Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026. Vol. 71. № 4
DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-38-46
S.V. Fesenko
CONCEPT FOR AGRICULTURAL RESPONSE IN THE EVENT OF RADIATION ACCIDENT
National Research Center “Kurchatov Institute”, Moscow, Russia
Contact person: Sergey Viktorovich Fesenko, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Analysis of the radiological aspects of emergency response in agriculture, including the definition of the goals, objectives, and principles of agricultural emergency response; refinement of emergency plans and response strategies; the use of reference levels and operational intervention levels; public communication; and the establishment of necessary response capacity.
Material and methods: The concept was developed based on a critical analysis of past experience in agricultural emergency response and a synthesis of international emergency response recommendations.
Results: The specific features of emergency response in agriculture were considered. It was noted that agriculture is one of the most vulnerable sectors in the event of a radiation accident, the consequences of which are long-term and complex (radiological, socio-economic, psychological). The role of monitoring in making operational emergency response decisions was defined. The goals and objectives of agricultural emergency response were outlined. The main principles of emergency response were presented. The necessity of establishing and utilizing an operational correlation between the ambient dose equivalent rate – a parameter that can be measured easily and quickly in the field – and permissible levels of radionuclides in agricultural products was demonstrated. The need for the advanced creation of a comprehensive response capacity, including adaptive plans, trained personnel, and regular drills that consider not only technical measures but also human factors, was emphasized.
Conclusions: Emergency response in the agro-industrial complex following radiation accidents is a complex, multi-faceted task, the success of which depends on advance preparation, flexibility, and consideration of the full spectrum of consequences. Key factors for effectiveness are the shift from response based on monitoring data to response based on prognosis; the use of operational intervention levels for rapid decision-making; active public involvement; and a comprehensive approach aimed not only at radiological protection but also at the socio-economic recovery of affected territories.
Keywords: radiation accident, agriculture, population, radiation dose, emergency response, standards, permissible levels, food products
For citation: Fesenko SV. Concept for Agricultural Response in the Event of Radiation Accident. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2026;71(4):38–46. DOI:10.33266/1024-6177-2026-71-4-38-46
References
1. Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation: Report to the General Assembly. Scientific Annex A: Levels and Effects of Radiation Exposure Due to the Nuclear Accident after the 2011 Great East-Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR 2013). New York, UN. 2016.
2. Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation: Report to the General Assembly. Annex B: Radiation Exposures from Electricity Generation. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. United Nations. 2016.
3. Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation: Report to the General Assembly. Scientific Annex A: Levels and Effects of Radiation Exposure Due to the Nuclear Accident after the 2011 Great East-Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR 2021-2022). New York, UN. 2023.
4. Фесенко С.В. Уроки радиоэкологического мониторинга в районах расположения атомных электростанций. Мониторинг природных и сельскохозяйственных экосистем в районах расположения атомных электростанций // Труды ВНИИРАЭ / Под ред. С.В. Фесенко. Т.3. Обнинск: Всероссийский научно-исследовательский институт радиологии и агроэкологии, 2020. С. 158–167 [Fesenko S.V. Lessons from Radioecological Monitoring in Areas of Nuclear Power Plants. Monitoring Natural and Agricultural Ecosystems in Areas of Nuclear Power Plants. Trudy VNIIRAE = Proceedings of VNIIRAE. Vol. 3. Ed. S.V. Fesenko. Obninsk, Vserossiyskiy Nauchno-Issledovatel’skiy Institut Radiologii i Agroekologii Publ., 2020. P. 158-167 (In Russ.)].
5. Алексахин Р.М., Крышев И.И., Фесенко С.В. и др. Радиоэкологические проблемы ядерной энергетики // Атомная энергия. 1990. Т.68. №5. С. 320-327 [Aleksakhin R.M., Kryshev I.I., Fesenko S.V., et al. Radioecological Problems of Nuclear Energy. Atomnaya Energiya = Atomic Energy. 1990;68;5:320-327 (In Russ.)].
