Beyond protocols: improving the reliability of expert-based risk analysis underpinning invasive species policies

Risk Assessment Model System for Aquatic Animal Introduction Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

The spread of invasive species (IS) has the potential to upset ecosystem balances. In extreme cases, this can hinder economical utilization of both aquatic (fisheries) and terrestrial (agricultural) systems. As a result, many countries regard risk assessment of IS as an important process for solving the problem of biological invasion. Yet, some IS are purposefully introduced for what is seen as their potential economic benefits. Thus, conducting IS risk assessments and then formulating policies based on scientific information will allow protocols to be developed that can reduce problems associated with IS incursions, whether occurring purposefully or not. However, the risk assessment methods currently adopted by most countries use qualitative or semiquantitative methodologies. Currently, there is a mismatch between qualitative and quantitative assessments. Moreover, most assessment systems are for terrestrial animals. What is needed is an assessment system for aquatic animals; however, those currently available are relatively rudimentary. To fill this gap, we used the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to build a risk assessment model system for aquatic IS. Our AHP has four primary indexes, twelve secondary indexes, and sixty tertiary indexes. We used this AHP to conduct quantitative risk assessments on five aquatic animals that are typically introduced in China, which have distinct biological characteristics, specific introduction purposes, and can represent different types of aquatic animals. The assessment results show that the risk grade for Pterygoplichthys pardalis is high; the risk grade for Macrobrachium rosenbergii, Crassostrea gigas, and Trachemys scripta elegans is medium; and the grade risk for Ambystoma mexicanum is low. Risk assessment of the introduction of aquatic animals using our AHP is effective, and it provides support for the introduction and healthy breeding of aquatic animals. Thus, the AHP model can provide a basis for decision-making risk management concerning the introduction of species.

A roadmap for ladybird conservation and recovery

Ladybirds (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) provide services that are critical to food production, and they fulfill an ecological role as a food source for predators. The richness, abundance, and distribution of ladybirds, however, are compromised by many anthropogenic threats. Meanwhile, a lack of knowledge of the conservation status of most species and the factors driving their population dynamics hinders the development and implementation of conservation strategies for ladybirds. We conducted a review of the literature on the ecology, diversity, and conservation of ladybirds to identify their key ecological threats. Ladybird populations are most affected by climate factors, landscape composition, and biological invasions. We suggest mitigating actions for ladybird conservation and recovery. Short-term actions include citizen science programs and education, protective measures for habitat recovery and threatened species, prevention of the introduction of non-native species, and the maintenance and restoration of natural areas and landscape heterogeneity. Mid-term actions involve the analysis of data from monitoring programs and insect collections to disentangle the effect of different threats to ladybird populations, understand habitat use by taxa on which there is limited knowledge, and quantify temporal trends of abundance, diversity, and biomass along a management-intensity gradient. Long-term actions include the development of a worldwide monitoring program based on standardized sampling to fill data gaps, increase explanatory power, streamline analyses, and facilitate global collaborations.

Consistency in impact assessments of invasive species is generally high and depends on protocols and impact types

Impact assessments can help prioritising limited resources for invasive species management. However, their usefulness to provide information for decision-making depends on their repeatability, i.e. the consistency of the estimated impact. Previous studies have provided important insights into the consistency of final scores and rankings. However, due to the criteria to summarise protocol responses into one value (e.g. maximum score observed) or to categorise those final scores into prioritisation levels, the real consistency at the answer level remains poorly understood. Here, we fill this gap by quantifying and comparing the consistency in the scores of protocol questions with inter-rater reliability metrics. We provide an overview of impact assessment consistency and the factors altering it, by evaluating 1,742 impact assessments of 60 terrestrial, freshwater and marine vertebrates, invertebrates and plants conducted with seven protocols applied in Europe (EICAT; EPPO; EPPO prioritisation; GABLIS; GB; GISS; and Harmonia+). Assessments include questions about diverse impact types: environment, biodiversity, native species interactions, hybridisation, economic losses and human health. Overall, the great majority of assessments (67%) showed high consistency; only a small minority (13%) presented low consistency. Consistency of responses did not depend on species identity or the amount of information on their impacts, but partly depended on the impact type evaluated and the protocol used, probably due to linguistic uncertainties (pseudo-R2 = 0.11 and 0.10, respectively). Consistency of responses was highest for questions on ecosystem and human health impacts and lowest for questions regarding biological interactions amongst alien and native species. Regarding protocols, consistency was highest with Harmonia+ and GISS and lowest with EPPO. The presence of few, but very low, consistent assessments indicates that there is room for improvement in the repeatability of assessments. As no single factor explained largely the variance in consistency, low values can rely on multiple factors. We thus endorse previous studies calling for diverse and complementary actions, such as improving protocols and guidelines or consensus assessment to increase impact assessment repeatability. Nevertheless, we conclude that impact assessments were generally highly consistent and, therefore, useful in helping to prioritise resources against the continued relentless rise of invasive species.

