Dr Marinda Visser,
director: Strategic Pro-jects and Partnerships in Agriculture, National Biosecurity Hub
Isabella Bezuidenhout, phytosanitary specialist, National Biosecurity Hub
The recent foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) outbreaks highlighted the far-reaching consequences that biological threats can have on South African agriculture. While the disease affected livestock directly, the outbreak exposed vulnerabilities in surveillance systems, traceability, diagnostics, communication, and coordinated response mechanisms. These lessons extend well beyond the livestock industry and offer valuable insights for the grain industry.
For grain producers, the question is not whether the next biosecurity threat will emerge, but whether the industry will be prepared when it does.
Biosecurity threats do not respect borders
One of the clearest lessons from the FMD outbreak is that biosecurity threats rarely remain confined to a single region or country. Animal diseases, crop pests, and plant pathogens can spread across borders through trade, transport networks, environmental factors, and the movement of people and agricultural products.
South Africa forms part of an interconnected regional agricultural system. Effective biosecurity therefore requires collaboration not only within South Africa but across the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region. Surveillance, information sharing, and coordinated response mechanisms are critical to identifying and managing threats before they become widespread.
For the grain industry, regional cooperation will be increasingly important as emerging pests, diseases, and invasive species continue to expand their geographical ranges.
Surveillance and early detection are critical
The FMD outbreak demonstrated the importance of effective surveillance systems and rapid reporting mechanisms. The sooner a threat is detected, the greater the likelihood that its spread can be contained and its impact minimised.
For grain producers, this means maintaining vigilance in fields and production areas, monitoring for unusual symptoms, and reporting suspected new pests, diseases, or weeds promptly. Producers are often the first to observe changes in crop health and therefore play a critical role in the national biosecurity system.
Early detection relies not only on observation in the field but also on clear reporting pathways, access to technical expertise, and the ability to rapidly mobilise surveillance and diagnostic resources. Producers need to know who to contact, how samples should be submitted, and what information is required to support a rapid response.
Industry-wide surveillance programmes, supported by researchers, diagnostic laboratories, and producers, provide an essential early-warning system against emerging threats.
Diagnostics are the foundation of effective response
A biosecurity response is only as effective as the diagnostic capacity supporting it. During disease outbreaks, rapid and accurate identification is essential for informed decision making.
Diagnostic capacity extends beyond laboratory testing. Effective response also depends on access to specialist expertise, standardised diagnostic approaches, and mechanisms for rapidly sharing results with decision-makers.
The grain industry requires continued investment in diagnostic infrastructure, technical expertise, and laboratory networks capable of identifying emerging pests and diseases quickly and accurately. Without robust diagnostic capacity, valuable time can be lost while threats continue to spread.
Continued strengthening of diagnostic networks and testing capacity within the grain industry represents an important step towards strengthening South Africa’s preparedness for future biosecurity challenges.
Sustainable investment in research and preparedness
The FMD outbreak highlighted the importance of maintaining expertise, infrastructure, and research capacity before a crisis occurs. Building these capabilities during an emergency is often costly, inefficient, and too late to prevent significant damage.
Long-term investment in biosecurity research enables scientists and industry stakeholders to understand risks, develop management strategies, strengthen surveillance systems, and improve preparedness. Sustained funding is particularly important because biosecurity threats may emerge years after initial investments are made.
Preparedness should therefore be viewed as an ongoing investment rather than a response to a specific crisis.
Coordinated responses deliver better outcomes
Another lesson from FMD is the importance of coordination between government, organised agriculture, researchers, industry bodies, and producers. Effective responses require clear roles, efficient information sharing, and strong partnerships across the agricultural value chain.
No single organisation can manage a major biosecurity threat alone. The grain industry will require coordinated action between producers, research institutions, industry organisations, and regulatory authorities to respond effectively to future incursions.
The FMD outbreak has also highlighted the value of preparedness exercises and simulation activities. Testing response systems before an actual emergency occurs helps identify gaps in communication, decision making, surveillance, and coordination. Similar exercises for plant health threats can strengthen the grain industry’s readiness for future incursions.
The collaborative approaches already being developed within the grain industry provide a strong foundation for future biosecurity preparedness.
Communication matters
During any outbreak, misinformation and speculation can spread rapidly. Conflicting messages create uncertainty and may undermine confidence in response efforts.
The FMD outbreak reinforced the importance of timely, transparent, and science-based communication. Producers require access to reliable information that enables informed decision making and reduces unnecessary panic.
Trusted communication channels between government, industry organisations, researchers, and producers will remain a critical component of any future biosecurity response.
What if the grain industry faced its own FMD?
The greatest lesson from the FMD outbreak may be the importance of considering future scenarios before they occur.
What would happen if South Africa experienced an outbreak of a serious grain disease such as maize lethal necrosis disease (MLND), wheat blast, or another emerging seed-borne pathogen? The grain industry faces a range of biosecurity threats that could affect production, trade, and food security, with pathways including seed movement, trade, natural spread, and changing climatic conditions.
The consequences could extend far beyond the affected production areas. Crop losses, increased management costs, and disruptions to local and international markets could have significant implications for producers and the broader agricultural economy. Such an event would test the industry’s surveillance systems, diagnostic capacity, research capabilities, and coordination mechanisms in much the same way that FMD tested the livestock industry.
Biosecurity is an investment in agricultural resilience
The FMD outbreak demonstrated that biosecurity is not simply a technical issue. It is a strategic investment in the resilience and competitiveness of South African agriculture.
Strengthening surveillance systems, diagnostic capacity, information sharing, technical expertise, and multi-stakeholder coordination will be essential to improving South Africa’s preparedness for future biosecurity threats.
For grain producers, biosecurity protects more than crops. It protects farm profitability, market access, production sustainability, and the long-term future of the grain industry. By applying the lessons learned from FMD, the industry can strengthen its preparedness and ensure that it is better equipped to respond to the biosecurity challenges of tomorrow.