6. Алексахин Р.М., Булдаков Л.А., Губанов В.А. и др. Крупные радиационные аварии: последствия и защитные меры / Под ред. Ильина Л.А., Губанова В.А. M.: ИздАТ, 2001. 751 с. [Aleksakhin R.M., Buldakov L.A., Gubanov V.A., et al. Krupnyye Radiatsionnyye Avarii: Posledstviya i Mery Zashchity = Major Radiation Accidents: Consequences and Protective Measures. Ed. Il’in L.A, Gubanov V.A. Moscow, IzdAT Publ., 2001. 751 p. (In Russ.)].
7. Фесенко С.В. Сравнительный анализ последствий аварий на Чернобыльской АЭС и АЭС «Фукусима 1» (Япония) для сельского хозяйства и природных экосистем // Атомная энергия. 2023. Т.135. №5. С. 149–158 [Fesenko S.V. Comparative Analysis of the Consequences of the Accidents at the Chernobyl NPP and the Fukushima-1 NPP (Japan) for Agriculture and Natural Ecosystems. Atomnaya Energiya = Atomic Energy. 2023;135;5:149-158 (In Russ.)].
8. Environmental Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident and Their Remediation: Twenty Years of Experience. Report of the Chernobyl Forum Expert Group Environment. Vienna, IAEA, 2006. 180 p.
9. Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-2-R. Vienna, IAEA, 2015. 136 p.
10. Военная доктрина Российской Федерации. 2022 г. М: ГЦЕНТРМА, 2022. 24 с. [Voyennaya Doktrina Rossiyskoy Federatsii. 2022 god = Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation. 2022. Moscow, GTSENTRMA Publ., 2022. 24 p.
(In Russ.)]
11. Санжарова Н.И., Фесенко С.В. Радиоэкологические последствия аварии на Чернобыльской АЭС: биологические эффекты, миграция, реабилитация загрязненных территорий: Монография. М.: РАН, 2018. 278 c. [Sanzharova N.I., Fesenko S.V. Radioekologicheskiye Posledstviya Avarii na Chernobyl’skoy AES: Biologicheskiye Effekty, Migratsiya, Reabilitatsiya Zagryaznennykh Territoriy = Radioecological Consequences of the Accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant: Biological Effects, Migration, Rehabilitation of Contaminated Areas. Moscow, Rossiyskaya Akademiya Nauk Publ., 2018. 278 p. (In Russ.)].
12. Алексахин Р.М. Радиоэкологические уроки Чернобыля // Радиационная биология. Радиоэкология. 1993. Т.33. № 1. С. 14 [Aleksakhin R.M. Radioecological Lessons of Chernobyl. Radiatsionnaya Biologiya. Radioekologiya = Radiation Biology. Radioecology. 1993;33;1:14 (In Russ.)].
13. Crick M.J., Linsley G.S. An Assessment of the Radiological Impact of the Windscale Reactor Fire. International Journal of Radiation Biology. 1984;46;5:479–506.
14. Iranzo E., Richmond C.R. Plutonium Contamination Twenty Years after the Nuclear Accident in Spain. Tennessee, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 1987.
15. The Radiological Accident in Goiania. Vienna, IAEA. 1988. 152 p.
16. Steinhauser G., Brandl A., Johnson T.E. Comparison of the Chernobyl and Fukushima Nuclear Accidents: a Review of the Environmental Impacts. Sci. Total Environ. 2014;470-471:800-817.
17. Ильин Л.А., Кенигсберг Я.Э., Линге И.И., Лихтарев И.А., Савкин М.Н. Радиационная защита населения при реагировании на Чернобыльскую аварию // Медицинская радиология и радиационная безопасность. 2016. Т.61. №3. С. 1–16 [Il’in L.A., Kenigsberg Ya.E., Linge I.I., Likhtarev I.A., Savkin M.N. Radiation Protection of the Population during the Response to the Chernobyl Accident. Meditsinskaya Radiologiya i Radiatsionnaya Bezopasnost’ = Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2016;61;3:1–16 (In Russ.)].