Potential for invasion of traded birds under climate and land-cover change

Humans have moved species away from their native ranges since the Neolithic, but globalization accelerated the rate at which species are being moved. We fitted more than half million distribution models for 610 traded bird species on the CITES list to examine the separate and joint effects of global climate and land-cover change on their potential end-of-century distributions. We found that climate-induced suitability for modelled invasive species increases with latitude, because traded birds are mainly of tropical origin and much of the temperate region is 'tropicalizing.' Conversely, the tropics are becoming more arid, thus limiting the potential from cross-continental invasion by tropical species. This trend is compounded by forest loss around the tropics since most traded birds are forest dwellers. In contrast, net gains in forest area across the temperate region could compound climate change effects and increase the potential for colonization of low-latitude birds. Climate change has always led to regional redistributions of species, but the combination of human transportation, climate, and land-cover changes will likely accelerate the redistribution of species globally, increasing chances of alien species successfully invading non-native lands. Such process of biodiversity homogenization can lead to emergence of non-analogue communities with unknown environmental and socioeconomic consequences.

Identifying, reducing, and communicating uncertainty in community science: a focus on alien species

Community science (also often referred to as citizen science) provides a unique opportunity to address questions beyond the scope of other research methods whilst simultaneously engaging communities in the scientific process. This leads to broad educational benefits, empowers people, and can increase public awareness of societally relevant issues such as the biodiversity crisis. As such, community science has become a favourable framework for researching alien species where data on the presence, absence, abundance, phenology, and impact of species is important in informing management decisions. However, uncertainties arising at different stages can limit the interpretation of data and lead to projects failing to achieve their intended outcomes. Focusing on alien species centered community science projects, we identified key research questions and the relevant uncertainties that arise during the process of developing the study design, for example, when collecting the data and during the statistical analyses. Additionally, we assessed uncertainties from a linguistic perspective, and how the communication stages among project coordinators, participants and other stakeholders can alter the way in which information may be interpreted. We discuss existing methods for reducing uncertainty and suggest further solutions to improve data reliability. Further, we make suggestions to reduce the uncertainties that emerge at each project step and provide guidance and recommendations that can be readily applied in practice. Reducing uncertainties is essential and necessary to strengthen the scientific and community outcomes of community science, which is of particular importance to ensure the success of projects aimed at detecting novel alien species and monitoring their dynamics across space and time.

Risk Management Assessment Improves the Cost-Effectiveness of Invasive Species Prioritisation

Simple Summary

International agreements commit nations to control or eradicate invasive alien species. The scale of this challenge exceeds available resources and so it is essential to prioritise the management of invasive alien species. Species prioritisation for management may consider the likelihood and scale of impact (risk assessment) and the feasibility, costs and effectiveness of management (risk management). Risk assessment processes are widely used, risk management less so. To assess the cost effectiveness of prioritisation, we considered 26 high-risk species considered for eradication from Great Britain (GB) with pre-existing risk assessment and risk management outputs. We used these to consider the relative reduction in risk per unit cost when managing prioritised species based on different criteria. We showed that the cost effectiveness of prioritisation within our sample using risk assessment scores alone performed no better than a random ranking of the species. In contrast, prioritisation including management feasibility produced nearly two orders of magnitude improvement compared to random ranking. We concluded that basing management actions on priorities based solely on risk assessment without considering management feasibility risks the inefficient use of limited resources. In this study, the cost effectiveness of species prioritisation action was greatly increased by the inclusion of a risk management assessment.

Abstract

International agreements commit nations to control or eradicate invasive alien species. The scale of this challenge exceeds available resources and so it is essential to prioritise the management of invasive alien species. Species prioritisation for management typically involves a hierarchy of processes that consider the likelihood and scale of impact (risk assessment) and the feasibility, costs and effectiveness of management (risk management). Risk assessment processes are widely used, risk management less so, but are a crucial component of resource decision making. To assess the cost-effectiveness of prioritisation, we considered 26 high-risk species considered for eradication from Great Britain (GB) with pre-existing risk assessment and risk management outputs. We extracted scores to reflect the overall risk to GB posed by the species, together with the estimated cost and the overall feasibility of eradication. We used these to consider the relative reduction in risk per unit cost when managing prioritised species based on different criteria. We showed that the cost-effectiveness of prioritisation within our sample using risk assessment scores alone, performed no better than a random ranking of the species. In contrast, prioritisation including management feasibility produced nearly two orders of magnitude improvement compared to random. We conclude that basing management actions on priorities based solely on risk assessment without considering management feasibility risks the inefficient use of limited resources. In this study, the cost-effectiveness of species prioritisation for action was greatly increased by the inclusion of risk management assessment.

A weed risk analytical screen to assist in the prioritisation of an invasive flora for containment

Prioritising weeds for control and deciding upon the type of control and its associated investment are fundamental to weed management planning. Risk analysis is central to this process, combining the activities of risk assessment, risk management and risk communication. Risk assessment methodology has a rich history, but management feasibility has typically been a secondary matter, dealt with separately or not at all. Determinants of management feasibility for weeds include the stage of invasion, weed biology, means of control and cost of weed control. Here, we describe a simple weed risk analytical screen that combines risk assessment with species traits that influence management feasibility. We consider stage of invasion, species biological/dispersal characteristics and plant community invasibility in a preliminary analysis of the risk posed by the non-native plant species on Christmas Island in the Indian Ocean. For each of 31 high-risk species considered to be ineradicable under existing funding constraints, we analyse the risk posed to two major plant communities: evergreen closed-canopy rainforest and semi-deciduous scrub forest. Weed risk ratings are combined with ratings for species-intrinsic feasibility of containment (based on a measure that combines time to reproduction with potential for long distance dispersal) to create preliminary rankings for containment specific to each community. These rankings will provide a key input for a more thorough analysis of containment feasibility – one that considers spatial distributions/landscape features, management aspects and the social environment. We propose a general non-symmetric relationship between weed risk and management feasibility, considering risk to be the dominant component of risk analysis. Therefore, in this analysis species are ranked according to their intrinsic containment feasibility within similar levels of risk to produce an initial prioritisation list for containment. Shade-tolerant weeds are of particular concern for the closed-canopy evergreen rainforest on Christmas Island, but a greater diversity of weeds is likely to invade the semi-deciduous scrub forest because of higher light availability. Nevertheless, future invasion of both communities will likely be conditioned by disturbance, both natural and anthropogenic. The plant communities of Christmas Island have undergone significant fragmentation because of clearing for phosphate mining and other purposes. With a substantial number of invasive plant species firmly established and having the potential to spread further, minimising future anthropogenic disturbance is paramount to reducing community invasibility and therefore conserving the island’s unique biodiversity.

Risk management options to contrast the introduction of citrus fruit bacterial canker through ornamental Rutaceae in the Mediterranean Basin: An Italian case study

Citrus bacterial canker (CBC) is a known disease caused by Xanthomonas citri subsp citri, which affects many species and varieties of Rutaceae. It causes evident damage on the epigeal parts of plant (leaves and branches) and, in particular, on the fruits, causing their fall and/or deterioration, making them unsuitable for sale. EPPO has signaled its presence in many Asian countries and in the Middle East, in South and Central America and in some regions of the African continent, but not yet in Europe. There are several possible ways of introducing this pathogen into the Mediterranean Basin and, among these, there is the trade of plant material for propagation and planting and the flow of tourism between the risk areas and the Mediterranean countries. This research demonstrates how the risk of invasion through ornamental Rutaceae is evident and identifies - in a participatory way through the involvement of stakeholders - some possible tools of phytosanitary protection. The methodological approach, with multi-criteria analysis, recognizes the interest in forms of protection represented by voluntary certification tools, rather than the introduction of new taxation that can finance the protection system.

