Table 1. The definitions used in the questionnaire and report
| Term | Definition |
| Active mosquito surveillance | A system employing professional staff (e.g. from public agencies, academic institutes, private companies) to collect (often on a regular basis) information on mosquito-specific data. |
| Animals of veterinary importance | Animals of either economical or personal importance, such as cattle or pets, often living in close proximity to humans. Livestock and companion animals. |
| Deployment | An act of applying a system, e.g. spraying adulticide within an area around the home of a dengue case. |
| Implementation | Putting in place a system: e.g. for reactive mosquito control in case of a detection of an autochthonous case of dengue. |
| Mosquito control | Measures of any kind against mosquitoes, intended to limit their presence or abundance or their ability to transmit pathogens. |
| Mosquito surveillance | Continuous, systematic collection, analysis and interpretation of mosquito-specific data that can be used in planning, implementing and evaluating public or veterinary health practice. |
| Passive mosquito surveillance | A system by which the responsible authority/agency collates mosquito-specific data from all potential sources, without commissioning or funding field mosquito-sampling by professionals.
Citizens' contributions to surveillance ('Citizen science') is considered as part of a passive surveillance system. |
| Preventive mosquito control | Planned mosquito control (can be triggered, e.g. by densities exceeding thresholds) aiming to reduce population densities and/or disease transmission risk |
| Reactive mosquito control | Mosquito control in response to a detection of an introduction of an exotic species, or an imported or autochthonous disease case. |
| Wildlife | Undomesticated animal species including abandoned/feral pets. |
===== PAGE 10 =====
## Results
## Participating countries
In total 26 of 38 questionnaires sent out were completed and returned, resulting in a 68% response rate (Figure). Twenty one of the 30 EU/EEA countries, four out of the seven EU enlargement policy countries (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo1, Montenegro, and Serbia), and the UK replied to the questionnaire. In this section, if five or more countries gave a particular response, they are not listed individually. If a particular response was given by less than five countries, then they are individually named.
Figure 1. Overview of the responding countries
Figure 2. Overview of the countries that implement vector surveillance and control of Culex mosquitoes that are WNV vectors
Table 2. The reasons provided why surveillance of Culex mosquitoes is implemented (multiple answers are possible) (n = 17)
Table 3. Indicators assessed by the Culex surveillance activities (multiple answers possible) (n = 17)
Table 4. The objectives of the Culex surveillance (multiple answers possible) (n = 17)
Table 5. Is reporting of the surveillance indicators voluntary or compulsory?
Table 6. Who designs the actual control plan? (multiple answers possible) (n = 12)
Table 7. Who is responsible for the execution of the Culex mosquito control in your country? (multiple answers possible) (n = 13)
Table 8. What type of Culex mosquito control is implemented in your country? (multiple answers possible) (n = 13)
Figure 3. Overview of the countries that implement vector surveillance and control of Aedes invasive mosquitoes
Table 10. Indicators assessed by the Aedes invasive mosquito surveillance activities (multiple answers possible) (n = 20)
Table 11. The objectives of the Aedes invasive mosquito surveillance (multiple answers possible) (n = 20)
Table 12. What type of Aedes invasive mosquito surveillance is implemented in your country for the objectives listed below? (n = 20)
Table 13. How do you classify the public funding for active (Aedes invasive) mosquito surveillance activities in your country? (n = 20)
Table 14. Is reporting of the surveillance indicators voluntary or compulsory? (n = 20)
Table 15. Who designs the actual Aedes invasive mosquito control plan? (multiple answers possible) (n = 17)
Figure 4. Overview rating of needs for mosquito surveillance in terms of importance.
