Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jan 6;16(1):e0241190.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241190. eCollection 2021.

80 questions for UK biological security

Luke Kemp  1   2 , David C Aldridge  1   3 , Olaf Booy  4   5 , Hilary Bower  6 , Des Browne  1   2 , Mark Burgmann  7 , Austin Burt  8 , Andrew A Cunningham  9 , Malcolm Dando  10 , Jaimie T A Dick  11 , Christopher Dye  12 , Sam Weiss Evans  1   2   13 , Belinda Gallardo  1   3 , H Charles J Godfray  12 , Ian Goodfellow  14 , Simon Gubbins  15 , Lauren A Holt  1   2 , Kate E Jones  8   16 , Hazem Kandil  1 , Phillip Martin  1   3 , Mark McCaughan  17 , Caitríona McLeish  18 , Thomas Meany  19 , Kathryn Millett  20 , Sean S ÓhÉigeartaigh  1   2 , Nicola J Patron  21 , Catherine Rhodes  1   2 , Helen E Roy  22 , Gorm Shackelford  1   2 , Derek Smith  23 , Nicola Spence  24 , Helene Steiner  20 , Lalitha S Sundaram  1   2 , Silja Voeneky  25 , John R Walker  26 , Harry Watkins  27 , Simon Whitby  10 , James Wood  28 , William J Sutherland  1   3
Affiliations

80 questions for UK biological security

Luke Kemp et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Multiple national and international trends and drivers are radically changing what biological security means for the United Kingdom (UK). New technologies present novel opportunities and challenges, and globalisation has created new pathways and increased the speed, volume and routes by which organisms can spread. The UK Biological Security Strategy (2018) acknowledges the importance of research on biological security in the UK. Given the breadth of potential research, a targeted agenda identifying the questions most critical to effective and coordinated progress in different disciplines of biological security is required. We used expert elicitation to generate 80 policy-relevant research questions considered by participants to have the greatest impact on UK biological security. Drawing on a collaboratively-developed set of 450 questions, proposed by 41 experts from academia, industry and the UK government (consulting 168 additional experts) we subdivided the final 80 questions into six categories: bioengineering; communication and behaviour; disease threats (including pandemics); governance and policy; invasive alien species; and securing biological materials and securing against misuse. Initially, the questions were ranked through a voting process and then reduced and refined to 80 during a one-day workshop with 35 participants from a variety of disciplines. Consistently emerging themes included: the nature of current and potential biological security threats, the efficacy of existing management actions, and the most appropriate future options. The resulting questions offer a research agenda for biological security in the UK that can assist the targeting of research resources and inform the implementation of the UK Biological Security Strategy. These questions include research that could aid with the mitigation of Covid-19, and preparation for the next pandemic. We hope that our structured and rigorous approach to creating a biological security research agenda will be replicated in other countries and regions. The world, not just the UK, is in need of a thoughtful approach to directing biological security research to tackle the emerging issues.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Authors TM and HS are affiliated with Opencell. KM is affiliated with Biosecure Ltd. Arcadia provided support in the form of salaries for authors WS and CR. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products to declare. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. An overview of the 80 questions process.
Fig 2
Fig 2. A venn diagram of the 80 questions categories.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Smith RD, Keogh-Brown MR, Barnett T, Tait J. The Economy-Wide Impact of Pandemic Influenza on the UK: A Computable General Equilibrium Modelling Experiment. BMJ. 2009;339:1–7. 10.1136/bmj.b4571 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bates C. When Foot-and-Mouth Disease Stopped the UK in its Tracks. BBC News Magazine [Internet]. 2016 Feb; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35581830
    1. The Comptroller, Auditor General. The 2001 Outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease. London, UK; 2002.
    1. Hill L, Jones G, Atkinson N, Hector A, Hemery G, Brown N. The £15 Billion Cost of Ash Dieback in Britain. Curr Biol. 2019;29(9):315–6. 10.1016/j.cub.2019.03.033 - DOI - PubMed
    1. HM Office. UK Biological Security Strategy [Internet]. London, UK; 2018. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/biological-security-strategy

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources