1
|
Linklater WL, Steer J, Munro D. An update on allegations of invasive species denialism. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2024; 38:e14223. [PMID: 38078776 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.14223] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2023] [Accepted: 10/25/2023] [Indexed: 01/30/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Wayne L Linklater
- Department of Environmental Studies, California State University - Sacramento, Sacramento, California, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Guiaşu RC, Tindale CW. Logical fallacies persist in invasion biology and blaming the messengers will not improve accountability in this field: a response to Frank et al. BIOLOGY & PHILOSOPHY 2023; 38:3. [PMID: 36683876 PMCID: PMC9845828 DOI: 10.1007/s10539-023-09892-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2022] [Accepted: 01/06/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
We analyze the "Logical fallacies and reasonable debates in invasion biology: a response to Guiaşu and Tindale" article by Frank et al., and also discuss this work in the context of recent intense debates in invasion biology, and reactions by leading invasion biologists to critics of aspects of their field. While we acknowledge the attempt by Frank et al., at least in the second half of their paper, to take into account more diverse points of view about non-native species and their complex roles in ecosystems, we also find the accusations of misrepresenting invasion biology, for instance by "cherry-picking" and "constructing 'straw people'", directed at the Guiaşu and Tindale study to be unwarranted. Despite the sometimes harsh responses by leading invasion biologists to critics of their field, we believe that persistent and fundamental problems remain in invasion biology, and we discuss some of these problems in this article. Failing to recognize these problems, and simply dismissing or minimizing legitimate criticisms, will not advance the cause, or enhance the general appeal, of invasion biology and will prevent meaningful progress in understanding the multiple contributions non-native species can bring to various ecosystems worldwide. We recommend taking a more open-minded and pragmatic approach towards non-native species and the novel ecosystems they are an integral part of.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Radu Cornel Guiaşu
- Biology Program, Glendon College, York University, 2275 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON M4N 3M6 Canada
| | - Christopher W. Tindale
- Department of Philosophy, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Ave., Windsor, ON N9B 3P4 Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Shackleton RT, Vimercati G, Probert AF, Bacher S, Kull CA, Novoa A. Consensus and controversy in the discipline of invasion science. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2022; 36:e13931. [PMID: 35561048 PMCID: PMC9805150 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13931] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2021] [Revised: 04/20/2022] [Accepted: 04/22/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
Approaches, values, and perceptions in invasion science are highly dynamic, and like in other disciplines, views among different people can diverge. This has led to debate in the field specifically surrounding the core themes of values, management, impacts, and terminology. Considering these debates, we surveyed 698 scientists and practitioners globally to assess levels of polarization (opposing views) on core and contentious topics. The survey was distributed online (via Google Forms) and promoted through listservs and social media. Although there were generally high levels of consensus among respondents, there was some polarization (scores of ≥0.39 [top quartile]). Relating to values, there was high polarization regarding claims of invasive species denialism, whether invasive species contribute to biodiversity, and how biodiversity reporting should be conducted. With regard to management, there were polarized views on banning the commercial use of beneficial invasive species, the extent to which stakeholders' perceptions should influence management, whether invasive species use alone is an appropriate control strategy, and whether eradication of invasive plants is possible. For impacts, there was high polarization concerning whether invasive species drive or are a side effect of degradation and whether invasive species benefits are understated. For terminology, polarized views related to defining invasive species based only on spread, whether species can be labeled as invasive in their native ranges, and whether language used is too xenophobic. Factor and regression analysis revealed that views were particularly divergent between people working on different invasive taxa (plants and mammals) and in different disciplines (between biologists and social scientists), between academics and practitioners, and between world regions (between Africa and the Global North). Unlike in other studies, age and gender had a limited influence on response patterns. Better integration globally and between disciplines, taxa, and sectors (e.g., academic vs. practitioners) could help build broader understanding and consensus.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ross T. Shackleton
- Swiss Federal Institute for Forest Snow and Landscape Research WSLBirmensdorfSwitzerland
- Centre for Invasion Biology, Department of Botany and ZoologyStellenbosch UniversityStellenboschSouth Africa
- Institute of Geography and SustainabilityUniversity of LausanneLausanneSwitzerland
| | - Giovanni Vimercati
- Department of Biology, Unit Ecology and EvolutionUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland
| | - Anna F. Probert
- Department of Biology, Unit Ecology and EvolutionUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland
| | - Sven Bacher
- Department of Biology, Unit Ecology and EvolutionUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland
| | - Christian A. Kull
- Institute of Geography and SustainabilityUniversity of LausanneLausanneSwitzerland
| | - Ana Novoa
