Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 05:30, 15 December 2024

Biosecurity refers to measures aimed at preventing the introduction or spread of harmful organisms (e.g. viruses, bacteria, plants, animals etc.) intentionally or unintentionally outside their native range or within new environments. In agriculture, these measures are aimed at protecting food crops and livestock from pests, invasive species, and other organisms not conducive to the welfare of the human population. The term includes biological threats to people, including those from pandemic diseases and bioterrorism. The definition has sometimes been broadened to embrace other concepts, and it is used for different purposes in different contexts.

The COVID-19 pandemic is a recent example of a threat for which biosecurity measures have been needed in all countries of the world.

Background and terminology

The term "biosecurity" has been defined differently by various disciplines. The term was first used by the agricultural and environmental communities to describe preventative measures against threats from naturally occurring diseases and pests, later expanded to introduced species. Australia and New Zealand, among other countries, had incorporated this definition within their legislation by 2010. New Zealand was the earliest adopter of a comprehensive approach with its Biosecurity Act 1993. In 2001, the US National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) defined biosecurity as "the sum of risk management practices in defense against biological threats", and its main goal as "protect against the risk posed by disease and organisms".

In 2010, the World Health Organization (WHO) provided an information note describing biosecurity as a strategic and integrated approach to analysing and managing relevant risks to human, animal and plant life and health and associated risks for the environment. In another document, it describes the aim of biosecurity being "to enhance the ability to protect human health, agricultural production systems, and the people and industries that depend on them", with the overarching goal being "to prevent, control and/or manage risks to life and health as appropriate to the particular biosecurity sector".

Measures taken to counter biosecurity risks typically include compulsory terms of quarantine, and are put in place to minimise the risk of invasive pests or diseases arriving at a specific location that could damage crops and livestock as well as the wider environment.

In general, the term is today taken to include managing biological threats to people, industries or environment. These may be from foreign or endemic organisms, but they can also extend to pandemic diseases and the threat of bioterrorism, both of which pose threats to public health.

Laboratory biosafety and intentional harm

The definition has sometimes been broadened to embrace other concepts, and it is used for different purposes in different contexts. It can be defined as the "successful minimising of the risks that the biological sciences will be deliberately or accidentally misused in a way which causes harm for humans, animals, plants or the environment, including through awareness and understanding of the risks".

From the late 1990s, in response to the threat of biological terrorism, the term started to include the prevention of the theft of biological materials from research laboratories, called "laboratory biosecurity" by WHO. The term laboratory biosafety refers to the measures taken "to reduce the risk of accidental release of or exposure to infectious disease agents", whereas laboratory biosecurity is usually taken to mean "a set of systems and practices employed in legitimate bioscience facilities to reduce the risk that dangerous biological agents will be stolen and used maliciously". Joseph Kanabrocki (2017) source elaborates: "Biosafety focuses on protection of the researcher, their contacts and the environment via accidental release of a pathogen from containment, whether by direct release into the environment or by a laboratory-acquired infection. Conversely, biosecurity focuses on controlling access to pathogens of consequence and on the reliability of the scientists granted this access (thereby reducing the threat of an intentional release of a pathogen) and/or access to sensitive information related to a pathogen's virulence, host-range, transmissibility, resistance to medical countermeasures, and environmental stability, among other things".

In the US, the National Science Advisory Board on Biosecurity was created in 2004 to provide biosecurity oversight of "dual-use research", defined as "biological research with legitimate scientific purpose that may be misused to pose a biological threat to public health and/or national security". In 2006, the National Academy of Sciences defined biosecurity as "security against the inadvertent, inappropriate, or intentional malicious or malevolent use of potentially dangerous biological agents or biotechnology, including the development, production, stockpiling, or use of biological weapons as well as outbreaks of newly emergent and epidemic disease".

A number of nations have developed biological weapons for military use, and many civilian research projects in medicine have the potential to be used in military applications (dual-use research), so biosecurity protocols are used to prevent dangerous biological materials from falling into the hands of malevolent parties.

