trade disputes.

If we succeed in strengthening this collective approach, we can gradually move towards a future where HPAI is managed more effectively, vaccination is used appropriately without fear of unjustified trade consequences, and the poultry sector reinforces its credibility in the eyes of policymakers and the public alike.