- Department of Invasion EcologyInstitute of Botany, Czech Academy of SciencesPrůhoniceCzech Republic
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bodey TW, Carter ZT, Haubrock PJ, Cuthbert RN, Welsh MJ, Diagne C, Courchamp F. Building a synthesis of economic costs of biological invasions in New Zealand. PeerJ 2022; 10:e13580. [PMID: 35990909 PMCID: PMC9387519 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.13580] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2022] [Accepted: 05/22/2022] [Indexed: 01/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Biological invasions are a major component of anthropogenic environmental change, incurring substantial economic costs across all sectors of society and ecosystems. There have been recent syntheses of costs for a number of countries using the newly compiled InvaCost database, but New Zealand-a country renowned for its approach to invasive species management-has so far not been examined. Here we analyse reported economic damage and management costs incurred by biological invasions in New Zealand from 1968 to 2020. In total, US$69 billion (NZ$97 billion) is currently reported over this ∼50-year period, with approximately US$9 billion of this considered highly reliable, observed (c.f. projected) costs. Most (82%) of these observed economic costs are associated with damage, with comparatively little invested in management (18%). Reported costs are increasing over time, with damage averaging US$120 million per year and exceeding management expenditure in all decades. Where specified, most reported costs are from terrestrial plants and animals, with damages principally borne by primary industries such as agriculture and forestry. Management costs are more often associated with interventions by authorities and stakeholders. Relative to other countries present in the InvaCost database, New Zealand was found to spend considerably more than expected from its Gross Domestic Product on pre- and post-invasion management costs. However, some known ecologically (c.f. economically) impactful invasive species are notably absent from estimated damage costs, and management costs are not reported for a number of game animals and agricultural pathogens. Given these gaps for known and potentially damaging invaders, we urge improved cost reporting at the national scale, including improving public accessibility through increased access and digitisation of records, particularly in overlooked socioeconomic sectors and habitats. This also further highlights the importance of investment in management to curtail future damages across all sectors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas W. Bodey
- School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand,School of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom
| | - Zachary T. Carter
- School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Phillip J. Haubrock
- Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Gelnhausen, Germany,Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, University of South Bohemia, České Budějovice, Czech Republic
| | - Ross N. Cuthbert
- GEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel, Kiel, Germany,School of Biological Sciences, The Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
| | | | - Christophe Diagne
- CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France
| | - Franck Courchamp
- CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Renault D, Hess MCM, Braschi J, Cuthbert RN, Sperandii MG, Bazzichetto M, Chabrerie O, Thiébaut G, Buisson E, Grandjean F, Bittebiere AK, Mouchet M, Massol F. Advancing biological invasion hypothesis testing using functional diversity indices. THE SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT 2022; 834:155102. [PMID: 35398434 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155102] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2022] [Revised: 03/31/2022] [Accepted: 04/03/2022] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
Pioneering investigations on the effects of introduced populations on community structure, ecosystem functioning and services have focused on the effects of invaders on taxonomic diversity. However, taxonomic-based diversity metrics overlook the heterogeneity of species roles within and among communities. As the homogenizing effects of biological invasions on community and ecosystem processes can be subtle, they may require the use of functional diversity indices to be properly evidenced. Starting from the listing of major functional diversity indices, alongside the presentation of their strengths and limitations, we focus on studies pertaining to the effects of invasive species on native communities and recipient ecosystems using functional diversity indices. By doing so, we reveal that functional diversity of the recipient community may strongly vary at the onset of the invasion process, while it stabilizes at intermediate and high levels of invasion. As functional changes occurring during the lag phase of an invasion have been poorly investigated, we show that it is still unknown whether there are consistent changes in functional diversity metrics that could indicate the end of the lag phase. Thus, we recommend providing information on the invasion stage under consideration when computing functional diversity metrics. For the existing literature, it is also surprising that very few studies explored the functional difference between organisms from the recipient communities and invaders of the same trophic levels, or assessed the effects of non-native organism establishment into a non-analogue versus an analogue community. By providing valuable tools for obtaining in-depth diagnostics of community structure and functioning, functional diversity indices can be applied for timely implementation of restoration plans and improved conservation strategies. To conclude, our work provides a first synthetic guide for their use in hypothesis testing in invasion biology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Renault
- University of Rennes, CNRS, ECOBIO [(Ecosystèmes, biodiversité, évolution)] - UMR 6553, Rennes, France; Institut Universitaire de France, 1 rue Descartes, 75231 Paris Cedex 05, France.