Laboratory program

Components of a laboratory biosecurity program include:

• Physical security
• Personnel security
• Material control and accountability
• Transport security
• Information security
• Program management
• Biological Security

Animals and plants

Threats to animals and plants, in particular food crops, which may in turn threaten human health, are typically overseen by a government department of agriculture.

Animal biosecurity encompasses different means of prevention and containment of disease agents in a specific area. A critical element in animal biosecurity is biocontainment – the control of disease agents already present in a particular area and work to prevent transmission. Animal biosecurity may protect organisms from infectious agents or noninfectious agents such as toxins or pollutants, and can be executed in areas as large as a nation or as small as a local farm.

Animal biosecurity takes into account the epidemiological triad for disease occurrence: the individual host, the disease, and the environment in contributing to disease susceptibility. It aims to improve nonspecific immunity of the host to resist the introduction of an agent, or limit the risk that an agent will be sustained in an environment at adequate levels. Biocontainment works to improve specific immunity towards already present pathogens.

The aquaculture industry is also vulnerable to pathogenic organisms, including fungal, bacterial, or viral infections which can affect fish at different stages of their life cycle.

Human health

Direct threats to human health may come in the form of epidemics or pandemics, such as the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic and other influenza epidemics, MERS, SARS, or the COVID-19 pandemic, or they may be deliberate attacks (bioterrorism). The country/federal and/or state health departments are usually responsible for managing the control of outbreaks and transmission and the supply of information to the public.

Medical countermeasures

Medical countermeasures (MCMs) are products such as biologics and pharmaceutical drugs that can protect from or treat the effects of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) attack or in the case of public health emergencies. MCMs can also be used for prevention and diagnosis of symptoms associated with CBRN attacks or threats.

In the US, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) runs a program called the "FDA Medical Countermeasures Initiative" (MCMi), with programs funded by the federal government. It helps support "partner" agencies and organisations prepare for public health emergencies that could require MCMs.

International agreements and guidelines

Agricultural biosecurity and human health

Various international organisations, international bodies and legal instruments and agreements make up a worldwide governance framework for biosecurity.

Standard-setting organisations include the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (CPM) develop standards pertinent to their focuses, which then become international reference points through the World Trade Organization (WTO)'s Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement), created in 1995. This agreement requires all members of the WTO to consider all import requests concerning agricultural products from other countries. Broadly, the measures covered by the agreement are those aimed at the protection of human, animal or plant life or health from certain risks.

Other important global and regional agreements include the International Health Regulations (IHR, 2005), the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, the Codex Alimentarius, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT, 1947).

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and WHO are the most important organisations associated with biosecurity.

The IHR is a legally binding agreement on 196 nations, including all member states of WHO. Its purpose and scope is "to prevent, protect against, control, and provide a public health response to the international spread of disease in ways that are commensurate with and restricted to public health risks and that avoid unnecessary interference with international traffic and trade", "to help the international community prevent and respond to acute public health risks that have the potential to cross borders and threaten people worldwide".

Biological weapons

• The Biological Weapons Convention was the first multilateral disarmament treaty banning the production of an entire category of weapons, being biological weapons.
• UN Resolution 1540 (2004) "affirms that the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and their means of delivery constitutes a threat to international peace and security. The resolution obliges States, inter alia, to refrain from supporting by any means non-State actors from developing, acquiring, manufacturing, possessing, transporting, transferring or using nuclear, chemical or biological weapons and their means of delivery". Resolution 2325, reaffirming 1540, was adopted unanimously on 15 December 2016.

Laboratory safety

• OECD Best Practice Guidelines for Biological Resource Centres, a consensus report created in 2001 after experts from OECD countries came together, calling upon "national governments to undertake actions to bring the BRC concept into being in concert with the international scientific community". BRCs are "repositories and providers of high-quality biological materials and information".

