ÌÇÐÄÊÓƵ

On 20 May, 2025, the .

In the shadow of the COVID-19 pandemic, the agreement aims to boost prevention, preparedness and response against pandemic threats to human health.

But what about animal health?

There are currently four significant animal diseases in parts of Asia that pose a potential risk to Australia: caused by the H5N1 strains, , , and .

H5N1 avian influenza can infect poultry and wild birds, other animals including seals and , and in rare cases, humans.

It has already killed and in an attempt to control its spread. These impacts highlight the serious consequences that could arise if H5N1 were to emerge in Australia.

While other emergency animal diseases may not infect such a wide range of species, an outbreak would still have major ramifications.

An outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in Australia, which affects cattle, sheep, goats and pigs, could lead to a loss of .

Three layers of biosecurity to protect animal, plant and human health

Australia has a history of .

While strict border custom rules, often referred to as at-border biosecurity, might be the most visible aspect of Australia's biosecurity system, the full scope of activities is much broader.

Biosecurity measures are generally grouped into three categories: pre-border, at-border, and post-border.

Pre-border activities include the treatment of foods and goods, including live animals and their commodities, before they are imported into Australia.

Post-border activities involved active responses to invasive pest and disease outbreaks within the country.

Given the impending risks of a H5N1 avian influenza outbreak, the to protect and prepare.

In biosecurity, . Pre-border and at-border activities, and early detection are crucial in reducing the risks and costs of biosecurity threats entering and spreading around the country.

However, unless we stop the movement of people, goods and wild plants and animals entirely, and control the weather, Australia will inevitably face animal disease outbreaks.

Hence, it is also crucial to boost our response, or post-border, capabilities.

Modeling and simulation support biosecurity responses

Modeling tools can help us synthesize data and produce a deeper understanding of the situation or provide forecasts of what could happen next. We can use modeling to help "test" out different strategies and to ready resources.

Developing biosecurity modeling tools and integrating them into routine practice through simulation exercises are important steps in improving biosecurity emergency response preparedness.

This is what we're doing as part of —a national industry-government-university collaboration to enhance rapid decision-support for emergency animal disease outbreaks.

Gaps in biosecurity response

During consultations with experts in government and potentially affected livestock industries, we identified several gaps.

Firstly, while existing mathematical models offer valuable insights, they are not yet fully tailored to the needs of specific end-users or outbreak scenarios. Strengthening processes for integrating modeling into animal disease outbreak decision-making presents a key opportunity to enhance the effectiveness of our responses.

Secondly, and more fundamentally, the people and organizations with different strengths and expertise don't always talk to one another, limiting our ability to coordinate in emergencies.

The key to effective coordination under the pressure of an outbreak is sustained collaborative relationships between model developers, veterinary epidemiologists, key decision-makers and affected stakeholders.

Without this, valuable expertise may not be fully leveraged during major outbreak responses, which can weaken trust in decision-making and allow confusion and , ultimately undermining response efforts and increasing negative impacts.

Systems-level thinking for biosecurity response

Pests and diseases do not care about human-constructed silos and sectors. Given the breadth of impact biosecurity threats can cause, joint cross-sectoral response is needed to deal with them.

We need an adaptable, coordinated, whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach to biosecurity. Thorough expert consultation, all-encompassing coordination and deep stakeholder inclusion is required to develop comprehensive and equitable plans, systems, and responses.

This is easier said than done—whole-of-society coordination needs political commitment, resourcing and a willingness to collaborate at all levels. Rapid biosecurity response requires mutual trust across sectors.

Timely sharing of information at all levels could supercharge response and prevent misinformation, disinformation and stigmatization, which would mitigate as many social and economic impacts as possible.

Many different groups of people are working towards this vision.

The WHO Pandemic Agreement is a catalyst for this work for human health. For animal biosecurity, there are groups such as , , , and , working hard to bring together people to develop and embed systems-thinking into biosecurity decision-making.

With accelerated risks of animal disease outbreaks due to factors like climate change and global movements, we need to deploy everything we can to limit widespread impact.

With an integrated biosecurity system, we can have healthier animals, people, communities, cultures, economies and environments.

This article was first published on Pursuit. Read the original article .