| | - Manon C M Hess
- Institut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d'Écologie marine et continentale (IMBE), UMR Aix Marseille Université, Avignon Université, CNRS, IRD, France; Institut de recherche pour la conservation des zones humides méditerranéennes Tour du Valat, Le Sambuc, 13200 Arles, France; NGE-GUINTOLI, Saint-Etienne du Grès, Parc d'activités de Laurade - BP22, 13156 Tarascon Cedex, France
| | - Julie Braschi
- Institut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d'Écologie marine et continentale (IMBE), UMR Aix Marseille Université, Avignon Université, CNRS, IRD, France; Naturalia-Environnement, Ingénierie en écologie, 20 Rue Lawrence Durrell, 84140 Avignon, France
| | - Ross N Cuthbert
- GEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel, 24105 Kiel, Germany; School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, BT9 5DL Belfast, United Kingdom
| | - Marta G Sperandii
- Dipartimento di Scienze, Università degli Studi Roma Tre, Viale G. Marconi 446, 00146 Roma, Italy
| | - Manuele Bazzichetto
- University of Rennes, CNRS, ECOBIO [(Ecosystèmes, biodiversité, évolution)] - UMR 6553, Rennes, France
| | - Olivier Chabrerie
- Université de Picardie Jules Verne, UMR 7058 CNRS EDYSAN, 1 rue des Louvels, 80037 Amiens Cedex 1, France
| | - Gabrielle Thiébaut
- University of Rennes, CNRS, ECOBIO [(Ecosystèmes, biodiversité, évolution)] - UMR 6553, Rennes, France
| | - Elise Buisson
- Institut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d'Écologie marine et continentale (IMBE), UMR Aix Marseille Université, Avignon Université, CNRS, IRD, France
| | - Frédéric Grandjean
- Université de Poitiers, UMR CNRS 7267 EBI- Ecologie et Biologie des Interactions, équipe EES, 5 rue Albert Turpin, Bat B8-B35, TSA 51106, 86073 Poitiers Cedex 09, France
| | - Anne-Kristel Bittebiere
- Univ Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS, ENTPE, UMR5023 LEHNA, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France
| | - Maud Mouchet
- UMR 7204 MNHN-SU-CNRS CESCO, CP135, 57 rue Cuvier, 75005 Paris, France
| | - François Massol
- Univ. Lille, CNRS, Inserm, CHU Lille, Institut Pasteur de Lille, U1019 - UMR 8204 - CIIL - Center for Infection and Immunity of Lille, F-59000 Lille, France
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Cuthbert RN, Diagne C, Hudgins EJ, Turbelin A, Ahmed DA, Albert C, Bodey TW, Briski E, Essl F, Haubrock PJ, Gozlan RE, Kirichenko N, Kourantidou M, Kramer AM, Courchamp F. Biological invasion costs reveal insufficient proactive management worldwide. THE SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT 2022; 819:153404. [PMID: 35148893 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153404] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2021] [Revised: 01/21/2022] [Accepted: 01/21/2022] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
The global increase in biological invasions is placing growing pressure on the management of ecological and economic systems. However, the effectiveness of current management expenditure is difficult to assess due to a lack of standardised measurement across spatial, taxonomic and temporal scales. Furthermore, there is no quantification of the spending difference between pre-invasion (e.g. prevention) and post-invasion (e.g. control) stages, although preventative measures are considered to be the most cost-effective. Here, we use a comprehensive database of invasive alien species economic costs (InvaCost) to synthesise and model the global management costs of biological invasions, in order to provide a better understanding of the stage at which these expenditures occur. Since 1960, reported management expenditures have totalled at least US$95.3 billion (in 2017 values), considering only highly reliable and actually observed costs - 12-times less than damage costs from invasions ($1130.6 billion). Pre-invasion management spending ($2.8 billion) was over 25-times lower than post-invasion expenditure ($72.7 billion). Management costs were heavily geographically skewed towards North America (54%) and Oceania (30%). The largest shares of expenditures were directed towards invasive alien invertebrates in terrestrial environments. Spending on invasive alien species management has grown by two orders of magnitude since 1960, reaching an estimated $4.2 billion per year globally (in 2017 values) in the 2010s, but remains 1-2 orders of magnitude lower than damages. National management spending increased with incurred damage costs, with management actions delayed on average by 11 years globally following damage reporting. These management delays on the global level have caused an additional invasion cost of approximately $1.2 trillion, compared to scenarios with immediate management. Our results indicate insufficient management - particularly pre-invasion - and urge better investment to prevent future invasions and to control established alien species. Recommendations to improve reported management cost comprehensiveness, resolution and terminology are also made.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ross N Cuthbert
- GEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel, 24105 Kiel, Germany; School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, BT9 5DL Belfast, United Kingdom.
| | - Christophe Diagne
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France
| | - Emma J Hudgins
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, Canada
| | - Anna Turbelin
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France
| | - Danish A Ahmed
- Center for Applied Mathematics and Bioinformatics, Department of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Gulf University for Science and Technology, P.O. Box 7207, Hawally 32093, Kuwait
| | - Céline Albert
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France
| | - Thomas W Bodey
- School of Biological Sciences, King's College, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB24 3FX, United Kingdom
| | - Elizabeta Briski
- GEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel, 24105 Kiel, Germany
| | - Franz Essl
- BioInvasions, Global Change, Macroecology-Group, Department of Botany and Biodiversity Research, University of Vienna, Rennweg 14, 1030 Vienna, Austria
| | - Phillip J Haubrock
- University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic; Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Gelnhausen, Germany
| | - Rodolphe E Gozlan
- ISEM UMR226, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, IRD, EPHE, 34090 Montpellier, France
| | - Natalia Kirichenko
- Sukachev Institute of Forest, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Federal Research Center "Krasnoyarsk Science Center SB RAS", Krasnoyarsk 660036, Russia; Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk 660041, Russia; Saint Petersburg State Forest Technical University, Saint Petersburg 194021, Russia
| | - Melina Kourantidou
- University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics, Degnevej 14, 6705 Esbjerg Ø, Denmark; Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole, MA 02543, United States; Institute of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters, Hellenic Center for Marine Research, Athens 164 52, Greece
| | - Andrew M Kramer
- Department of Integrative Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33620, United States
| | - Franck Courchamp
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kouba A, Oficialdegui FJ, Cuthbert RN, Kourantidou M, South J, Tricarico E, Gozlan RE, Courchamp F, Haubrock PJ. Identifying economic costs and knowledge gaps of invasive aquatic crustaceans. THE SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT 2022; 813:152325. [PMID: 34971690 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152325] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2021] [Revised: 12/05/2021] [Accepted: 12/07/2021] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
Despite voluminous literature identifying the impacts of invasive species, summaries of monetary costs for some taxonomic groups remain limited. Invasive alien crustaceans often have profound impacts on recipient ecosystems, but there may be great unknowns related to their economic costs. Using the InvaCost database, we quantify and analyse reported costs associated with invasive crustaceans globally across taxonomic, spatial, and temporal descriptors. Specifically, we quantify the costs of prominent aquatic crustaceans - crayfish, crabs, amphipods, and lobsters. Between 2000 and 2020, crayfish caused US$ 120.5 million in reported costs; the vast majority (99%) being attributed to representatives of Astacidae and Cambaridae. Crayfish-related costs were unevenly distributed across countries, with a strong bias towards European economies (US$ 116.4 million; mainly due to the signal crayfish in Sweden), followed by costs reported from North America and Asia. The costs were also largely predicted or extrapolated, and thus not based on empirical observations. Despite these limitations, the costs of invasive crayfish have increased considerably over the past two decades, averaging US$ 5.7 million per year. Invasive crabs have caused costs of US$ 150.2 million since 1960 and the ratios were again uneven (57% in North America and 42% in Europe). Damage-related costs dominated for both crayfish (80%) and crabs (99%), with management costs lacking or even more under-reported. Reported costs for invasive amphipods (US$ 178.8 thousand) and lobsters (US$ 44.6 thousand) were considerably lower, suggesting a lack of effort in reporting costs for these groups or effects that are largely non-monetised. Despite the well-known damage caused by invasive crustaceans, we identify data limitations that prevent a full accounting of the economic costs of these invasive groups, while highlighting the increasing costs at several scales based on the available literature. Further cost reports are needed to better assess the true magnitude of monetary costs caused by invasive aquatic crustaceans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antonín Kouba
- University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic.
| | | | - Ross N Cuthbert
- GEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel, Kiel, Germany; Queen's University Belfast, School of Biological Sciences, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
| | - Melina Kourantidou
- Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA, USA; University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics, Esbjerg, Denmark
| | - Josie South
- Centre for Invasion Biology, South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity (SAIAB), Makhanda, South Africa; South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity (SAIAB), DSI/NRF Research Chair in Inland Fisheries and Freshwater Ecology, Makhanda, South Africa
| | - Elena Tricarico
- University of Florence, Department of Biology, Sesto Fiorentino, FI, Italy
| | | | - Franck Courchamp
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Orsay, France
| | - Phillip J Haubrock
- University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic; Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Gelnhausen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Fantle-Lepczyk JE, Haubrock PJ, Kramer AM, Cuthbert RN, Turbelin AJ, Crystal-Ornelas R, Diagne C, Courchamp F. Economic costs of biological invasions in the United States. THE SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT 2022; 806:151318. [PMID: 34743879 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151318] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2021] [Revised: 10/25/2021] [Accepted: 10/26/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
The United States has thousands of invasive species, representing a sizable, but unknown burden to the national economy. Given the potential economic repercussions of invasive species, quantifying these costs is of paramount importance both for national economies and invasion management. Here, we used a novel global database of invasion costs (InvaCost) to quantify the overall costs of invasive species in the United States across spatiotemporal, taxonomic, and socioeconomic scales. From 1960 to 2020, reported invasion costs totaled $4.52 trillion (USD 2017). Considering only observed, highly reliable costs, this total cost reached $1.22 trillion with an average annual cost of $19.94 billion/year. These costs increased from $2.00 billion annually between 1960 and 1969 to $21.08 billion annually between 2010 and 2020. Most costs (73%) were related to resource damages and losses ($896.22 billion), as opposed to management expenditures ($46.54 billion). Moreover, the majority of costs were reported from invaders from terrestrial habitats ($643.51 billion, 53%) and agriculture was the most impacted sector ($509.55 billion). From a taxonomic perspective, mammals ($234.71 billion) and insects ($126.42 billion) were the taxonomic groups responsible for the greatest costs. Considering the apparent rising costs of invasions, coupled with increasing numbers of invasive species and the current lack of cost information for most known invaders, our findings provide critical information for policymakers and managers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jean E Fantle-Lepczyk
- Auburn University, School of Forestry & Wildlife Sciences, 602 Duncan Dr, Auburn, AL 36849, USA.
| | - Phillip J Haubrock
- Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Gelnhausen, Germany; University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic.
| | - Andrew M Kramer
- University of South Florida, Department of Integrative Biology, Tampa, FL 33610, USA.
| | - Ross N Cuthbert
- GEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel, Düsternbrooker Weg 20, 24105 Kiel, Germany; School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, 19 Chlorine Gardens, BT9 5DL Belfast, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom
| | - Anna J Turbelin
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France.
| | - Robert Crystal-Ornelas
- Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources, Rutgers University, 14 College Farm Road, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA
| | - Christophe Diagne
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France.
| | - Franck Courchamp
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Haubrock PJ, Bernery C, Cuthbert RN, Liu C, Kourantidou M, Leroy B, Turbelin AJ, Kramer AM, Verbrugge LNH, Diagne C, Courchamp F, Gozlan RE. Knowledge gaps in economic costs of invasive alien fish worldwide. THE SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT 2022; 803:149875. [PMID: 34478901 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149875] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2021] [Revised: 08/19/2021] [Accepted: 08/20/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
Invasive alien fishes have had pernicious ecological and economic impacts on both aquatic ecosystems and human societies. However, a comprehensive and collective assessment of their monetary costs is still lacking. In this study, we collected and reviewed reported data on the economic impacts of invasive alien fishes using InvaCost, the most comprehensive global database of invasion costs. We analysed how total (i.e. both observed and potential/predicted) and observed (i.e. empirically incurred only) costs of fish invasions are distributed geographically and temporally and assessed which socioeconomic sectors are most affected. Fish invasions have potentially caused the economic loss of at least US$37.08 billion (US2017 value) globally, from just 27 reported species. North America reported the highest costs (>85% of the total economic loss), followed by Europe, Oceania and Asia, with no costs yet reported from Africa or South America. Only 6.6% of the total reported costs were from invasive alien marine fish. The costs that were observed amounted to US$2.28 billion (6.1% of total costs), indicating that the costs of damage caused by invasive alien fishes are often extrapolated and/or difficult to quantify. Most of the observed costs were related to damage and resource losses (89%). Observed costs mainly affected public and social welfare (63%), with the remainder borne by fisheries, authorities and stakeholders through management actions, environmental, and mixed sectors. Total costs related to fish invasions have increased significantly over time, from <US$0.01 million/year in the 1960s to over US$1 billion/year in the 2000s, while observed costs have followed a similar trajectory. Despite the growing body of work on fish invasions, information on costs has been much less than expected, given the overall number of invasive alien fish species documented and the high costs of the few cases reported. Both invasions and their economic costs are increasing, exacerbating the need for improved cost reporting across socioeconomic sectors and geographic regions, for more effective invasive alien fish management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Phillip J Haubrock
- Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Department of River Ecology and Conservation, 63571 Gelnhausen, Germany; University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic.
| | - Camille Bernery
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique et Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France; Unité Biologie des Organismes et Ecosystèmes Aquatiques (BOREA UMR 7208), Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Sorbonne Universités, Université de Caen Normandie, Université des Antilles, CNRS, IRD, Paris, France
| | - Ross N Cuthbert
- GEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel, 24105 Kiel, Germany; School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast BT9 5DL, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Chunlong Liu
- Institute of Biology, Freie Universität Berlin, 14195 Berlin, Germany; Leibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries (IGB), 12587 Berlin, Germany; Berlin-Brandenburg Institute of Advanced Biodiversity Research (BBIB), 14195 Berlin, Germany
| | - Melina Kourantidou
- Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole, MA 02543, United States; University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics, Esbjerg 6700, Denmark; Institute of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters, Hellenic Center for Marine Research, Athens 164 52, Greece
| | - Boris Leroy
- Unité Biologie des Organismes et Ecosystèmes Aquatiques (BOREA UMR 7208), Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Sorbonne Universités, Université de Caen Normandie, Université des Antilles, CNRS, IRD, Paris, France
| | - Anna J Turbelin
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique et Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France
| | - Andrew M Kramer
- Department of Integrative Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa, USA
| | - Laura N H Verbrugge
- University of Helsinki, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, Department of Forest Sciences, P. O. Box 27, 00014 Helsinki, Finland; Aalto University, Department of Built Environment, Water & Development Research Group, Tietotie 1E, FI-00076 Aalto, Finland
| | - Christophe Diagne
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique et Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France
| | - Franck Courchamp
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique et Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Mokotjomela TM, Nemurangoni T, Mundalamo T, Jaca TP, Kuhudzai AG. The value of dump sites for monitoring biological invasions in South Africa. Biol Invasions 2021. [DOI: 10.1007/s10530-021-02683-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
|
11
|
Crystal-Ornelas R, Hudgins EJ, Cuthbert RN, Haubrock PJ, Fantle-Lepczyk J, Angulo E, Kramer AM, Ballesteros-Mejia L, Leroy B, Leung B, López-López E, Diagne C, Courchamp F. Economic costs of biological invasions within North America. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.58038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
Invasive species can have severe impacts on ecosystems, economies, and human health. Though the economic impacts of invasions provide important foundations for management and policy, up-to-date syntheses of these impacts are lacking. To produce the most comprehensive estimate of invasive species costs within North America (including the Greater Antilles) to date, we synthesized economic impact data from the recently published InvaCost database. Here, we report that invasions have cost the North American economy at least US$ 1.26 trillion between 1960 and 2017. Economic costs have climbed over recent decades, averaging US$ 2 billion per year in the early 1960s to over US$ 26 billion per year in the 2010s. Of the countries within North America, the United States (US) had the highest recorded costs, even after controlling for research effort within each country ($5.81 billion per cost source in the US). Of the taxa and habitats that could be classified in our database, invasive vertebrates were associated with the greatest costs, with terrestrial habitats incurring the highest monetary impacts. In particular, invasive species cumulatively (from 1960–2017) cost the agriculture and forestry sectors US$ 527.07 billion and US$ 34.93 billion, respectively. Reporting issues (e.g., data quality or taxonomic granularity) prevented us from synthesizing data from all available studies. Furthermore, very few of the known invasive species in North America had reported economic costs. Therefore, while the costs to the North American economy are massive, our US$ 1.26 trillion estimate is likely very conservative. Accordingly, expanded and more rigorous economic cost reports are necessary to provide more comprehensive invasion impact estimates, and then support data-based management decisions and actions towards species invasions.