As international security issue

For a long time, health security or biosecurity issues were not considered as an international security issue, especially in the traditional view of international relations. However, some changes in trend have contributed to the inclusion of biosecurity (health security) in discussions of security. As time progressed, there was a movement towards securitisation. Non-traditional security issues such as climate change, organised crime, terrorism, and landmines came to be included in the definition of international security. There was a general realisation that the actors in the international system not only involved nation-states but also included international organisations, institutions, and individuals, which ensured the security of various actors within each nation became an important agenda. Biosecurity is one of the issues to be securitised under this trend. On 10 January 2000, the UN Security Council convened to discuss HIV/AIDS as a security issue in Africa and designated it a threat in the following month. The UNDP Millennium Development Goals also recognise health issues as international security issue.

Several instances of epidemics such as SARS increased awareness of health security (biosecurity). Several factors have rendered biosecurity issues more severe: there is a continuing advancement of biotechnology, which increases the possibility for malevolent use, evolution of infectious diseases, and globalising force which is making the world more interdependent and more susceptible to spread of epidemics.

Controversial experiments in synthetic biology, including the synthesis of poliovirus from its genetic sequence, and the modification of flu type H5N1 for airborne transmission in mammals, led to calls for tighter controls on the materials and information used to perform similar feats. Ideas include better enforcement by national governments and private entities concerning shipments and downloads of such materials, and registration or background check requirements for anyone handling such materials.

Challenges

Diseases caused by emerging viruses are a major threat to global public health. The proliferation of high biosafety level laboratories around the world has resulted in concern about the availability of targets for those that might be interested in stealing dangerous pathogens. The growth in containment laboratories is often in response to emerging diseases, and many new containment labs' main focus is to find ways to control these diseases. By strengthening national disease surveillance, prevention, control and response systems, the labs have improved international public health.

One of the major challenges of biosecurity is that harmful technology has become more available and accessible. Biomedical advances and the globalisation of scientific and technical expertise have made it possible to greatly improve public health; however, there is also the risk that these advances can make it easier for terrorists to produce biological weapons.

Communication between the citizen and law enforcement officials is important. Indicators of agro-terrorism at a food processing plant may include persons taking notes or photos of a business, theft of employee uniforms, employees changing working hours, or persons attempting to gain information about security measures and personnel. Unusual activity is best handled if reported to law enforcement personnel promptly. Communication between policymakers and life sciences scientists is also important.

The MENA (Middle East and North Africa) region, with its socio-political unrest, diverse cultures and societies, and recent biological weapons programs, faces particular challenges.

Future

Biosecurity requires the cooperation of scientists, technicians, policy makers, security engineers, and law enforcement officials.

The emerging nature of newer biosecurity threats means that small-scale risks can blow up rapidly, which makes the development of an effective policy challenging owing to the limitations on time and resources available for analysing threats and estimating the likelihood of their occurrence. It is likely that further synergies with other disciplines, such as virology or the detection of chemical contaminants, will develop over time.

Some uncertainties about the policy implementation for biosecurity remain for future. In order to carefully plan out preventive policies, policy makers need to be able to somewhat predict the probability and assess the risks; however, as the uncertain nature of the biosecurity issue goes it is largely difficult to predict and also involves a complex process as it requires a multidisciplinary approach. The policy choices they make to address an immediate threat could pose another threat in the future, facing an unintended trade-off.

Philosopher Toby Ord, in his 2020 book The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity, puts into question whether the current international conventions regarding biotechnology research and development regulation, and self-regulation by biotechnology companies and the scientific community are adequate.

American scientists have proposed various policy-based measures to reduce the large risks from life sciences research – such as pandemics through accident or misapplication. Risk management measures may include novel international guidelines, effective oversight, improvement of US policies to influence policies globally, and identification of gaps in biosecurity policies along with potential approaches to address them.

Researchers have also warned in 2024 of potential risks from mirror life, a hypothetical form of life whose molecular building blocks have inverted chirality. If mirror bacteria were synthesized, they may be able to evade immune systems and spread in the environment without natural predators. They noted that the technology to create mirror bacteria was still probably more than a decade away, but called for a ban on research aiming to create them.

Role of education

The advance of the life sciences and biotechnology has the potential to bring great benefits to humankind through responding to societal challenges. However, it is also possible that such advances could be exploited for hostile purposes, something evidenced in a small number of incidents of bioterrorism, particularly by the series of large-scale offensive biological warfare programs carried out by major states in the last century. Dealing with this challenge, which has been labelled the "dual-use dilemma", requires a number of different activities. However, one way of ensuring that the life sciences continue to generate significant benefits and do not become subject to misuse for hostile purposes is a process of engagement between scientists and the security community, and the development of strong ethical and normative frameworks to complement legal and regulatory measures that are developed by states.

See also

• Biodefence
• Biological Weapons Convention
• Biorisk
• Biosecurity in Australia
• Biosecurity in New Zealand
• Biosecurity in the United States
• Biowar
• Cyberbiosecurity
• Food safety
• Global health
• Global Health Security Initiative (GHSI)
• Good Agricultural Practices
• Human security
• International Health Regulations
• Interplanetary contamination
• Public health
• Quarantine
• Select agent

References

1. "Reconstruction of the 1918 Influenza Pandemic Virus". archive.cdc.gov. 13 September 2023. Retrieved 14 December 2024.
2. ^ Koblentz, Gregory D. (2010). "Biosecurity Reconsidered: Calibrating Biological Threats and Responses". International Security. 34 (4): 96–132. doi:10.1162/isec.2010.34.4.96. S2CID 57560210. Full text
3. Meyerson, Laura A.; Reaser, Jamie K. (July 2002). "Biosecurity: Moving toward a Comprehensive Approach: A comprehensive approach to biosecurity is necessary to minimize the risk of harm caused by non-native organisms to agriculture, the economy, the environment, and human health". BioScience. 52 (7): 593–600. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0593:BMTACA]2.0.CO;2.
4. "Biosecurity: An integrated approach to manage risk to human, animal and plant life and health" (PDF). WHO.int. 3 March 2010. Retrieved 13 April 2020.
5. ^ International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN) (3 March 2010). "Biosecurity: An integrated approach to manage risk to human, animal and plant life and health" (PDF). INFOSAN Information Note No. 1/2010 - Biosecurity. World Health Organization & Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved 23 May 2020.
6. ^ Fitt, Gary (15 November 2013). "Explainer: why Australia needs biosecurity". The Conversation. Retrieved 21 May 2020.
7. ^ Novossiolova, Tatyana (January 2016). Biological Security Education Handbook: The Power of Team-Based Learning (PDF). Bradford Disarmament Research Centre. ISBN 978-1-85143-278-3. Retrieved 22 May 2020.
8. ^ Salerno, Reynolds M.; Gaudioso, Jennifer; Brodsky, Benjamin H. (2007). "Preface". Laboratory Biosecurity Handbook (Illustrated ed.). CRC Press. p. xi. ISBN 9781420006209. Retrieved 23 May 2020.
9. Kanabrocki, Joseph (20 January 2017). "Biosafety and Biosecurity in the Realm of Dual-Use Research of Concern" (PDF). p. 2. Retrieved 23 May 2020.
10. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (14 September 2017). "3. Managing Dual Use Research of Concern". Dual Use Research of Concern in the Life Sciences: Current Issues and Controversies. Washington DC: National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/24761. ISBN 978-0-309-45888-7. PMID 29001489. Retrieved 23 May 2020 – via NCBI Bookshelf.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) PDF
11. "Controlling disease in farm animals". GOV.UK. 18 September 2012. Retrieved 22 May 2020.
12. "Biosecurity". Department of Agriculture. Retrieved 22 May 2020.
13. 1. Thomson, J. Biosecurity: preventing and controlling diseases in the beef herd. Livestock Conservation Institute; 1991; 49-51.
14. 5. Anderson, F. Biosecurity - a new term for an old concept: how to apply it. Bovine Practitioner; 1998; 32:61-70.
15. 8. Thomson, J. Biosecurity: preventing and controlling diseases in the beef herd. Livestock Conservation Institute; 1991; 49-51.
16. "Biosecurity in Aquaculture: Fighting Disease Transmission". Syndel. 30 October 2019. Retrieved 12 August 2020.
17. "Coronavirus (COVID-19) health alert". Australian Government Department of Health. 6 February 2020. Retrieved 22 May 2020.
18. "HSE news". Coronavirus: latest information and advice. 21 May 2020. Retrieved 22 May 2020.
19. "Australian Health Management Plan for Pandemic Influenza (AHMPPI)". Department of Health. 5 September 2014. Retrieved 22 May 2020.
20. ^ "What are Medical Countermeasures?". FDA: Emergency Preparedness and Response. Food and Drug Administration. Retrieved 15 June 2016.
21. "Alliance for Biosecurity applauds subcommittee efforts to sustain medical countermeasure funding". Homeland Preparedness News. Washington, D.C. 8 June 2016. Retrieved 15 June 2016.
22. "Chapter 5: Biosecurity and food safety". Inquiry into Australia's food processing sector. Published online 14 April 2013. 16 August 2012. ISBN 978-1-74229-657-9. Retrieved 23 May 2020.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
