Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Plant pathogens as agroterrorist weapons: assessment of the threat for European agriculture and forestry

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Food Security Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson PK, Cunningham AA, Patel NG, Morales FJ, Epstein PR, Daszak P (2004) Emerging infectious diseases of plants: pathogen pollution, climate change and agrotechnology drivers. Trends Ecol Evol 19(10):535–544

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brasier CM (2008) The biosecurity threat to the UK and global environment from international trade in plants. Plant Pathol 57(5):792–808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buzan B, Wæver O, de Wilde J (1998) Security: a new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner, Boulder, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne R (2007) Horizon scanning rural crime—agroterrorism an emerging threat to UK agriculture? International Journal of Rural Crime 1:62–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Castonguay S (2005) Biorégionalisme, commerce agricole et propagation des insectes nuisibles et des maladies végétales : les conventions internationales phytopathologiques. Ruralia 16/17:137–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane H, Haslett D (2002) Deliberate release—what are the risks? NZ J For 47(2):16–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Connick WJ, Daigle DJ, Pepperman AB, Hebbar KP, Lumsden RD, Anderson TW, Sands DC (1998) Preparation of stable, granular formulations containing Fusarium oxysporum pathogenic to narcotic plants. Biol Control 13(2):79–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cupp OS, Walker DE, Hillison J (2004) Agroterrorism in the US: key security challenge for the 21st century. Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science 2(2):97–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desprez-Loustau ML, Robin C, Buée M, Courtecuisse R, Garbaye J, Suffert F et al (2007) The fungal dimension of biological invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 22(9):472–480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • EPPO (2007) PM 5/3 (3) Decision-support scheme for quarantine pests. http://www.eppo.org/QUARANTINE/Pest_Risk_Analysis/PRA_intro.htm. Accessed 23 January 2008

  • Fletcher J, Bender C, Budowle B, Cobb WT, Gold SE, Ishimaru CA et al (2006) Plant pathogen forensics: capabilities, needs, and recommendations. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 70(2):450–471

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Foxwell J (2001) Current trends in agroterrorism (antilivestock, anticrop, and antisoil bioagricultural terrorism) and their potential impact on food security. Stud Confl Terror 24:107–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gullino ML, Fletcher J, Gamliel A, Stack J (2008) Crop biosecurity: assuring our global food supply. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Heather NW, Hallman GJ (2008) Agricultural warfare and bioterrorism using invasive species. In: Heather NW, Hallman GJ (eds) Pest management and phytosanitary trade barriers. CABI, Wallingford, UK, pp 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • IPPC (2004) Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests, including analysis of environmental risks and living modified organisms. International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures no. 11. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/y5874e/y5874e00.pdf. Accessed 23 January 2008

  • Jelsma M (2001) Vicious circle: the chemical and biological war on drugs. http://www.tni.org/archives/jelsma/viciouscircle-e.pdf. Accessed 23 January 2008

  • Junior P (2006) Terrorismo biológico. Veja 1961:60–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Khetarpal RK, Gupta K (2007) Plant biosecurity in India—status and strategy. Asian Biotechnology and Development Review 9(2):83–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Klinkowski M (1961) Blue mould (Peronospora tabacina Adam). Dtsch Landwirtsch 12:229–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Latxague E, Sache I, Pinon J, Andrivon D, Barbier M, Suffert F (2007) A methodology for assessing the risk posed by the deliberate and harmful use of plant pathogens in Europe. EPPO Bull 37(2):427–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Line RF, Griffith CS (2001) Research on the epidemiology of stem rust of wheat during the Cold War. In: Peterson PD (ed) Stem rust of wheat: from ancient enemy to modern foe. APS, St. Paul, MN, USA, pp 83–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Madden LV, Van Den Bosch F (2002) A population-dynamics approach to assess the threat of plant pathogens as biological weapons against annual crops. BioScience 52(1):65–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madden LV, Wheelis M (2003) The threat of plant pathogens as weapons against US crops. Annu Rev Phytopathol 41:155–176

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Major E, Asch D, Cordey-Hayes M (2001) Foresight as a core competence. Futures 33(2):91–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller N, Estoup A, Toepfer S, Bourguet D, Lapchin L, Derridj S et al (2005) Multiple transatlantic introductions of the western corn rootworm. Science 310(5750):992