Figure 5. Overview rating of needs for mosquito control in terms of importance
===== PAGE 24 =====
## Discussion
Between 2020 and 2025, Cu/ex surveillance was conducted in 17 of the 26 countries that responded to the questionnaire, while control measures were implemented in 12 countries. Among countries conducting surveillance, WNV was most often reported as a public and/or veterinary health concern, and surveillance activities were commonly described as informing response efforts. The questionnaire findings also show substantial variation in how surveillance and control activities are organised and implemented across countries. This variation reflects differences in national governance structures, legal mandates and the distribution of responsibilities between national, regional and local levels. The main reported objectives of Cu/ex surveillance were outbreak investigation and assessment of the level, location and timing of transmission risk. Funding for Cu/ex surveillance was often reported as limited in duration or project-based: only seven of the 17 countries conducting surveillance reported that outbreak-related surveillance activities were embedded in a long-term strategy (exceeding three years) for disease risk assessment and control. Countries reported using a range of control methods, with adult mosquito control using biocides being the most frequently reported approach.
Between 2020 and 2025, Aedes invasive mosquito surveillance was conducted in 20 of the 26 responding countries, and control activities were implemented in 17 countries. Surveillance was mainly used to assess the introduction and spread of invasive Aedes species. In several countries, it was also used to inform response efforts or to address public or veterinary health concerns. As with Cu/ex mosquitoes, the organisation and implementation of Aedes mosquito surveillance and control varied across countries, reflecting differences in institutional structures, responsibilities and risk contexts. Some countries reported that preventive control was embedded in long-term strategies for disease risk reduction, while reactive control was often funded on an ad hoc basis. For elimination efforts following introductions, the funding mechanism was unclear or unknown in several countries. Respondents reported using a range of methods to control Aedes mosquitoes. Preventive and elimination measures commonly targeted immature stages and included both biocidal and non-biocidal interventions, often combined with formalised social mobilisation programmes. Reactive control, by contrast, was more often reported as targeting adult mosquitoes using biocides.
Previous work has identified several challenges related to vector surveillance and control in Europe. The ECDC report 'Organisation of Vector Surveillance and Control in Europe', published in 2021, described constraints including limited human and financial resources, complex organisational structures within countries, insufficient inter-governmental and inter-institutional cooperation, and unclear roles and responsibilities in the organisation and implementation of vector surveillance and control [1]. Similarly, the AIM-COST survey on Aedes invasive mosquito surveillance and control highlighted challenges related to limited political support, insufficient funding, shortages of trained personnel and weak coordination across governance levels [7]. It also reported that surveillance data were often underused in planning and that international guidance, although widely used, was not always well adapted to local contexts. The findings from the current questionnaire are consistent with several of these previously identified challenges, particularly in relation to funding, training, coordination, clarity of responsibilities, use of surveillance data, guidance and capacity-building.
The questionnaire findings are discussed below under four main themes: responsibilities and coordination, resources, legal and regulatory issues, and operational topics.
## Responsibilities and coordination
At the international level, respondents rated international coordination between countries as important for mosquito surveillance. This finding is relevant in the context of mosquitoes and vector-borne diseases that may affect more than one country. The questionnaire therefore suggests that respondents see value in cross-border exchange and collaboration, including through existing EU-level cooperation frameworks for serious cross-border threats to health.
At the national level, questionnaire responses showed that responsibilities for mosquito surveillance and control vary considerably between countries. Depending on the country, these responsibilities may involve ministries, public or veterinary health agencies, regional or municipal authorities, scientific institutions and private companies. Due to the this, there was a reported need for greater clarity about competencies, including who is responsible for specific aspects of surveillance and control.
Respondents also rated the need for a long-term mosquito plan as important, particularly for surveillance, and identified clarity of responsibilities as an important area for better control. The questionnaire findings indicate that, in some countries, roles, funding arrangements and mechanisms for monitoring or evaluating implementation are not always clearly defined or consistently reported. Some countries reported using coordination mechanisms, working groups or dedicated agencies, but these arrangements differed between national contexts.
The questionnaire findings also indicate that communication and collaboration across actors involved in mosquito surveillance and control remain relevant issues. Respondents identified multisectoral collaboration and improved communication between surveillance and control as important needs. Depending on the
===== PAGE 25 =====
country, the actors involved may include public health institutions, veterinary or environmental authorities, local authorities, scientific institutions, private companies and, in some settings, citizens.
Dedicated national committees play a key role in overcoming regulatory and operational barriers. For example, to ensure that vector control tools are available when needed, a specialised committee on biocides could support applicants in going through the approval processes.