23. Peter Van den Bossche and Werner Zdouc, The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization: Text, Cases and Materials (Cambridge University Press, 2013) 834.
24. "Australia's international biosecurity obligations". Department of Agriculture. Retrieved 23 May 2020.
25. "Protecting Australia's Health Through Human Biosecurity". Department of Health. 27 September 2017. Retrieved 23 May 2020.
26. "What are the International Health Regulations and Emergency Committees?". WHO. 19 December 2019. Retrieved 23 May 2020.
27. "Biological Weapons:The Biological Weapons Convention". United Nations. 10 April 1972. Retrieved 23 May 2020.
28. "The Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) At A Glance". Arms Control Association. 28 January 2004. Retrieved 23 May 2020.
29. "1540 Committee (Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004)): 1540 Fact Sheet". United Nations. 28 April 2004. Retrieved 23 May 2020.
30. "OECD Best Practice Guidelines for Biological Resource Centres". OECD. Retrieved 23 May 2020. pdf
31. The Millennium Development Goals Report: 2006 (PDF). United Nations. 2006. Retrieved 22 May 2020.
32. ^ Ord, Toby (6 March 2020). "Why we need worst-case thinking to prevent pandemics". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 11 April 2020. This is an edited extract from The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity
33. Dankosky, John; Oye, Kenneth; Garrett, Laurie; Carr, Peter (8 November 2013). "Biosecurity for the Age of Redesigned Life" (Audio & transcript). NPR.org. Retrieved 22 May 2020.
34. Artika, I. Made; Ma'roef, Chairin Nisa (May 2017). "Laboratory biosafety for handling emerging viruses". Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Biomedicine. 7 (5): 483–491. doi:10.1016/j.apjtb.2017.01.020. PMC 7103938. PMID 32289025.
35. Gaudioso, Jennifer (28 March 2008). "Biosecurity and Biosafety—A Growing Concern". Sandia Corporation. Retrieved 23 May 2020.
36. McClellan, Paul (27 March 2009). "Designer Plague". EDA Graffiti. Archived from the original on 12 May 2010. Retrieved 23 April 2009.
37. ^ Piper, Kelsey (5 April 2022). "Why experts are terrified of a human-made pandemic — and what we can do to stop it". Vox. Retrieved 8 April 2022.
38. Institute of Medicine (31 January 2006). Globalization, Biosecurity, and the Future of the Life Sciences. National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/11567. ISBN 978-0-309-10032-8.
39. Criminal Investigation Handbook for Agroterrorism|2008|U.S. Government Printing Office|Washington, D.C.|pages=34-36
40. The Bipartisan WMD Terrorism Research Center (October 2011). "Bio-Response Report Card" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 December 2011. Retrieved 22 November 2011.
41. Benson, David; Kjelgren, Roger K. (13 January 2014). "Tacit Diplomacy in Life Sciences A Foundation for Science Diplomacy". Science & Diplomacy. 3 (1). Archived from the original on 5 December 2023.
42. Nasim, Anwar; et al. (26 November 2013). "Paths to Biosafety and Biosecurity Sustainability". Science & Diplomacy. 2 (4). Archived from the original on 28 January 2023.
43. Del Rio Vilas, Alberto; Voller, Fay; Montibeller, Gilberto; et al. (1 February 2013). "An integrated process and management tools for ranking multiple emerging threats to animal health". Preventive Veterinary Medicine. 108 (2–3): 94–102. doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2012.08.007. PMID 22954461. S2CID 23937402. Archived from the original on 6 November 2023.
44. Jaspersen, Johannes G.; Montibeller, Gilberto (1 July 2015). "Probability Elicitation Under Severe Time Pressure: A Rank-Based Method". Risk Analysis. 35 (7): 1317–1335. doi:10.1111/risa.12357. ISSN 1539-6924. PMID 25850859. S2CID 30118666.
45. Ord, Toby (23 March 2021). "Covid-19 has shown humanity how close we are to the edge". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 26 March 2021.
46. "Forschung an Krankheitserregern soll sicherer werden". Science Media Center Germany. 2022. Retrieved 17 January 2023.
47. Pannu, Jaspreet; Palmer, Megan J.; Cicero, Anita; Relman, David A.; Lipsitch, Marc; Inglesby, Tom (16 December 2022). "Strengthen oversight of risky research on pathogens" (PDF). Science. 378 (6625): 1170–1172. Bibcode:2022Sci...378.1170P. doi:10.1126/science.adf6020. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 36480598. S2CID 254998228. Archived from the original (PDF) on 23 May 2023.
    • University press release: Chasnoff, Ari (8 December 2022). "Stanford Researchers Recommend Stronger Oversight of Risky Research on Pathogens". Stanford University Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. Retrieved 17 January 2023.
48. Adamala, Katarzyna P.; Agashe, Deepa; Belkaid, Yasmine; Bittencourt, Daniela Matias de C.; Cai, Yizhi; Chang, Matthew W.; Chen, Irene A.; Church, George M.; Cooper, Vaughn S.; Davis, Mark M.; Devaraj, Neal K.; Endy, Drew; Esvelt, Kevin M.; Glass, John I.; Hand, Timothy W. (12 December 2024). "Confronting risks of mirror life". Science. 0 (0): eads9158. doi:10.1126/science.ads9158.
49. Whitby, Simon; Novossiolova, Tatyana; Walther, Gerald; Dando, Malcolm, eds. (December 2015). "Preventing Biological Threats: What You Can Do" (PDF). Bradford Disarmament Research Centre. Retrieved 22 May 2020.