Collapse
|
12
|
Renault D, Manfrini E, Leroy B, Diagne C, Ballesteros-Mejia L, Angulo E, Courchamp F. Biological invasions in France: Alarming costs and even more alarming knowledge gaps. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.59134] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
The ever-increasing number of introduced species profoundly threatens global biodiversity. While the ecological and evolutionary consequences of invasive alien species are receiving increasing attention, their economic impacts have largely remained understudied, especially in France. Here, we aimed at providing a general overview of the monetary losses (damages caused by) and expenditures (management of) associated with invasive alien species in France. This country has a long history of alien species presence, partly due to its long-standing global trade activities, highly developed tourism, and presence of overseas territories in different regions of the globe, resulting in a conservative minimum of 2,750 introduced and invasive alien species. By synthesizing for the first time the monetary losses and expenditures incurred by invasive alien species in Metropolitan France and French overseas territories, we obtained 1,583 cost records for 98 invasive alien species. We found that they caused a conservative total amount ranging between US$ 1,280 million and 11,535 million in costs over the period 1993–2018. We extrapolated costs for species invading France, for which costs were reported in other countries but not in France, which yielded an additional cost ranging from US$ 151 to 3,030 millions. Damage costs were nearly eight times higher than management expenditure. Insects, and in particular the Asian tiger mosquito Aedes albopictus and the yellow fever mosquito Ae. aegypti, totalled very high economic costs, followed by non-graminoid terrestrial flowering and aquatic plants (Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Ludwigia sp. and Lagarosiphon major). Over 90% of alien species currently recorded in France had no costs reported in the literature, resulting in high biases in taxonomic, regional and activity sector coverages. To conclude, we report alarming costs and even more alarming knowledge gaps. Our results should raise awareness of the importance of biosecurity and biosurveillance in France, and beyond, as well as the crucial need for better reporting and documentation of cost data.
Collapse
|
13
|
Haubrock PJ, Cuthbert RN, Tricarico E, Diagne C, Courchamp F, Gozlan RE. The recorded economic costs of alien invasive species in Italy. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.57747] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
Whilst the ecological impacts of invasion by alien species have been well documented, little is known of the economic costs incurred. The impacts of invasive alien species on the economy can be wide-ranging, from management costs, to loss of crops, to infrastructure damage. However, details on these cost estimates are still lacking, particularly at national and regional scales. In this study, we use data from the first global assessment of economic costs of invasive alien species (InvaCost), where published economic cost data were systematically gathered from scientific and grey literature. We aimed to describe the economic cost of invasions in Italy, one of the most invaded countries in Europe, with an estimate of more than 3,000 alien species. The overall economic cost of invasions to Italy between 1990 and 2020 was estimated at US$ 819.76 million (EUR€ 704.78 million). This cost was highest within terrestrial habitats, with considerably fewer costs being exclusively associated with aquatic habitats and management methods, highlighting a bias within current literature. There was also a clear indication of informational gaps, with only 15 recorded species with costs. Further, we observed a tendency towards particular taxonomic groups, with insect species accounting for the majority of cost estimates in Italy. Globally, invasion rates are not slowing down and the associated economic impact is thus expected to increase. Therefore, the evaluation and reporting of economic costs need to be improved across taxa, in order to mitigate and efficiently manage the impact of invasions on economies.
Collapse
|
14
|
Rico-Sánchez AE, Haubrock PJ, Cuthbert RN, Angulo E, Ballesteros-Mejia L, López-López E, Duboscq-Carra VG, Nuñez MA, Diagne C, Courchamp F. Economic costs of invasive alien species in Mexico. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.63846] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Invasive alien species (IAS) are a leading driver of biodiversity loss worldwide, and have negative impacts on human societies. In most countries, available data on monetary costs of IAS are scarce, while being crucial for developing efficient management. In this study, we use available data collected from the first global assessment of economic costs of IAS (InvaCost) to quantify and describe the economic cost of invasions in Mexico. This description was made across a range of taxonomic, sectoral and temporal variables, and allowed us to identify knowledge gaps within these areas. Overall, costs of invasions in Mexico were estimated at US$ 5.33 billion (i.e., 109) ($MXN 100.84 billion) during the period from 1992 to 2019. Biological invasion costs were split relatively evenly between aquatic (US$ 1.16 billion; $MXN 21.95 billion) and terrestrial (US$ 1.17 billion; $MXN 22.14 billion) invaders, but semi-aquatic taxa dominated (US$ 2.99 billion; $MXN 56.57 billion), with costs from damages to resources four times higher than those from management of IAS (US$ 4.29 billion vs. US$ 1.04 billion; $MXN 81.17 billion vs $MXN 19.68 billion). The agriculture sector incurred the highest costs (US$ 1.01 billion; $MXN 19.1 billion), followed by fisheries (US$ 517.24 million; $MXN 9.79 billion), whilst most other costs simultaneously impacted mixed or unspecified sectors. When defined, costs to Mexican natural protected areas were mostly associated with management actions in terrestrial environments, and were incurred through official authorities via monitoring, control or eradication. On natural protected islands, mainly mammals were managed (i.e. rodents, cats and goats), to a total of US$ 3.99 million, while feral cows, fishes and plants were mostly managed in protected mainland areas, amounting to US$ 1.11 million in total. Pterygoplichthys sp. and Eichhornia crassipes caused the greatest reported costs in unprotected aquatic ecosystems in Mexico, and Bemisia tabaci to terrestrial systems. Although reported damages from invasions appeared to be fluctuating through time in Mexico, management spending has been increasing. These estimates, albeit conservative, underline the monetary pressure that invasions put on the Mexican economy, calling for urgent actions alongside comprehensive cost reporting in national states such as Mexico.