Impact of invasive alien plants on native plant communities and Natura 2000 habitats: State of the art, gap analysis and perspectives in Italy

Invasive alien plants are a major threat to biodiversity and they contribute to the unfavourable conservation status of habitats of interest to the European Community. In order to favour implementation of European Union Regulation no. 1143/2014 on invasive alien species, the Italian Society of Vegetation Science carried out a large survey led by a task force of 49 contributors with expertise in vegetation across all the Italian administrative regions. The survey summed up the knowledge on impact mechanisms of invasive alien plants in Italy and their outcomes on plant communities and the EU habitats of Community Interest, in accordance with Directive no. 92/43/EEC. The survey covered 241 alien plant species reported as having deleterious ecological impacts. The data collected illustrate the current state of the art, highlight the main gaps in knowledge, and suggest topics to be further investigated. In particular, the survey underlined competition as being the main mechanism of ecological impact on plant communities and Natura 2000 habitats. Of the 241 species, only Ailanthus altissima was found to exert an ecological impact on plant communities and Natura 2000 habitats in all Italian regions; while a further 20 species impact up to ten out of the 20 Italian administrative regions. Our data indicate that 84 out of 132 Natura 2000 Habitats (64%) are subjected to some degree of impact by invasive alien plants. Freshwater habitats and natural and semi-natural grassland formations were impacted by the highest number of alien species, followed by coastal sand dunes and inland dunes, and forests. Although not exhaustive, this research is the first example of nationwide evaluation of the ecological impacts of invasive alien plants on plant communities and Natura 2000 Habitats.

Using structured eradication feasibility assessment to prioritize the management of new and emerging invasive alien species in Europe

Prioritizing the management of invasive alien species (IAS) is of global importance and within Europe integral to the EU IAS regulation. To prioritize management effectively, the risks posed by IAS need to be assessed, but so too does the feasibility of their management. While the risk of IAS to the EU has been assessed, the feasibility of management has not. We assessed the feasibility of eradicating 60 new (not yet established) and 35 emerging (established with limited distribution) species that pose a threat to the EU, as identified by horizon scanning. The assessment was carried out by 34 experts in invasion management from across Europe, applying the Non-Native Risk Management scheme to defined invasion scenarios and eradication strategies for each species, assessing the feasibility of eradication using seven key risk management criteria. Management priorities were identified by combining scores for risk (derived from horizon scanning) and feasibility of eradication. The results show eradication feasibility score and risk score were not correlated, indicating that risk management criteria evaluate different information than risk assessment. In all, 17 new species were identified as particularly high priorities for eradication should they establish in the future, whereas 14 emerging species were identified as priorities for eradication now. A number of species considered highest priority for eradication were terrestrial vertebrates, a group that has been the focus of a number of eradication attempts in Europe. However, eradication priorities also included a diverse range of other taxa (plants, invertebrates and fish) suggesting there is scope to broaden the taxonomic range of attempted eradication in Europe. We demonstrate that broad scale structured assessments of management feasibility can help prioritize IAS for management. Such frameworks are needed to support evidence-based decision-making.

A framework to support alien species regulation: the Risk Analysis for Alien Taxa (RAAT)

Human livelihoods and well-being in almost all regions of the world depend on taxa which are alien. Such taxa also, however, threaten human health, sustainable development, and biodiversity. Since it is not feasible or desirable to control all alien taxa, decision-makers increasingly rely on risk analyses to formalise the best available evidence of the threats posed and whether and how they can be managed. There are a variety of schemes available that consider the risks of alien taxa, but we argue a new framework is needed: 1) given major recent developments in international frameworks dealing with biological invasions (including the scoring of impacts); 2) so that decisions can be made consistently across taxa, regions and realms; 3) to explicitly set out uncertainties; and 4) to provide decision-makers with information both on the risks posed and on what can be done to mitigate or prevent impacts. Any such scheme must also be flexible enough to deal with constraints in capacity and information. Here we present a framework to address these points – the Risk Analysis for Alien Taxa (RAAT). It outlines a series of questions related to an alien taxon’s likelihood of invasion, realised and potential impacts, and options for management. The framework provides a structure for collating relevant data from the published literature to support a robust, transparent process to list alien taxa under legislative and regulatory requirements, with the aim that it can be completed by a trained science graduate within a few days. The framework also provides a defensible process for developing recommendations for the management of assessed taxa. We trialled the framework in South Africa and outline the process followed and some of the taxa assessed to date.