Further reading

General

• Biosecurity Commons, a Wiki Database
• Global Biosecurity, University of New South Wales, ISSN 2652-0036 – A peer-reviewed, open access electronic journal for cross-disciplinary research in all aspects of human or animal epidemics, pandemics, biosecurity, bioterrorism and CBRN, including prevention, governance, detection, mitigation and response.

Articles and books

• Chen, Lincoln, Jennifer Leaning, and Vasant Narasimhan, eds. (2003). Global Health Challenges for Human Security Harvard University Press.
• Falk, Ian; Wallace, Ruth; Ndoen, Marthen L., eds. (2011). Managing Biosecurity Across Borders (Illustrated ed.). Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN 9789400714120.
• High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change (2004). A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility: Report of the Secretary-General's High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change (PDF). United Nations. p. 41.
• Hoyt, Kendall and Brooks, Stephen G. (2003). "A Double-Edged Sword: Globalization and Biosecurity". International Affairs, Vol. 23, No. 3.
• Koblentz, Gregory D. (2012). "From biodefence to biosecurity: the Obama administration's strategy for countering biological threats". International Affairs, Vol. 88, Issue 1.
• Lakoff, Andrew, and Sorensen, Georg. (October 2008). Biosecurity Interventions: Global Health and Security in Question, Columbia University Press, ISBN 9780231146067. (Details here.)
• Paris, Roland. (2001). "Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air?". International Affairs, Vol. 26, No. 2.
• Tadjbakhsh, Shahrbanou. and Chenoy, Anuradha. (2007). Human Security: Concepts and Implications. New York, Routledge. ISBN 978-0415473385 p. 42. (Also 2005 article here)

External links

• Biosecurity at the FAO
• Canadian Food Inspection Agency
• OIE Biological Threat Reduction Strategy (World Organisation for Animal Health)

• Biosecurity