18. Шинкарев С.М. Самойлов А.С., Грановская Е.О., Корнева Е.А., Кухта Б.А., Андросова А.А., Яценко В.Н. Сравнительный анализ вклада короткоживущих изотопов йода в дозу облучения щитовидной железы у населения после Чернобыльской и Фукусимской аварий // Гигиена и санитария. 2017. Т.96. №9. С. 827–832 [Shinkarev S.M. Samoylov A.S., Granovskaya Ye.O., Korneva Ye.A., Kukhta B.A., Androsova A.A., Yatsenko V.N. Comparative Analysis of the Contribution of Short-Lived Iodine Isotopes to the Thyroid Gland Radiation Dose in the Population after the Chernobyl and Fukushima Accidents. Gigiyena i Sanitariya = Hygiene and Sanitation. 2017;96;9:827–832 (In Russ.)].
19. Uyba V., Samoylov A., Shinkarev S. Comparative Analysis of the Countermeasures Taken to Mitigate Exposure of the Public to Radioiodine Following the Chernobyl and Fukushima Accidents: Lessons from Both Accidents. J. Radiat. Res. 2018;59;S2:40-47.
20. Shinkarev S.M. Comparison of Thyroid Doses to the Public from Radioiodine Following the Chernobyl and Fukushima Accidents. Ann. ICRP. 2021;50;S1:174–180.
21. The Fukushima Daiichi Accident. Vienna, IAEA, 2015. Vol. 4. 222 p.
22. Fesenko S.V. Key Lessons from Major Radiation Accidents for Emergency Response in Agriculture. Atomic Energy. Springer. 2024;136;3:205–214.
23. Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation, United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) 2016 Report. New York, UN, 2017. 508 p.
24. Fesenko S.V. A Comparative Analysis of the Consequences of Accidents at Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi (Japan) NPPs for Agriculture and the Environment. Atomic Energy. Springer. 2024;135;3–4:195–205.
25. Фесенко С.В. Уроки крупных радиационных аварий для аварийного реагирования в сельском хозяйстве // Атомная энергия. 2024. Т.136. №34. С. 160-167 [Fesenko S.V. Lessons from Major Radiation Accidents for Emergency Response in Agriculture. Atomnaya Energiya = Atomic Energy. 2024;136;34:160-167 (In Russ.)].
26. Operational Intervention Levels for Reactor Emergencies. Vienna, IAEA, 2017. 163 p.
27. Manual for First Responders to a Radiological Emergency, EPR. First Responders. 2006. Vienna, IAEA, 2006. 144 p.
28. Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR. Part 3. Vienna, IAEA, 2014. 471 p.
29. Generic Procedures for Assessment and Response during a Radiological Emergency, IAEA TECDOC1162. Vienna, IAEA, 2000. 193 p.
30. Barnekow U., Fesenko S., Kashparov V., Kis–Benedek G., et al. Guidelines on Soil and Vegetation Sampling for Radiological Monitoring. TRS 486. Vienna, IAEA, 2019. 247 p.
31. Handbook of Radioactivity Analysis. Ed. L’Annunziata M.F. 3rd. Elsevier, Academic Press 2012. 1418 p.
32. Communication with the Public in a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency. EPR Public Communications. Vienna, IAEA, 2014. 116 p.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest.The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. These studies were conducted as part of fundamental and applied research under the 2023–2027 Program of Activities of the Federal State Budgetary Institution National Research Center Kurchatov Institute (complex topic 5P.7. “Applied Genetic and Biotechnological Research for Agriculture”).
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 20.03.2026. Accepted for publication: 25.04.2026.