Extinction.

It is vital to note the expected economic and social impact of a potential agroterror attack in order to develop thorough and efficient preparedness strategies. Historically, plant disease has precipitated ecological and social damage as evidenced by high mortality and migration rates (Velásquez et al., 2018). Perhaps the most infamous case was the Irish potato famine of the 1840s, caused by the fungus-like organism Phytophthora infestans, in which over a million individuals died of starvation or disease resulting from the infection of Ireland’s primary food source (DoChara, 2008). While modern societies are not reliant on monoculture, measures must still be taken to enhance the resistance of food crops essential for human nutrition. With an increasingly global society, national economies are intimately connected to the world market. Gill (2015) specifies that agroterrorism is not “flashy” (p. 10); while it may not produce the shock value of a bombing or other tactic, its use as economic sabotage will result in fear, instability, and loss of life and investments, including “heritage and environmental loss which may have psychological effects on populations” (Suffert et al., 2017, 225). Statistically, 1 in 6 jobs in the United States is linked to agriculture (Olson, 2012). Thus, it is vital to remember that an attack would not only inflict economic hardship on individuals working within the agriculture industry, but would inevitably spiral outward to impact the rest of the nation; the severity of the effects would depend on the type of pathogen.

In the recent past, analysts expressed concern that groups such as al-Qaeda would adopt tactics utilizing agroterrorism due to a “highly favorable cost-benefit ratio” (FAS, 2011, Section 6, para. 2); however, more recently the concern has shifted to include economic opportunists, domestic terrorists (including lone wolves and disgruntled employees), as well as militant animal rights groups (Gill, 2015). The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) notes the extent of economic and social damage which an agroterrorism attack could inflict, particularly on the United States:

[These include] direct losses due to containment measures, such as stop-movement orders (SMOs)… [and] indirect multiplier effects, such as compensation to farmers for destruction of agricultural commodities and losses suffered by directly and indirectly related industries… International costs would result from protective trade embargoes. Less measurable consequences would include the undermining of confidence in and support of government, creation of social panic, and threat to public health on the national and global levels. (Olson, 2012, para. 14)

An example of the economic devastation which can result from even a benign food issue can be found in the Korean beef riots of summer 2008. Rallies against U.S. beef imports resulted in demonstrations involving thousands of citizens and is credited with undermining the recently elected administration of South Korea (Green et al., 2017). The likelihood of food shortage resulting from disruption of the food supply is compounded in urban areas, as supermarkets only stock a week’s supply of food with the expectation for arrival of a timely shipment (Olson, 2012). The panic and rioting which would occur as a result of a successful agroterror attack and subsequent food shortage cannot be overstated. In the event of a large-scale attack, the resulting economic and social upheaval has been projected to cause extensive, long-term damage with more persistent consequences than most traditional tactics, such as suicide bombing. Consequently, agricultural losses are considered a primary obstacle to global food security for a growing population (Velásquez et al., 2018). Plant disease poses a threat due to the longevity of infection; whereas a biological toxin or chemical contaminant may be isolated quickly and the affected food products destroyed, infection at the source impacts growth and harvesting of cultivated crops fundamental to food security.