Biosecurity Capacity Building in Veterinary Laboratories in Pakistan: Laboratory Assessment and the Impact of an Advanced Biosecurity Training Program

Background Veterinary diagnostic laboratories are critical for the control of animal diseases, surveillance activities, and support for One Health initiatives. Biosecurity measures in these laboratories could effectively contribute to the prevention of laboratory-acquired infections, as well as the intentional and unintentional release of pathogens. However, veterinary laboratories in developing countries such as Pakistan face resource limitations, which increase biosafety and biosecurity risks, thus making them questionable in terms of their reliability and disease control efforts. Objective To assess the impact of a biosecurity training programme on the laboratory capacity and improvement in the biosecurity practices of veterinary laboratories in Pakistan. Method An advanced biosecurity programme was developed to strengthen veterinary diagnostic laboratory capacity and improve biosecurity practices across Pakistan. Fourteen divisional biosafety level-2 (BSL-2) laboratories were selected from three provinces of Pakistan (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab, and Balochistan). The laboratory profile data collection and biosecurity baseline and reassessment were conducted using a standardised biosecurity assessment tool developed by the Association for Biorisk Management (ABM). This programme comprises capacity building of laboratory personnel through advanced-level training complemented by structured mentorship, technical support and continuous monitoring. The programme also provides essential biosecurity-related equipment and supplies to improve laboratory capacity and reduce operational risks. Results A total of 246 laboratory personnel were trained; they subsequently cascaded training within their associated district laboratories, establishing a coordination network between 14 divisional and at least 35 district-level laboratories. The findings revealed significant improvements in scores (from high-risk to low-risk profiles) between baseline and reassessment ( p < 0.001) across all laboratories, with pronounced improvements in physical security measures (93% to 85.7%), personnel reliability (78.6% to 21.4%) and material control and accountability (100% to 14.3%) across all 14 laboratories. Critical gaps were identified in management and governance, such as the absence of formalised policies and procedures, unclear roles and responsibilities for biosecurity oversight, lack of laboratory-specific SOPs, major weaknesses in emergency preparedness, and monitoring and compliance mechanisms. However, it is necessary to move beyond training and ensure top management’s commitment to establishing institutional biosecurity policies, documented procedures and ongoing capacity-building initiatives for laboratory personnel in line with up-to-date biosecurity practices. Conclusion The study highlights significant progress in improving the biosecurity practices of veterinary laboratories in Pakistan. The establishment of a robust and sustainable laboratory biosecurity system requires institutionalised governance, standardised procedures, and continuous monitoring systems. Ongoing progress requires sustained leadership commitment, the establishment of regulatory frameworks, and effective enforcement of relevant legislation. This integrated strategy can be adapted to various laboratory settings and implemented in other regions to strengthen biosecurity capacity.