## Resources
The questionnaire findings indicate that funding and human-resource capacity are important issues for mosquito surveillance and control. For surveillance, respondents rated the need for more funding, more training for staff and a long-term mosquito plan as highly important. Several countries reported time-limited or project-based funding arrangements. For vector control, respondents rated the need for more funding for staff and expendables, more training of staff and better evidence on the public-health benefit of mosquito control as very important. The responses also showed variability in funding arrangements across countries, with some activities funded on an ad hoc or time-limited basis and others embedded in longer-term strategies.
In countries where municipalities, local authorities, public or veterinary health agencies, scientific institutions or private companies are involved in implementation, respondents' emphasis on training points to the importance they attach to maintaining practical competencies for data collection, surveillance, control activities and response-related procedures.
Citizen involvement was also identified by respondents as relevant to mosquito control. In particular, the need for more involvement of citizens in reducing mosquitoes in the peri-domestic environment was rated as important in the control-related needs assessment. This indicates that public participation, particularly source reduction around homes, is perceived by respondents as one component of mosquito control efforts.
## Legal and regulatory issues
The questionnaire findings indicate that legal and regulatory arrangements for mosquito control vary across countries and may influence how control activities are planned and implemented. For both Culex and Aedes invasive mosquito control, only a limited number of countries reported legal frameworks providing specific tools or rights to facilitate control activities, such as access to private property, importation regulations or tyre-storage regulations. Some countries also reported that mosquito control responsibilities are held at local or municipal level, while planning, oversight and implementation may involve different authorities or sectors. These findings indicate that, in some settings, the organisation of mosquito control may be shaped by fragmented responsibilities, variable legal mandates and differences in local implementation capacity.
Respondents also described country-specific arrangements that may affect the responsiveness of control activities. In some settings, mosquito control planning appeared to be linked to annual or predefined planning and funding cycles, while surveillance information, field assessments or changing epidemiological and entomological conditions may not always be fully integrated into planning processes. The questionnaire findings therefore suggest that, in some contexts, planned control activities and evolving operational needs may not always be fully aligned, although the extent and implications of this vary between countries.
## Operational topics
The questionnaire findings indicate that data availability, data use and monitoring of relevant vector indicators are important operational issues for mosquito surveillance and control. Surveillance activities reported by countries commonly included indicators such as mosquito presence or absence, abundance, seasonality and infection rates, and less frequently behavioural traits or insecticide/biocide resistance. Respondents also rated the need for a better understanding of how mosquito surveillance can inform early warning for mosquito-borne disease outbreaks as very important. These findings indicate that respondents perceive the use of surveillance data for risk assessment and response as an important area for further strengthening.
The findings also point to knowledge gaps in the relationship between vector indicators and disease risk. While several countries reported using surveillance to assess the level, location or timing of transmission risk, respondents also rated the need for better evidence on the public-health benefit of mosquito control as very important. The questionnaire also identified a need for measurable control targets. Together, these findings suggest that the links between mosquito abundance, biting rates, transmission risk and operational thresholds are not consistently defined across countries.
===== PAGE 26 =====
Evaluation of control activities also appeared to vary across countries. Some countries reported that surveillance or control plans are evaluated and readjusted regularly, while others reported that this is done less frequently, never, or that the frequency is unknown. Respondents also identified updated guidance and practical protocols, as well as better evidence on the effectiveness and public-health benefit of control measures, as important. These findings indicate that the evidence available to assess and compare control approaches remains uneven across countries.
Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness considerations were also identified as relevant operational gaps. The questionnaire findings indicate that evidence on the public-health benefit of mosquito control and information to support efficient allocation of resources remains important areas for respondents. This includes better understanding of the relative value of proactive and reactive control approaches, although the availability of such analyses appears limited and varies by country.
===== PAGE 27 =====
## Conclusions
This report provides an overview of the organisation of surveillance and control of Cu/ex mosquitoes, as vectors of West Nile virus, and invasive Aedes mosquitoes in the EU/EEA countries, EU enlargement policy countries and the UK. It also summarises the needs identified to improve this by questionnaire respondents.
