In the late 20th century, the internet revolutionised how we connect and fundamentally changed how we communicate, conduct business, and gather intelligence. With the wide landscape of transformative opportunities, it also provoked a wave of unprecedented threats. In response, the field of cybersecurity evolved to protect critical infrastructure and sensitive information from malicious actors.
Today, we face similar dynamics in the realm of biological threats. Biotechnology in the 21st century (the so-called “Century of Biology”) has unlocked wholly novel possibilities from synthetic biology, precision medicine, gene therapy and beyond. At the same time, it also has led to new threats through nature, by accident, and even the risk of intentional biological attacks. Thus, like cybersecurity, biosecurity uses modern technologies to analyse genetic material from the environment and gather extensive biological data from any given physical area or region. This data allows us to monitor the emergence and migration of pathogens and respond to emerging threats with unparalleled accuracy and speed.
Biological security is not just a public health issue – it is a strategic priority that demands the full attention of governments worldwide. As we look to the future, it is clear that biological threats will only become more complex and unpredictable, driven by factors like climate change, massed migration, and technological advancements.
Militaries must recognise that investing in robust biosurveillance and biosecurity infrastructure is not optional – it is essential
Just as CJADC2 returns a precious dividend of time to military decision makers by integrating data from all domains, a robust biosurveillance system detects threats early and extends the window for implementing a targeted response. The stakes are too high to rely on reactive measures alone, or on voluntary reporting from organizations or nations. Instead, we must adopt a proactive approach that emphasizes detection over reporting. This approach integrates advanced technologies, continuous monitoring, and global collaboration into our defence and security frameworks. By doing so, we can detect and mitigate biological threats before they escalate into national or global crises.
The Opportunity
Our national security, economic stability, and public health are increasingly linked, especially as biological threats grow due to climate change, urbanisation, and global travel. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for stronger health security measures. For example, early in the pandemic, countries that implemented wastewater surveillance were able to detect COVID-19 spikes before they appeared in clinical testing, providing a crucial early warning system.
However, with geopolitical conflicts on the rise, there is a risk that focus on health security may decline. It’s essential to maintain and expand global efforts in biosurveillance to stay ahead of new and emerging biological threats, and to understand COVID-19 not as a problem in our past, but a single glimpse at a wider landscape of consequential biological risks.
This involves going beyond current systems, which predominantly detect threats only once they’ve caused symptoms, and when the analysis of those symptoms is voluntarily reported. Continuous environmental monitoring allows us to detect changes in microbial communities early.
An advanced biosurveillance system would analyse environmental samples from strategically selected locations, combining this data with other sources to create actionable intelligence. For example, during the 2014 Ebola outbreak, rapid sequencing of the virus in West Africa enabled scientists to trace its spread and evolution in real time, which was critical in understanding the outbreak and informing response efforts.
Such a network offers major benefits. It sets up robust systems that continuously collect biological data, creating a dynamic understanding of our environment. This ongoing monitoring enables us to detect unusual patterns early, allowing for quick responses to new threats. Just like cybersecurity systems that constantly scan for breaches, a global network of data collection sites can help us identify biological threats as they arise, no matter where they occur. The U.S. Zika virus outbreak in 2016 demonstrated the need for such a system – where early detection in Florida could have limited the spread if more comprehensive biosurveillance was in place.
By placing monitoring nodes in high-risk areas and diverse environments, these networks can overcome physical and political barriers, much like GPS systems provide detailed insights across vast regions. For instance, the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) uses environmental surveillance by sampling sewage to detect and track poliovirus globally, enabling rapid response and vaccination campaigns that have reduced polio cases by 99.9% worldwide.
This model demonstrates the power of proactive detection, international collaboration, and rapid intervention, offering a blueprint for broader biosurveillance strategies to combat other biological threats. Since biological threats know no borders, this network needs to be global, combining environmental data with other types – such as health, geographic, and social media data – to generate powerful insights.
The Threat
The UK Biological Security Strategy, published in 2018, emphasises the importance of coordinated surveillance, rapid response capabilities, and international collaboration to prevent and mitigate biological incidents. It recognises the increasing complexity of biological threats in the modern world like combat bioterrorism, pandemics, and emerging infectious diseases.
Ultimately, biological threats are inevitable, requiring a proactive strategy that integrates open biosurveillance aligned with existing Chemical Biological and Radiological (CBR) defence frameworks for resilience against disease outbreaks, accidental releases, and potential bioweapons.
Biological threats pose significant risks to both public health and national security. The COVID-19 pandemic showed the massive economic impact of such threats, costing trillions and straining global resources. A comprehensive approach must tie together public health, economic stability, and defence, treating biological threats with the same seriousness as cyber or nuclear risks.
To avoid the "panic and neglect" cycle that weakens long-term preparedness, sustained investment in biosecurity infrastructure is crucial. The 2001 anthrax attacks in the U.S., which caused widespread fear and economic disruption, illustrated the importance of maintaining constant vigilance and preparedness against biological threats.
Key Requirements
To make biosurveillance work effectively, it must be integrated into national and international defence systems. Key elements include:
- Rapid Detection and Response: Quickly identifying anomalies and deviations from environmental norms, allowing for timely interventions. For instance, South Korea’s rapid response to the MERS outbreak in 2015 was largely due to its advanced monitoring systems, which enabled swift isolation of cases and containment of the virus.
- Threat Characterisation: Understanding how threats spread is key to effective responses, including identifying engineered threats and their origins. The genomic analysis of the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic provided crucial insights into the virus’ origins and helped shape the global response.
- Technological Innovation: Using AI and machine learning to predict and manage biological threats, offering a foresight advantage in outbreak response. For example, AI was used to predict the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, helping authorities to plan better responses and allocate resources more effectively.
- Global Collaboration and Data Sharing: Success relies on sharing data across countries, with transparent ethical standards for data sharing to address privacy concerns. The Global Initiative for Sharing All Influenza Data (GISAID) is a prime example, where global data sharing allowed scientists to quickly develop vaccines and treatments during the pandemic.
Ethical Considerations
As we integrate biosurveillance into defence strategies, ethical and regulatory considerations must be thoroughly addressed to ensure these capabilities are used responsibly and remain focused on defence rather than offence.
The widespread collection of environmental DNA (eDNA) samples, which can include human genetic material, raises significant privacy concerns. For instance, in some cases, eDNA from public places could be used to track individuals or groups without their knowledge. This necessitates clear policies on data ownership, consent, and usage, ensuring that individuals' rights are protected. The debate around data privacy in the context of COVID-19 contact tracing apps provides a cautionary tale – where the balance between public health and individual privacy rights sparked intense public and legal discussions.
Additionally, the use of digital sequence information (DSI) from pathogens must navigate the complexities of access and benefit-sharing (ABS) principles. Countries contributing genetic data often seek fair benefits from subsequent research and commercial products, as seen in the ongoing debates within the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) regarding the Nagoya Protocol.
