Katz R, Graeden E, Abe K, Attal-Juncqua A, Boyce MR, Eaneff S. Mapping stakeholders and policies in response to deliberate biological events. Heliyon. 2018; 4(12):e01091. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e01091.
Katz R, Graeden E, Abe K, Attal-Juncqua A, Boyce MR, Eaneff S. Mapping stakeholders and policies in response to deliberate biological events. Heliyon. 2018; 4(12):e01091. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e01091.
Katz R, Graeden E, Abe K, Attal-Juncqua A, Boyce MR, Eaneff S. Mapping stakeholders and policies in response to deliberate biological events. Heliyon. 2018; 4(12):e01091. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e01091.
Katz R, Graeden E, Abe K, Attal-Juncqua A, Boyce MR, Eaneff S. Mapping stakeholders and policies in response to deliberate biological events. Heliyon. 2018; 4(12):e01091. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e01091.
Abstract
Background: Recent infectious disease outbreaks have brought increased attention to strengthening the capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to natural biological threats. However, deliberate biological events also represent a significant global threat that have received relatively little attention. The Biological Weapons Convention provides a foundation for the response to deliberate biological events, but the political mechanisms to respond to and recover from such an event are poorly defined. Methods: We performed an analysis of the epidemiological timeline, the international policies triggered as a notional deliberate biological event unfolds, and the corresponding stakeholders and mandates assigned by each mandate. Findings: The results of this analysis identify a significant gap in both policy and stakeholder mandates: there is no single policy nor stakeholder mandate for leading and coordinating the response activities associated with a deliberate biological event. These results were visualized using an open source web-based tool published at https://dbe.talusanalytics.com. Interpretation: While there are organizations and stakeholders responsible for roles in leading security or public health response, these roles are non-overlapping and are led by organizations not with limited interaction outside such events. The lack of mandates highlights a gap in the mechanisms available to coordinate response and a gap in guidance for managing the response. The results of the analysis corroborate anecdotal evidence from stakeholder meetings and highlight a critical need and gap in deliberate biological response policy.
Supplementary and Associated Material
https://dbe.talusanalytics.com/: Link to tool that describes how a deliberate biological outbreak might unfold, including the stakeholders who would be involved in identifying, responding to, and recovering from the event, and the policies that govern these efforts.
Keywords
deliberate biological events; stakeholder mapping; preparedness and response
Subject
Social Sciences, Political Science
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