The questionnaire findings show that mosquito surveillance and control are implemented in many responding countries, but that their organisation, objectives, funding arrangements, legal frameworks and operational approaches vary considerably. For both Culex and invasive Aedes mosquitoes, activities are shaped by differences in national and sub-national responsibilities, available resources, technical capacity and perceived public or veterinary health priorities.
Across the responses, several recurring needs were identified by respondents. These included funding and human-resource capacity, training, coordination within and between countries, clarity of responsibilities, legal and regulatory arrangements, laboratory and field capacity, monitoring of insecticide or biocide resistance, and evidence to support the assessment of surveillance and control activities. Respondents also highlighted gaps in the evidence base, including the relationship between vector indicators and disease risk, the public health benefit of control measures, and the definition of measurable control targets.
Overall, the questionnaire findings indicate that mosquito surveillance and control in Europe are characterised by diverse national arrangements and different levels of capacity, while several common operational and evidence-related needs are shared across countries.
===== PAGE 28 =====
## References
1. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Organisation of vector surveillance and control in Europe. Stockholm: ECDC; 2021. Available at: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/organisation-vector-surveillance-and-control-europe
2. Bakonyi T, Haussig JM. West Nile virus keeps on moving up in Europe. Eurosurveillance. 2020;25(46):20_01938.
3. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Aedes albopictus - current known distribution: June 2025
Stockholm: ECDC; 2025. Available at: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/aedes-albopictus-current-known-distribution-june-2025
4. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC_. Historical data on local transmission of dengue in the EU/EEA Stockholm: ECDC; 2025. Available at: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/all-topics-z/dengue/surveillance-and-disease-data/autochthonous-transmission-dengue-virus-eueea-previous-years
5. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Historical data on local transmission in the EU/EEA of chikungunya virus disease Stockholm: ECDC; 2025. Available at: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/infectious-disease-topics/chikungunya-virus-disease/surveillance-and-updates/local-transmission-previous-years
6. Ministry of Health. Mosquito Control Measures in Aircraft. 2025. Updated 26/06/2025. Available at: https://www.moh.gov.gr/articles/health/dieythynsh-dhmosias-ygieinhs/metadotika-kai-mh-metadotika-noshmata/noshmata-poy-metadidontai-me-diabibastes-ndash-koynoypia/13460-metra-elegxoy-katapolemhshs-twn-koynoypiwn-se-pthtika-mesa
7. AIM COST. A questionnaire-based survey of surveillance and management of Aedes invasive mosquitoes in Europe. technical Report Rome: University La Sapienza: AIM-COST Action CA 17108; 2020. Available at: https://www.aedescost.com/sites/default/files/2020-08/AIMcOSTQuestionnaire_Full_Report_postedV4.pdf
===== PAGE 29 =====
### Annex 1. Questionnaire
| PART 1. General questions |
| 1.1. What is your name?; 1.2. What is your country?; 1.3. What is your email? If you provide this we assume that you give us permission to contact you about your answers.; 1.4. What is your affiliation?; 1.5. What is your role/function within your organization?; 1.6. Would you like to be acknowledged in any report on this survey? (Y/N); 1.7. Who did you consult to complete this questionnaire? Please provide name, institution and role/function of the institution. |
| 1.8. Please indicate whether in the last 5 years (2020—present) any type of surveillance or control was deployed* or planned in your country (*see definitions) | Surveillance of WNV vectors (Y/N); Control of WNV vectors (Y/N); Surveillance of Aedes invasive mosquitoes (Y/N); Control of Aedes invasive mosquitoes (Y/N) |
| PART 2. Questions if no surveillance implemented in your country |
| 2.1. If no surveillance is carried out in your country, please specify the reason why mosquito surveillance was not implemented in your country. Multiple reasons per mosquito group are possible (specify for WNV vectors and Aedes invasive species) |
| 1. Vector-borne disease(s) transmitted by this mosquito group is NOT a public or veterinary health problem/priority in the country; 2. Mosquito surveillance does not contribute to response and control of vector-borne diseases; 3. There is no legal framework within which mosquito surveillance can be organised; 4. There is a lack of resources to implement mosquito surveillance; 5. Other (please specify - for each mosquito group); 6 Don't know /NA |
