Pandemics & Biorisk
Many of the worst catastrophes in history have been pandemics, from the Black Death plague to COVID-19. Modern biotechnology enhances the ability to respond to outbreaks while creating new risks to humans and other species.
An Introduction to Pandemics & Biorisk
The COVID-19 pandemic is, by a large margin, the most severe global event to have occurred within recent decades. As of December 2024, the World Health Organization shows around seven million total reported deaths worldwide from COVID-19; accounting for unreported deaths brings the total significantly higher. This falls short of a global catastrophe by most definitions, but it still caused massive harm around the world. The pandemic additionally serves as a stark reminder of the possibility for extreme global catastrophe, including biological events.
The cause of COVID-19 has been a point of some controversy. The leading scientific theory is that the virus SARS-COV-2 first infected humans via a non-human animal, i.e. natural zoonosis. A GCRI report published in February 2024 finds that experts also see at least some chance that humans were first infected via a research-related accident. Regardless of what caused COVID-19, an understanding of its origins can inform preparedness for future pandemics.
Future pandemics can come from either natural sources, as in zoonosis, or artificial sources, as in research accidents or biological weapons, though the distinction between natural and artificial pandemics is blurry. A variety of human activities are increasing pandemic and biological risks, including globalization, factory farming, and biotechnology. At the same time, advances in biotechnology and public health are improving humanity’s ability to respond to outbreaks, as seen in the successful programs to develop COVID-19 vaccines.
Biological risks can also factor in scenarios involving multiple global catastrophic risks. For example, a pandemic or other extreme biological event could lead to the catastrophic failure of other technologies such as geoengineering. Additionally, in the aftermath of various global catastrophes such as nuclear war, survivors may face a substantial burden of disease outbreaks due to having reduced sanitation and medical facilities. These scenarios illustrate the value of considering biological risks within a broader cross-risk framework.
Image credits: COVID map: World Health Organization; chicken farm: Sangamithra Iyer and Wan Park
Featured GCRI Publications on Pandemics & Biorisk
Was COVID-19 caused by a natural spillover from wild animals to humans or a research-related accident? And what would each potential origin mean for future pandemics? This report addresses these questions in a survey of 168 virologists, infectious disease epidemiologists, and other scientists from 47 countries.
A large nuclear war may cause a global public health catastrophe via the environmental effect known as nuclear winter. However, the field of public health has done little. Therefore, this paper, published in the Journal of Public Health Policy, outlines a public health research and policy agenda to address the threat.
Refuges could ensure that some people survive a global catastrophe, but past refuge proposals have been highly theoretical. This paper, published in the journal Risk Analysis, shows that refuges have some real-world viability: during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic, jurisdictions such as China and Western Australia served as refuges.
Â
Full List of GCRI Publications on Pandemics & Biorisk
Note: Compared to other major global catastrophic risk topics, GCRI has done relatively little on pandemics & biorisk. We wish to emphasize that our lack of prior work on pandemics & biorisk is for circumstantial reasons and not due to any lack of concern about the risk. To the contrary, we view the risk as significant and we hope to be more active on it in future work.
Ackerman, Gary, Brandon Behlendorf, Seth Baum, Hayley Peterson, Anna Wetzel, and John Halstead, 2024. The origin and implications of the COVID-19 pandemic: An expert survey. Global Catastrophic Risk Institute Technical Report 24-1.
Vilhelmsson, Andreas and Seth D. Baum, 2023. Public health and nuclear winter: Addressing a catastrophic threat. Journal of Public Health Policy, vol. 44, no. 3 (September), pages 360-369, DOI 10.1057/s41271-023-00416-7.
Baum, Seth D., 2023. Assessing natural global catastrophic risks. Natural Hazards, vol. 115, no. 3 (February), pages 2699-2719, DOI 10.1007/s11069-022-05660-w.
Baum, Seth D. and Vanessa M. Adams, 2022. Pandemic refuges: Lessons from two years of COVID-19. Risk Analysis, vol. 43, no. 5 (May), pages 875-883, DOI 10.1111/risa.13953.
de Neufville, Robert, 2020. The unthinkable is possible. California Magazine. Summer.
Brown, Jared, 2020. The Defense Production Act and the failure to prepare for catastrophic incidents. War on the Rocks, 14 April.
Baum, Seth and Grant Wilson, 2013. The ethics of global catastrophic risk from dual-use bioengineering. Ethics in Biology, Engineering and Medicine, vol. 4, no. 1, pages 59-72, DOI 10.1615/EthicsBiologyEngMed.2013007629.