Collapse
|
15
|
Haubrock PJ, Cuthbert RN, Yeo DCJ, Banerjee AK, Liu C, Diagne C, Courchamp F. Biological invasions in Singapore and Southeast Asia: data gaps fail to mask potentially massive economic costs. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.64560] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
The impacts of invasive alien species are well-known and are categorised as a leading contributor to biodiversity loss globally. However, relatively little is known about the monetary costs incurred from invasions on national economies, hampering management responses. In this study, we used published data to describe the economic cost of invasions in Southeast Asia, with a focus on Singapore – a biodiversity-rich, tropical island city state with small size, high human density and high trade volume, three factors likely to increase invasions. In this country, as well as in others in Southeast Asia, cost data were scarce, with recorded costs available for only a small fraction of the species known to be invasive. Yet, the overall available economic costs to Singapore were estimated to be ~ US$ 1.72 billion in total since 1975 (after accounting for inflation), which is approximately one tenth of the total cost recorded in all of Southeast Asia (US$ 16.9 billion). These costs, in Singapore and Southeast Asia, were mostly linked to insects in the family Culicidae (principally Aedes spp.) and associated with damage, resource loss, healthcare and control-related spending. Projections for 11 additional species known to be invasive in Singapore, but with recorded costs only from abroad, amounted to an additional US$ 893.13 million, showing the potential huge gap between recorded and actual costs (cost records remain missing for over 90% of invasive species). No costs within the database for Singapore – or for other Southeast Asian countries – were exclusively associated with proactive management, highlighting that a shortage of reporting on the costs of invasions is mirrored by a lack of investment in management. Moreover, invasion cost entries in Singapore were under-reported relative to import levels, but total costs exceeded expectations, based on land area and population size, and to a greater extent than in other Southeast Asian countries. Therefore, the evaluation and reporting of economic costs of invasions need to be improved in this region to provide efficient data-based support for mitigation and management of their impacts.
Collapse
|
16
|
Duboscq-Carra VG, Fernandez RD, Haubrock PJ, Dimarco RD, Angulo E, Ballesteros-Mejia L, Diagne C, Courchamp F, Nuñez MA. Economic impact of invasive alien species in Argentina: a first national synthesis. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.63208] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
Invasive alien species (IAS) affect natural ecosystems and services fundamental to human well-being, human health and economies. However, the economic costs associated with IAS have been less studied than other impacts. This information can be particularly important for developing countries such as Argentina, where monetary resources for invasion management are scarce and economic costs are more impactful. The present study provides the first analysis of the economic cost of IAS in Argentina at the national level, using the InvaCost database (expanded with new data sources in Spanish), the first global compilation of the reported economic costs of invasions. We analyzed the temporal development of invasions costs, distinguishing costs according to the method reliability (i.e. reproducibility of the estimation methodology) and describing the economic costs of invasions by invaded environment, cost type, activity sector affected and taxonomic group of IAS. The total economic cost of IAS in Argentina between 1995 and 2019 was estimated at US$ 6,908 million. All costs were incurred and 93% were highly reliable. The recorded costs were mainly related to terrestrial environments and the agricultural sector, with lack of costs in other sectors, making it difficult to discuss the actual distribution of invasion costs in Argentina. Nevertheless, the reported costs of IAS in this country are very high and yet likely much underestimated due to important data gaps and biases in the literature. Considering that Argentina has an underdeveloped economy, costs associated with biological invasions should be taken into consideration for preventing invasions, and to achieve a more effective use of available resources.
Collapse
|
17
|
Angulo E, Ballesteros-Mejia L, Novoa A, Duboscq-Carra VG, Diagne C, Courchamp F. Economic costs of invasive alien species in Spain. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.59181] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Economic assessments for invasive alien species (IAS) are an urgent requirement for informed decision-making, coordinating and motivating the allocation of economic and human resources for the management of IAS. We searched for economic costs of IAS occurring in Spain, by using the InvaCost database and requesting data to regional governments and national authorities, which resulted in over 3,000 cost entries. Considering only robust data (i.e. excluding extrapolated, potential (not-incurred or expected) and low reliability costs), economic costs in Spain were estimated at US$ 261 million (€ 232 million) from 1997 to 2022. There was an increase from US$ 4 million per year before 2000 to US$ 15 million per year in the last years (from € 4 to 13 million). Robust data showed that most reported costs of IAS in Spain (> 90%) corresponded to management costs, while damage costs were only found for 2 out of the 174 species with reported costs. Economic costs relied mostly on regional and inter-regional administrations that spent 66% of costs in post-invasion management actions, contrary to all international guidelines, which recommend investing more in prevention. Regional administrations unequally reported costs. Moreover, 36% of the invasive species, reported to incur management costs, were not included in national or European regulations (i.e. Black Lists), suggesting the need to review these policies; besides, neighbouring regions seem to manage different groups of species. We suggest the need of a national lead agency to effectively coordinate actions, facilitate communication and collaboration amongst regional governments, national agencies and neighbouring countries. This will motivate the continuity of long-lasting management actions and the increase in efforts to report IAS costs by regional and inter-regional managers which will adequately provide information for future budgets gaining management effectiveness.
