A practical stakeholder-focused approach for assessing the biosecurity system in Pacific Island countries.

Aims: To develop a structured process for a transparent, efficient, high-level review of a low-resource biosecurity system (limited by physical infrastructure, financial, and human resources), in order to identify and prioritise key areas for future focus which could then lead to interventions, tailored by country, to improve the system. A key requirement was that the approach developed was culturally sensitive and respectful to Pasifika people within the country.

Methods: Animal health and biosecurity systems need to be urgently strengthened by Pacific Island countries and territories (PICTs) if they are to respond to current and future threats. Understanding where additional resources should be allocated to maximise benefit and ensuring buy-in from PICT stakeholders are critical for uptake of any recommendations made. However, there is little available literature on reviewing biosecurity systems, particularly where there is a need for efficiency, simplicity, and cultural sensitivity. A framework was developed through initial in-person consultation between four New Zealand experts who had experience working in international animal health development and support programmes. This was followed by input from informal discussions with selected heads of agriculture in PICTs and included their experiences with previous system reviews, as well as general advice from experts in Pasifika culture. Foundational objectives included simplicity, local inclusivity, and a structured approach, which could be undertaken over a relatively short period of time.A rapid evidence assessment methodology was used to search the available literature (published and grey, search terms biosecurity, system, Pacific, animal, framework, and review used in AND/OR combinations), to establish an evidence base for other methods of biosecurity system review. The developed framework for review of biosecurity systems in low-resource PICTs was based on elements from expert elicitation frameworks, the SurF surveillance evaluation framework and the Performance of Veterinary Services tool from The World Organisation for Animal Health.

Results: The developed framework involved bringing stakeholders together in a workshop environment and comprised up to 10 steps including mapping the PICT biosecurity system and exploring attributes of component activities. Understanding the system at a high level enables stakeholders to make informed recommendations on improvements to address future needs. Using the Delphi method, recommendations were then prioritised by stakeholders.

Conclusions and clinical relevance: A distinctive difference flowing from the use of the needs analysis described in this process was the empowerment of PICT stakeholders to determine their own needs and priorities, rather than have these developed by external parties.