An Introduction to Pandemics & Biorisk
The COVID-19 pandemic is, by a large margin, the most severe global event to have occurred within recent decades. As of December 2024, the World Health Organization shows around seven million total reported deaths worldwide from COVID-19; accounting for unreported deaths brings the total significantly higher. This falls short of a global catastrophe by most definitions, but it still caused massive harm around the world. The pandemic additionally serves as a stark reminder of the possibility for extreme global catastrophe, including biological events.
The cause of COVID-19 has been a point of some controversy. The leading scientific theory is that the virus SARS-COV-2 first infected humans via a non-human animal, i.e. natural zoonosis. A GCRI report published in February 2024 finds that experts also see at least some chance that humans were first infected via a research-related accident. Regardless of what caused COVID-19, an understanding of its origins can inform preparedness for future pandemics.
Future pandemics can come from either natural sources, as in zoonosis, or artificial sources, as in research accidents or biological weapons, though the distinction between natural and artificial pandemics is blurry. A variety of human activities are increasing pandemic and biological risks, including globalization, factory farming, and biotechnology. At the same time, advances in biotechnology and public health are improving humanity’s ability to respond to outbreaks, as seen in the successful programs to develop COVID-19 vaccines.
Biological risks can also factor in scenarios involving multiple global catastrophic risks. For example, a pandemic or other extreme biological event could lead to the catastrophic failure of other technologies such as geoengineering. Additionally, in the aftermath of various global catastrophes such as nuclear war, survivors may face a substantial burden of disease outbreaks due to having reduced sanitation and medical facilities. These scenarios illustrate the value of considering biological risks within a broader cross-risk framework.
Image credits: COVID map: World Health Organization; chicken farm: Sangamithra Iyer and Wan Park
Featured GCRI Publications on Pandemics & Biorisk
Was COVID-19 caused by a natural spillover from wild animals to humans or a research-related accident? And what would each potential origin mean for future pandemics? This report addresses these questions in a survey of 168 virologists, infectious disease epidemiologists, and other scientists from 47 countries.
A large nuclear war may cause a global public health catastrophe via the environmental effect known as nuclear winter. However, the field of public health has done little. Therefore, this paper, published in the Journal of Public Health Policy, outlines a public health research and policy agenda to address the threat.
Refuges could ensure that some people survive a global catastrophe, but past refuge proposals have been highly theoretical. This paper, published in the journal Risk Analysis, shows that refuges have some real-world viability: during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic, jurisdictions such as China and Western Australia served as refuges.
Â
Full List of GCRI Publications on Pandemics & Biorisk
Note: Compared to other major global catastrophic risk topics, GCRI has done relatively little on pandemics & biorisk. We wish to emphasize that our lack of prior work on pandemics & biorisk is for circumstantial reasons and not due to any lack of concern about the risk. To the contrary, we view the risk as significant and we hope to be more active on it in future work.
Ackerman, Gary, Brandon Behlendorf, Seth Baum, Hayley Peterson, Anna Wetzel, and John Halstead, 2024. The origin and implications of the COVID-19 pandemic: An expert survey. Global Catastrophic Risk Institute Technical Report 24-1.
Vilhelmsson, Andreas and Seth D. Baum, 2023. Public health and nuclear winter: Addressing a catastrophic threat. Journal of Public Health Policy, vol. 44, no. 3 (September), pages 360-369, DOI 10.1057/s41271-023-00416-7.
Baum, Seth D., 2023. Assessing natural global catastrophic risks. Natural Hazards, vol. 115, no. 3 (February), pages 2699-2719, DOI 10.1007/s11069-022-05660-w.
Baum, Seth D. and Vanessa M. Adams, 2022. Pandemic refuges: Lessons from two years of COVID-19. Risk Analysis, vol. 43, no. 5 (May), pages 875-883, DOI 10.1111/risa.13953.
de Neufville, Robert, 2020. The unthinkable is possible. California Magazine. Summer.
Brown, Jared, 2020. The Defense Production Act and the failure to prepare for catastrophic incidents. War on the Rocks, 14 April.
Baum, Seth and Grant Wilson, 2013. The ethics of global catastrophic risk from dual-use bioengineering. Ethics in Biology, Engineering and Medicine, vol. 4, no. 1, pages 59-72, DOI 10.1615/EthicsBiologyEngMed.2013007629.