Collapse
|
18
|
Kourantidou M, Cuthbert RN, Haubrock PJ, Novoa A, Taylor NG, Leroy B, Capinha C, Renault D, Angulo E, Diagne C, Courchamp F. Economic costs of invasive alien species in the Mediterranean basin. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.58926] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
Invasive alien species (IAS) negatively impact the environment and undermine human well-being, often resulting in considerable economic costs. The Mediterranean basin is a culturally, socially and economically diverse region, harbouring many IAS that threaten economic and societal integrity in multiple ways. This paper is the first attempt to collectively quantify the reported economic costs of IAS in the Mediterranean basin, across a range of taxonomic, temporal and spatial descriptors. We identify correlates of costs from invasion damages and management expenditures among key socioeconomic variables, and determine network structures that link countries and invasive taxonomic groups. The total reported invasion costs in the Mediterranean basin amounted to $27.3 billion, or $3.6 billion when only realised costs were considered, and were found to have occurred over the last three decades. Our understanding of costs of invasions in the Mediterranean was largely limited to a few, primarily western European countries and to terrestrial ecosystems, despite the known presence of numerous high-impact aquatic invasive taxa. The vast majority of costs were attributed to damages or losses from invasions ($25.2 billion) and were mostly driven by France, Spain and to a lesser extent Italy and Libya, with significantly fewer costs attributed to management expenditure ($1.7 billion). Overall, invasion costs increased through time, with average annual costs between 1990 and 2017 estimated at $975.5 million. The lack of information from a large proportion of Mediterranean countries, reflected in the spatial and taxonomic connectivity analysis and the relationship of costs with socioeconomic variables, highlights the limits of the available data and the research effort needed to improve a collective understanding of the different facets of the costs of biological invasions. Our analysis of the reported costs associated with invasions in the Mediterranean sheds light on key knowledge gaps and provides a baseline for a Mediterranean-centric approach towards building policies and designing coordinated responses. In turn, these could help reach socially desirable outcomes and efficient use of resources invested in invasive species research and management.
Collapse
|
19
|
Liu C, Diagne C, Angulo E, Banerjee AK, Chen Y, Cuthbert RN, Haubrock PJ, Kirichenko N, Pattison Z, Watari Y, Xiong W, Courchamp F. Economic costs of biological invasions in Asia. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.58147] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Invasive species have caused severe impacts on biodiversity and human society. Although the estimation of environmental impacts caused by invasive species has increased in recent years, economic losses associated with biological invasions are only sporadically estimated in space and time. In this study, we synthesized the losses incurred by invasions in Asia, based on the most comprehensive database of economic costs of invasive species worldwide, including 560 cost records for 88 invasive species in 22 countries. We also assessed the differences in economic costs across taxonomic groups, geographical regions and impacted sectors, and further identified the major gaps of current knowledge in Asia. Reported economic costs of biological invasions were estimated between 1965 and 2017, and reached a total of US$ 432.6 billion (2017 value), with dramatic increases in 2000–2002 and in 2004. The highest costs were recorded for terrestrial ectotherms, for species estimated in South Asia, and for species estimated at the country level, and were related to more than one impacted sector. Two taxonomic groups with the highest reported costs were insects and mammals, and two countries with the highest costs were India and China. Non-English data covered all of 12 taxonomic groups, whereas English data only covered six groups, highlighting the importance of considering data from non-English sources to have a more comprehensive estimation of economic costs associated with biological invasions. However, we found that the estimation of economic costs was lacking for most Asian countries and for more than 96% of introduced species in Asia. Further, the estimation is heavily biased towards insects and mammals and is very limited concerning expenditures on invasion management. To optimize the allocation of limited resources, there is an important need to better and more widely study the economic costs of invasive alien species. In this way, improved cost reporting and more collaborations between scientists and stakeholders are needed across Asia.
Collapse
|
20
|
Davis MA. Let's welcome a variety of voices to invasion biology. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2020; 34:1329-1330. [PMID: 32780480 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13608] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2020] [Revised: 08/02/2020] [Accepted: 08/07/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Mark A Davis
- Department of Biology, Macalester College, 1600 Grand Avenue, Saint Paul, MN, 55105, U.S.A
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Sagoff M. Fact and value in invasion biology: reply to Cuthbert et al. 2020. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2020; 34:1583-1585. [PMID: 33176004 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13594] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2020] [Revised: 06/23/2020] [Accepted: 06/25/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Mark Sagoff
- Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, 22030, U.S.A
| |
Collapse
|