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nutter FW (2004) Crop biosecurity and safety of grain based foods. International Quality Grains Conference Proceedings, 19–22 July 2004, Indianapolis, USA. http://cobweb.ecn.purdue.edu/∼grainlab/IQGC1/proc/pdf/nutter.pdf. Accessed 23 January 2008

  • O’Neill NR, Jennings JC, Bailey BA, Farr DF (2000) Dendryphion penicillatum and Pleospora papaveracea, destructive seedborne pathogens and potential mycoherbicides for Papaver somniferum. Phytopathology 90(7):691–698

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pasquali M (2006) Biosecurity research and agroterrorism: are there ethical issues at stake? In: Kaiser M, Lien ME (eds) Ethics and the politics of food. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands, pp 203–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Ploetz RC (2008) Assessing threats that are posed by destructive banana pathogens. Acta Horticulturae (in press). http://www.aebe.ec/data/files/DocumentosPDF/Capacitacion/2008/Ploetz_sketch_Guayaquil_2008.pdf

  • Russell R, Paterson M (2006) Fungi and fungal toxins as weapons. Mycol Res 110(9):1003–1010

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers P, Whitby S, Dando M (1999) Biological warfare against crops. Sci Am 280(6):70–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schaad NW, Frederick RD, Shaw J, Schneider WL, Hickson R, Petrillo MD (2003) Advances in molecular-based diagnostics in meeting crop biosecurity and phytosanitary issues. Annu Rev Phytopathol 41:305–324

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schaad NW, Abrams J, Madden LV, Frederick RD, Luster DG, Damsteegt VD et al (2006) An assessment model for rating high-threat crop pathogens. Phytopathology 96(6):616–621

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schrader G, Unger JG (2003) Plant quarantine as a measure against invasive alien species: the framework of the International Plant Protection Convention and the plant health regulations in the European Union. Biological Invasions 5(4):357–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwägerl C (2005) La recherché sur le bioterrorisme ne mérite pas tant d’argent. Courrier International 752:56

    Google Scholar 

  • Stack J, Cardwell K, Hammerschmidt R, Byrne J, Loria R, Snover-Clift K et al (2006) The National Plant Diagnostic Network. Plant Dis 90(2):128–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suffert F (2003) L’utilisation volontaire d’agents phytopathogènes contre les cultures. L’agroterrorisme et ses conséquences sur notre approche de la lutte contre les maladies des plantes. Phytoma 563:8–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Suffert F, Barbier M, Sache I, Latxague E (2008) Biosécurité des cultures et agroterrorisme. Une menace, des questions scientifiques et une opportunité : réactiver un dispositif d’épidémiovigilance. Le Courrier de l’environnement de l’INRA 56:67–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Turvey CG, Mafoua E, Schilling B, Onyango B (2003) Economics, hysteresis and agroterrorism. Canadian Agricultural Economics Society Annual Meeting, July 27–30, 2003, Montreal, Canada. http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/18186/1/wp030011.pdf. Accessed 23 January 2008

  • Waage JK, Mumford JD (2007) Agricultural biosecurity. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 363:863–876

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheelis M, Casagrande R, Madden LV (2002) Biological attack on agriculture: low-tech, high-impact bioterrorism. Bioscience 52(7):569–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitby S (2002) Biological warfare against crops. Palgrave, Basingstoke, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • WTO (1995) The WTO agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures. SPS Agreement. http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm. Accessed 23 January 2008

  • Young JM, Allen C, Coutinho T, Denny T, Elphinstone J, Fegan M et al (2008) Plant-pathogenic bacteria as biological weapons—real threats? Phytopathology 98(10):1060–1065

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zilinskas RA (1999) Cuban allegations of biological warfare by the United States: assessing the evidence. CRC Crit Rev Microbiol 25(3):173–227

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work has been supported by the European Commission (6th PCRD grant, contract CT-2004-6403) in the framework of the EU project “CropBioterror”. We thank Jean Pinon and Marc Barbier for their scientific contribution. The content of the present article only reflects the opinion of its authors, and not the opinions of either the European Commission or INRA.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frédéric Suffert.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Suffert, F., Latxague, É. & Sache, I. Plant pathogens as agroterrorist weapons: assessment of the threat for European agriculture and forestry. Food Sec. 1, 221–232 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-009-0014-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-009-0014-2

Keywords

Navigation