| PART 3. Questions about mosquito surveillance |
| 3.1. If YES, please specify the reason why surveillance was implemented. Multiple reasons per mosquito group are possible. |
| 1. Vector-borne diseases transmitted by this mosquito group are a public or veterinary health problem/priority in the country; 2. Mosquito surveillance informs response to and control of vector-borne diseases; 3. Mosquito surveillance is needed to assess the introduction and spread of invasive vector species; 4. There is a legal obligation; 5. Other (please specify for each mosquito group); 6 Don't know /NA |
| 3.2. If mosquito surveillance was implemented in a context of a legal framework, can you specify below. Multiple reasons per mosquito group are possible. |
| 1. Related to the International Health Regulation of surveillance at points of entry; 2. Embedded in a legal framework on diseases surveillance in the country; 3. Based on a specific legislation on mosquito surveillance in the country; 4. Other (please specify, for each mosquito group); None; Don't know /NA |
| 3.3. Which ministry is responsible for mosquito surveillance? Here we ask the ministry that has the overall responsibility and oversight of mosquito surveillance and is legally bound to it. Multiple ministries per disease (group) are possible if the responsibility is joint. This is organizational level 1 (Fig.1). Please specify for each mosquito group. |
| 1. Ministry of Health at national level; 2. Ministry of Agriculture of national level; 3. Ministry of Environment at national level; 4. Ministry of Health at sub-national level; 5. Ministry of Agriculture at sub-national level; 6. Ministry of Environment at sub-national level; Other (please specify for each disease); None; Don't know /NA |
| 3.4. Is the surveillance plan per mosquito group designed at national or at sub-national level? A plan can be designed at national level, but targeting only specific areas e.g. points of entry or areas at risk for vector-borne diseases, or depending on levels of establishment or ecological conditions, but, in those situations, you should check 'national'. Please specify for each mosquito group. |
| 1. National; 2. Sub-national |
| 3.5. Who designs the actual mosquito surveillance plan? Here we ask for the organization/agency that is responsible for designing a plan on "what, when, and where" needs to be done related to mosquito surveillance. This is at organizational level 2 (Fig.1). Please specify for each mosquito group. |
| 1. Dedicated agency; 2. Working group within a ministry; 3. Working group between ministries; 4. Public/Veterinary health agency; 5. Scientific/Academic institution; 6. Private company or organization; 7. Other (please specify for each mosquito group); 8. None; 9. Don't know /NA |
| 3.6. Specify which organization/agency is responsible for designing of the actual mosquito surveillance plan by providing the name of the agency and their website. It can be more than one if e.g. the design of the actual mosquito surveillance plan is at sub-national level. If you believe further explanation is necessary, you can provide an extra comment. |
| Mosquito vectors of WNV: Name, website, Comment; Aedes Invasive mosquitoes: name, website, Comment; |
| 3.7. Who is responsible for the evaluation and possible re-adjustments of the mosquito surveillance plan? Multiple answers per mosquito group are possible. |
| 1. The same organization/agency that develops the surveillance plan; 2. Other (Please specify for each mosquito group); Don't know /NA |
| 3.8. How often is the evaluation and re-adjustment of the surveillance plan done? Specify per mosquito group. |
| 1. Each year; 2. Every 2 - 5 years; 3. Less often than every 5 years; 4. Never |
| 3.9. If mosquito surveillance is implemented, who executes the mosquito surveillance in your country? Here we ask for the organization or agency that carries out the day-to-day mosquito surveillance activities. organizational level 3 (Fig.1). Specify for each mosquito group. |
| 1. Dedicated agency; 2. Public/Veterinary health agency; 3. Scientific/Academic institution; 4. Private company or organization; 5. Other (please specify for each mosquito group); None; Don't know/NA |
| 3.10. Specify which organizations/agencies are responsible for the execution of the mosquito surveillance. Provide their name and website. If you believe further explanation is necessary you can provide an extra comment. |
| Mosquito vectors of WNV: Name, website, Comment; Invasive Aedes mosquitoes: name, website, Comment |
===== PAGE 30 =====
| 3.11. What indicators do mosquito surveillance activities assess in your country? Multiple answers per mosquito group are possible |
