Methods to assess on-farm biosecurity in Europe and beyond

Fernando Duarte; Lena Mari Tamminen; Miroslav Kjosevski; Giovanna Ciaravino; Mattias Delpont; Carla Correia-Gomes; Bart H.P. van den Borne; Ilias Chantziaras; Laura Valeria Alarcón; Line Svennesen; Ina Toppari; Alessandra Piccirillo; Rreze M. Gecaj; Artur Zbikowski; Telmo Nunes; Jasna Prodanov-Radulović; Marco De Nardi; Vitalii Nedosekov; Amelie Desvars-Larrive; Alberto Allepuz

doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2025.106486

Methods to assess on-farm biosecurity in Europe and beyond

Fernando Duarte^*, Lena Mari Tamminen, Miroslav Kjosevski, Giovanna Ciaravino, Mattias Delpont, Carla Correia-Gomes, Bart H.P. van den Borne, Ilias Chantziaras, Laura Valeria Alarcón, Line Svennesen, Ina Toppari, Alessandra Piccirillo, Rreze M. Gecaj, Artur Zbikowski, Telmo Nunes, Jasna Prodanov-Radulović, Marco De Nardi, Vitalii Nedosekov, Amelie Desvars-Larrive, Alberto Allepuz

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

The aim of this study was to identify which biosecurity assessment methods (BAMs) are currently used in practice in animal farms. To address this, a structured questionnaire was developed to gather information such as the animal species, main objectives, type of enforcement, output generated and feedback of the result. In the context of the BETTER Cost Action project, country representatives identified in each of their countries which BAMs were used and completed an online survey. The survey was prepared and translated in 23 languages. Besides a descriptive analysis, clusters of BAMs were determined using a multiple correspondence analysis. Responses, collected between December 2022 and July 2023, included 74 BAMs used in 28 countries. Most of them were used in a single country while three were used in multiple countries. This study provides a comprehensive picture of existing BAMs and insights into their diversity, such as variations in objectives, implementation, evaluators, respondents, feedback, or assessment outputs. Moreover, we identified four BAMs clusters differentiated by their objective, evaluator and type of feedback provided. This study might also represent the basis for future research on strengths and weaknesses of different BAMs.

Original language	English
Article number	106486
Number of pages	7
Journal	Preventive Veterinary Medicine
Volume	239
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2025.106486
Publication status	Published - Jun 2025

Keywords

Assessment
Biosecurity
Farm
Prevention
Survey

Access to Document

10.1016/j.prevetmed.2025.106486Licence: CC BY

https://edepot.wur.nl/690025Licence: CC BY

Cite this

Duarte, F., Tamminen, L. M., Kjosevski, M., Ciaravino, G., Delpont, M., Correia-Gomes, C., van den Borne, B. H. P., Chantziaras, I., Alarcón, L. V., Svennesen, L., Toppari, I., Piccirillo, A., Gecaj, R. M., Zbikowski, A., Nunes, T., Prodanov-Radulović, J., De Nardi, M., Nedosekov, V., Desvars-Larrive, A., & Allepuz, A. (2025). Methods to assess on-farm biosecurity in Europe and beyond. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 239, Article 106486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2025.106486

@article{4be9079c2dfd4f52a226b503754caadb,

title = "Methods to assess on-farm biosecurity in Europe and beyond",

abstract = "The aim of this study was to identify which biosecurity assessment methods (BAMs) are currently used in practice in animal farms. To address this, a structured questionnaire was developed to gather information such as the animal species, main objectives, type of enforcement, output generated and feedback of the result. In the context of the BETTER Cost Action project, country representatives identified in each of their countries which BAMs were used and completed an online survey. The survey was prepared and translated in 23 languages. Besides a descriptive analysis, clusters of BAMs were determined using a multiple correspondence analysis. Responses, collected between December 2022 and July 2023, included 74 BAMs used in 28 countries. Most of them were used in a single country while three were used in multiple countries. This study provides a comprehensive picture of existing BAMs and insights into their diversity, such as variations in objectives, implementation, evaluators, respondents, feedback, or assessment outputs. Moreover, we identified four BAMs clusters differentiated by their objective, evaluator and type of feedback provided. This study might also represent the basis for future research on strengths and weaknesses of different BAMs.",

