Search

This review addresses ways to prepare for and to mitigate effects of biohazards on primary production of crops and livestock. These biohazards can be natural or intentional introductions of pathogens, and they can cause major economic damage to farmers, the agricultural industry, society, and international trade. Agroterrorism is the intentional introduction of animal or plant pathogens into agricultural production systems with the intention to cause socioeconomic harm and generate public fear. Although few acts of agroterrorism are reported, the threat of agroterrorism in Europe is real. New concerns about threats arise from the rapid advancements in biotechnology and emerging technologies. FORSA, an analytical framework for risk and vulnerability analysis, was used to review how to prepare for and mitigate the possible effects of natural or intentional biohazards in agricultural production. Analyzing the effects of a biohazard event involves multiple scientific disciplines. A comprehensive analysis of biohazards therefore requires a systems approach. The preparedness and ability to manage events are strengthened by bolstered farm biosecurity, increased monitoring and laboratory capacity, improved inter-agency communication and resource allocation. The focus of this review is on Europe, but the insights gained have worldwide applications. The analytical framework used here is compared to other frameworks. With climate change, Covid-19 and the war in Ukraine, the supply chains are challenged, and we foresee increasing food prices associated with social tensions. Our food supply chain becomes more fragile with more unknowns, thereby increasing the needs for risk and vulnerability analyses, of which FORSA is one example. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Agricultural Heritage Systems Tourism (AHST) has increased considerably in the past ten years and is projected to continue growing in the future. Despite such growth, there is not a shared understanding of many aspects of the tourism development framework for all kinds of agricultural heritage sites. Given that meanings and characteristics are critical to determining the appeal of a particular activity among tourism consumers and because the development directions of AHST are essential for achieving heritage conservation goals, a study was conducted in 2014-2015 to assess stakeholder preferences for definitional phrases and their perceptions. This manuscript summarizes the characteristics of AHST in four aspects, taking agricultural heritage systems in China as examples: 1) synthesis of agritourism, cultural heritage tourism, and ecotourism; 2) annual variation of tourism attractions and activities; 3) the dominant role of artisan farmers; 4) the unique gastronomic experiences of traditional food. Finally, there are some objectives offered by this research from economic, environmental, cultural, social and political perspectives to build a framework of AHST according to its features and characteristics. Based on environmental and cultural objectives, with political and social support, through reaching the core objectives of economic development, AHST will be sustainable and agricultural heritage systems will be well conserved. This study carries important implications for the further applications of AHST. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to the WHO, dual use research of concern (DURC) is 'life sciences research that is intended for benefit, but which might easily be misapplied to do harm'. Recent studies, particularly those on influenza viruses, have led to renewed attention on DURC, as there is an ongoing debate over whether the benefits of gain-of-function (GOF) experiments that result in an increase in the transmission and/or pathogenicity of potential pandemic pathogens (PPPs) are outweighed by concerns over biosecurity and biosafety. In this Viewpoint article, proponents and opponents of GOF experiments discuss the benefits and risks associated with these studies, as well as the implications of the current debate for the scientific community and the general public, and suggest how the current discussion should move forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Malevolent use of plant pathogens in an act of agroterrorism represents a potential threat for European agriculture and forestry. We investigated the risk of agroterrorism sensu lato, which is raising debates among the community of plant pathologists. In the absence of a previous unambiguous definition of agroterrorism we characterized the risk for Europe by taking into account the multiplicity of the threat, of the perpetrator’s objectives, and of potential modus operandi. To this end, we have applied a three-step methodology involving: (1) the building of a list of candidate pathogens, (2) a scenario-based exploration of potential agroterrorist acts, and (3) the design of a risk evaluation scheme (RES), derived from the standard pest risk analysis (PRA). We adopted a congruent risk assessment strategy consisting of coupling the foresight exercise (assignment of nine key pathogens extracted from the list to nine scenarios and comparison of different intrinsic criteria) to the analytical assessment (application of the RES to the nine key pathogens and qualitative analysis resulting in a pentagonal star plot representing risk profiles). Analysis was performed by non-experts on the selected diseases, and thus enabled a comparison between crops or pathogens on the basis of the characterization of the threat. The risk, considered in its hybrid dimension (both factual because it refers to crop protection and an effective stake, and also irrational because it refers to bioterrorism, a vague and unobservable concept) was characterized exhaustively for the selected plant pathogens and the success of a malevolent act appeared to be much more uncertain than believed. However, agroterrorism should be considered as a plausible threat, potentially more important by the consequences of the securitization of the concept, which could imply disruption of regulations and trade, than by direct damaging consequences on European crops. There is probably not a single short-list of threatening pathogens: different pathogens would be most threatening for different purposes, for different perpetrators, and for different target crops. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has added rice pathogen to the list of bioterror agents. It is stated that despite objections from scientists, USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has listed the bacterium Xanthomonas oryzae due to its properties that could be used for bioterrorism.