| 1. Mosquito presence/absence; 2. Mosquito abundance; 3. Mosquito seasonality; 4. Mosquito infection rate and xenomonitoring; 5. Mosquito behavioural traits; 6. Insecticide/biocide resistance; 7. Other (please specify for each mosquito group); None; Don't know/NA |
| 3.12. What are the mosquito surveillance objectives in your country? Multiple answers per mosquito group are possible. |
| 1. Prevention of establishment after introduction of exotic mosquito species; 2. Assessment of level, place and/or time of transmission risk; 3. Assessment of nuisance levels; 4. Investigation of (ongoing) outbreaks (ad hoc, event based); 5. Assess quality/efficiency of mosquito control interventions; 6. Other (please specify for each mosquito group); Don't know/NA |
| 3.13. What type of mosquito surveillance is implemented in your country for the indicators listed below? See definition of active and passive surveillance above. Provide this for following activities: WNV vectors: Prevention of establishment after introduction of exotic mosquito species; Assessment of level, place and/or time of transmission risk; Assessment of nuisance levels; Investigation of (ongoing) outbreaks (ad hoc, event based); Assessment of control efficacy; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: Prevention of establishment after introduction of exotic mosquito species; Assessment of level, place and/or time of transmission risk; Assessment of nuisance levels; Investigation of (ongoing) outbreaks (ad hoc, event based); Assessment of control efficacy |
| 1. Active; 2. Passive; 3. Active and passive; None, Don't know/NA |
| 3.14. Where is the mosquito surveillance activity implemented? Specify for each mosquito group and activity. Provide this for following activities: WNV vectors: Prevention of establishment after introduction of exotic mosquito species; Assessment of level, place and/or time of transmission risk; Assessment of nuisance levels; Investigation of (ongoing) outbreaks (ad hoc, event based); Assessment of control efficacy; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: Prevention of establishment after introduction of exotic mosquito species; Assessment of level, place and/or time of transmission risk; Assessment of nuisance levels; Investigation of (ongoing) outbreaks (ad hoc, event based); Assessment of control efficacy |
| 1. Country wide; 2. Certain parts of the country; Don't know/NA |
| 3.15. If mosquito surveillance is implemented in certain parts of the country, please specify why, for each activity: Prevention of establishment after introduction of exotic mosquito species; Assessment of level, place and/or time of transmission risk; Assessment of nuisance levels; Investigation of (ongoing) outbreaks (ad hoc, event based); Assessment of control efficacy; Mosquito vectors of WNV; Aedes Invasive mosquitoes |
| 3.16. How do you classify the public funding for ACTIVE mosquito surveillance activities in your country? Per indicator and mosquito group. WNV vectors: Prevention of establishment after introduction of exotic mosquito species; Assessment of level, place and/or time of transmission risk; Assessment of nuisance levels; Investigation of (ongoing) outbreaks (ad hoc, event based); Assessment of control efficacy; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: Prevention of establishment after introduction of exotic mosquito species; Assessment of level, place and/or time of transmission risk; Assessment of nuisance levels; Investigation of (ongoing) outbreaks (ad hoc, event based); Assessment of control efficacy. |
| ACTIVE surveillance: 1. Limited in time (e.g. project based); 2. Embedded in a long-term (>3 years) strategy of disease risk assessment and control; 3. Don't know/NA |
| PASSIVE surveillance: 1. Limited in time (e.g. project based); 2. Embedded in a long-term (>3 years) strategy of disease risk assessment and control; 3. Don't know/NA |
| 3.17. Please specify for each surveillance indicator (see 2.13), whether reporting to the national level is voluntary or compulsory. WNV vectors: Prevention of establishment after introduction of exotic mosquito species; Assessment of level, place and/or time of transmission risk; Assessment of nuisance levels; Investigation of (ongoing) outbreaks (ad hoc, event based); Assessment of control efficacy; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: Prevention of establishment after introduction of exotic mosquito species; Assessment of level, place and/or time of transmission risk; Assessment of nuisance levels; Investigation of (ongoing) outbreaks (ad hoc, event based); Assessment of control efficacy |
| 1. Voluntary; 2. Compulsory 3. Don't know/NA |