keywords = "Assessment, Biosecurity, Farm, Prevention, Survey",

author = "Fernando Duarte and Tamminen, {Lena Mari} and Miroslav Kjosevski and Giovanna Ciaravino and Mattias Delpont and Carla Correia-Gomes and {van den Borne}, {Bart H.P.} and Ilias Chantziaras and Alarc{\'o}n, {Laura Valeria} and Line Svennesen and Ina Toppari and Alessandra Piccirillo and Gecaj, {Rreze M.} and Artur Zbikowski and Telmo Nunes and Jasna Prodanov-Radulovi{\'c} and {De Nardi}, Marco and Vitalii Nedosekov and Amelie Desvars-Larrive and Alberto Allepuz",

year = "2025",

month = jun,

doi = "10.1016/j.prevetmed.2025.106486",

language = "English",

volume = "239",

journal = "Preventive Veterinary Medicine",

issn = "0167-5877",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Duarte, F, Tamminen, LM, Kjosevski, M, Ciaravino, G, Delpont, M, Correia-Gomes, C, van den Borne, BHP, Chantziaras, I, Alarcón, LV, Svennesen, L, Toppari, I, Piccirillo, A, Gecaj, RM, Zbikowski, A, Nunes, T, Prodanov-Radulović, J, De Nardi, M, Nedosekov, V, Desvars-Larrive, A & Allepuz, A 2025, 'Methods to assess on-farm biosecurity in Europe and beyond', Preventive Veterinary Medicine, vol. 239, 106486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2025.106486

TY - JOUR

T1 - Methods to assess on-farm biosecurity in Europe and beyond

AU - Duarte, Fernando

AU - Tamminen, Lena Mari

AU - Kjosevski, Miroslav

AU - Ciaravino, Giovanna

AU - Delpont, Mattias

AU - Correia-Gomes, Carla

AU - van den Borne, Bart H.P.

AU - Chantziaras, Ilias

AU - Alarcón, Laura Valeria

AU - Svennesen, Line

AU - Toppari, Ina

AU - Piccirillo, Alessandra

AU - Gecaj, Rreze M.

AU - Zbikowski, Artur

AU - Nunes, Telmo

AU - Prodanov-Radulović, Jasna

AU - De Nardi, Marco

AU - Nedosekov, Vitalii

AU - Desvars-Larrive, Amelie

AU - Allepuz, Alberto

PY - 2025/6

Y1 - 2025/6

N2 - The aim of this study was to identify which biosecurity assessment methods (BAMs) are currently used in practice in animal farms. To address this, a structured questionnaire was developed to gather information such as the animal species, main objectives, type of enforcement, output generated and feedback of the result. In the context of the BETTER Cost Action project, country representatives identified in each of their countries which BAMs were used and completed an online survey. The survey was prepared and translated in 23 languages. Besides a descriptive analysis, clusters of BAMs were determined using a multiple correspondence analysis. Responses, collected between December 2022 and July 2023, included 74 BAMs used in 28 countries. Most of them were used in a single country while three were used in multiple countries. This study provides a comprehensive picture of existing BAMs and insights into their diversity, such as variations in objectives, implementation, evaluators, respondents, feedback, or assessment outputs. Moreover, we identified four BAMs clusters differentiated by their objective, evaluator and type of feedback provided. This study might also represent the basis for future research on strengths and weaknesses of different BAMs.

AB - The aim of this study was to identify which biosecurity assessment methods (BAMs) are currently used in practice in animal farms. To address this, a structured questionnaire was developed to gather information such as the animal species, main objectives, type of enforcement, output generated and feedback of the result. In the context of the BETTER Cost Action project, country representatives identified in each of their countries which BAMs were used and completed an online survey. The survey was prepared and translated in 23 languages. Besides a descriptive analysis, clusters of BAMs were determined using a multiple correspondence analysis. Responses, collected between December 2022 and July 2023, included 74 BAMs used in 28 countries. Most of them were used in a single country while three were used in multiple countries. This study provides a comprehensive picture of existing BAMs and insights into their diversity, such as variations in objectives, implementation, evaluators, respondents, feedback, or assessment outputs. Moreover, we identified four BAMs clusters differentiated by their objective, evaluator and type of feedback provided. This study might also represent the basis for future research on strengths and weaknesses of different BAMs.

KW - Assessment

KW - Biosecurity

KW - Farm

KW - Prevention

KW - Survey

U2 - 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2025.106486

DO - 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2025.106486

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:86000631637

SN - 0167-5877

VL - 239

JO - Preventive Veterinary Medicine

JF - Preventive Veterinary Medicine

M1 - 106486

ER -

Methods to assess on-farm biosecurity in Europe and beyond

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this