| 3.18. Please rate the following needs for mosquito surveillance in your country (on a Likert scale) in terms of importance. Resources: Need for a better evidence how mosquito surveillance has a public-health benefit; Need for more funding (for staff, expendables); Need for more training of human resources (irrespective of funding for mosquito surveillance being available, there is not enough knowledge and capacity); Responsibilities: Need for a dedicated national agency for mosquito surveillance; Need for more clarity about roles and responsibilities (which authority is responsible for what); Coordination: Need for more international coordination between countries; Need for more national coordination between sub-national actors within the same sector; Need for development of multisectoral collaboration; Need for more collaboration between academic institutes and health institutes; Need for more communication between surveillance and control; Operational: Need for a long-term mosquito surveillance plan; Need for citizen science adapted to local contexts; Need for identification of minimum essential surveillance information; Need for improved surveillance equipment and tools, e.g. traps, mosquito apps, species identification/diagnostic solutions; Need for a better understanding how mosquito surveillance can inform early warning for mosquito-borne diseases outbreaks |
| 1. Not important; 2. Not very important; 3. Neither important or unimportant; Quite important; Very important |
| 3.19. Please identify any additional needs regarding mosquito surveillance in your country, or put "none" or "unknown" |
| Free text |
| PART 4. Questions if no control implemented |
| 4.1. If no control is carried out in your country, please specify the reason why mosquito control was not implemented in your country. Multiple answers per group are possible. |
| 1. The mosquito species group is not present; 2. mosquito-borne disease(s) transmitted by this mosquito group is not considered a public or veterinary health problem; 3. We don't have reliable mosquito control options for this mosquito group; 4. There is no legal framework within which control can be organised; 5. Other (please specify for each mosquito group); 6. Don't know/NA |
===== PAGE 31 =====
| PART 5. Questions about reactive and preventive mosquito control |
| 5.1. If YES please specify the objectives. Multiple answers per group are possible.
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; 3. Other (please specify); Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak; 4. Other (please specify) |
| Yes; No; Don't know/NA |
| 5.2. Is there a legal framework which provides certain tools or rights facilitating mosquito control? Multiple answers per group are possible.
1. The right to enter private property; 2. Tyre recycling regulation (e.g. storage regulations); 3. Importation regulations; 4. Other (please specify for each mosquito group); 5. There is no legal framework; Don't know/NA |
| 5.3. Which ministry is responsible for mosquito control? Here we ask the ministry that has the overall responsibility and oversight of mosquito control and is legally bound to it. Multiple ministries per disease (group) are possible if the responsibility is joint. This is at organizational level 1 (Fig.1).
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak |
| 1. Ministry of Health at national level; 2. Ministry of Agriculture of national level; 3. Ministry of Environment at national level; 4. Ministry of Health at sub-national level; 5. Ministry of Agriculture at sub-national level; 6. Ministry of Environment at sub-national level; Other (please specify for each disease); None; Don't know/NA |
| 5.4. Is the actual mosquito control plan (on "what, when, and where" needs to be done regarding mosquito control) designed at national or at sub-national level? Specify for each objective.
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak |
| 1. National; 2. Sub-national (specify which level, e.g. province, municipality); Other |
| 5.5. Who designs the actual control plan? Here we ask for the organization/agency that is responsible to design a plan on "what, when, and where" needs to be done regarding mosquito control. This is at organizational level 2 (Fig.1). Specify for each objective.
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak |
| 1. Dedicated agency mandated by law; 2. Working group within a ministry; 3. Working group between ministries; 4. Public/Veterinary health agency; 5. Scientific/Academic institution; 6. Private company or organization; 7. Other (please specify for each objective); 8. Don't know/NA |
| 5.6. Specify which organization/agency is responsible for the design of the mosquito control plan by providing the name of the agency and the website. If you believe further explanation is necessary, you can provide an extra comment. Specify for each objective.
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak |
| Agency Name; Agency Website; Comment |
| 5.7. Who is responsible for the evaluation and possible re-adjustments of the mosquito control plan? Specify for each objective.
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak |
| 1. The same organization/agency that develops the control plan; 2. Other; Don't know/NA |
| 5.7a & 5.7b. If OTHER, please specify which organization/agency that is responsible for the evaluation and possible re-adjustments. Provide the name of the agency and their website. If you believe further explanation is necessary, you can provide an extra comment.
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak |
| Agency Name; Agency Website; Comment |
| 5.8. Is the control plan monitored and evaluated for impact and effectiveness? If YES, how? Put "none" or "unknown" if you don't know.
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak |
| Free text |
| 5.9. How often is the evaluation and re-adjustment of the mosquito control plan done? Specify for each objective. |
===== PAGE 32 =====
| WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak
1. Each year; 2. Every 2 – 5 years; 3. Every 6 years or longer; 4. Never; Don't know/NA |
| 5.10. How do you classify public funding for mosquito control in your country? Specify for each objective.
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak
1. Ad hoc and limited in time (e.g. for protecting mass gathering outdoor events); 2. Embedded in a long-term strategy (> 3 years) of disease risk control; Don't know |
| 5.11. Who is in charge of the execution of the mosquito control in your country? Here we ask who carries out the day-to-day activities of mosquito control. This is at organizational level 3 (Fig.1). Specify for each objective.
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak
1. Dedicated agency; 2. Public/Veterinary health agency; 3. Scientific/Academic institution; 4. Private company or organization; 5. Other (please specify for each objective); Don't know/NA |
| 3.12. Specify which organization/agency is responsible for the execution of the mosquito control. Please provide the name of the organization/agency and their website. There can be more than one if e.g. the execution of the mosquito control is at sub-national level. If the responsibility is at municipality level, please provide a few representative examples and explain in the free text space below.
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak
Agency Name; Agency Website; Comment |
| 5.13a. Please provide examples of municipalities responsible for WNV vector control. Put "none" or "unknown" if you don't know
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Municipalities
5.13b. Please provide examples of municipalities responsible for Aedes invasive mosquito control. Put "none" or "unknown" if you don't know
Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak
municipalities
5.14. What type of mosquito control is implemented in your country (irrespective of deployment)? Multiple answers per group and objective are possible.
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak
1. Targeting immature stages using nonbiocidal intervention (such as source reduction, surface films and Biological control such as copepods or fish); 2. Targeting adults using biocides; 3. Targeting adults using non-biocidal intervention (such as mass trapping); 4. Environmental management; 5. Targeting adult stages using innovative methods such as SIT; 6. Formalised social mobilization program; 7. Other (please specify for each objective); 8. No control; Don't know/NA |
| 5.15. For each of the mosquito control types listed above, please provide details about the method (e.g. active ingredient, formulation, method of administration, and, if possible, the annual public budget for this activity).
WNV vectors: 1. Preventive control of mosquito vectors of WNV to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 2. Reactive control after detection of WNV cases to control an outbreak; Aedes invasive mosquitoes: 1. Elimination of invasive Aedes mosquitoes after introductions; 2. Preventive control of invasive Aedes mosquitoes to reduce disease risk (and/or nuisance); 3. Reactive control after detection of autochthonous cases of dengue, chikungunya or Zika to control an outbreak
Free text |
| 5.16. What is the overall mosquito control annual budget in your country? If you don't know put "none" or "unknown" |
| Free text |
| 5.17. Is this budget covering all vector control needs? |
| Yes; No; Don't know/NA |
| 5.18. Please rate the following needs for mosquito control in your country (on a Likert scale) in terms of importance.
Resources. Need for better evidence on how investing in mosquito control has a public health benefit; Need for more funding (for staff, consumables); Need for more training of human resources (irrespective of funding for mosquito control being available, there is not enough knowledge and capacity); Responsibilities: Need for a dedicated (national) agency for mosquito control; Need for clarity about competencies (Who is responsible for what?); Coordination: Need for more international coordination between countries; Need for more (national) coordination between sub-national actors within the same sector; Need for development of multisector collaboration; Need for more collaboration between health institutes and |
===== PAGE 33 =====