Quantifying expert opinion with discrete choice models: Invasive elodea's influence on Alaska salmonids

Scientific evidence should inform environmental policy, but rapid environmental change brings high ecological uncertainty and associated barriers to the science-management dialogue. Biological invasions of aquatic plants are a worldwide problem with uncertain ecological and economic consequences. We demonstrate that the discrete choice method (DCM) can serve as a structured expert elicitation alternative to quantify expert opinion across a range of possible but uncertain environmental outcomes. DCM is widely applied in the social sciences to better understand and predict human preferences and trade-offs. Here we apply it to Alaska's first submersed invasive aquatic freshwater plant, Elodea spp. (elodea), and its unknown effects on salmonids. While little is known about interactions between elodea and salmonids, ecological research suggests that aquatic plant invasions can have positive and negative, as well as direct and indirect, effects on fish. We use DCM to design hypothetical salmonid habitat scenarios describing elodea's possible effect on critical environmental conditions for salmonids: prey abundance, dissolved oxygen, and vegetation cover. We then observe how experts choose between scenarios that they believe could support persistent salmonid populations in elodea-invaded salmonid habitat. We quantify the relative importance of habitat characteristics that influence expert choice and investigate how experts trade off between habitat characteristics. We take advantage of Bayesian techniques to estimate discrete choice models for individual experts and to simulate expert opinion for specific environmental management situations. We discuss possible applications and advantages of the DCM approach for expert elicitation in the ecological context. We end with methodological questions for future research.

Guiding principles for utilizing social influence within expert-elicitation to inform conservation decision-making

Many hundreds of people have engaged with our collaborative studies using expert-elicitation approaches through facilitated discussions to dynamically inform decision-making within the field of biological invasions. We draw on our experiences to outline ways that allow the inclusion of multiple viewpoints within expert-elicitation while limiting or transparently documenting potential bias.

The impact is in the details: evaluating a standardized protocol and scale for determining non-native insect impact

Assessing the ecological and economic impacts of non-native species is crucial to providing managers and policymakers with the information necessary to respond effectively. Most non-native species have minimal impacts on the environment in which they are introduced, but a small fraction are highly deleterious. The definition of ‘damaging’ or ‘high-impact’ varies based on the factors determined to be valuable by an individual or group, but interpretations of whether non-native species meet particular definitions can be influenced by the interpreter’s bias or level of expertise, or lack of group consensus. Uncertainty or disagreement about an impact classification may delay or otherwise adversely affect policymaking on management strategies. One way to prevent these issues would be to have a detailed, nine-point impact scale that would leave little room for interpretation and then divide the scale into agreed upon categories, such as low, medium, and high impact. Following a previously conducted, exhaustive search regarding non-native, conifer-specialist insects, the authors independently read the same sources and scored the impact of 41 conifer-specialist insects to determine if any variation among assessors existed when using a detailed impact scale. Each of the authors, who were selected to participate in the working group associated with this study because of their diverse backgrounds, also provided their level of expertise and uncertainty for each insect evaluated. We observed 85% congruence in impact rating among assessors, with 27% of the insects having perfect inter-rater agreement. Variance in assessment peaked in insects with a moderate impact level, perhaps due to ambiguous information or prior assessor perceptions of these specific insect species. The authors also participated in a joint fact-finding discussion of two insects with the most divergent impact scores to isolate potential sources of variation in assessor impact scores. We identified four themes that could be experienced by impact assessors: ambiguous information, discounted details, observed versus potential impact, and prior knowledge. To improve consistency in impact decision-making, we encourage groups to establish a detailed scale that would allow all observed and published impacts to fall under a particular score, provide clear, reproducible guidelines and training, and use consensus-building techniques when necessary.

Invasive alien plant species: Their impact on environment, ecosystem services and human health

Ecological perturbations caused by biotic invasion have been identified as a growing threat to global sustainability. Invasive alien plants species (IAPS) are considered to be one of the major drivers of biodiversity loss and thereby altering the ecosystem services and socio-economic conditions through different mechanisms. Although the ecological impacts of IAPS are well documented, there is a dearth of studies regarding their economic quantification, livelihood considerations, biotechnological prospects (phytoremediation, bioenergy, phyto-synthesis of nanoparticles, biomedical, industrial applications etc.) and human health risk assessments of IAPS. In this context, the current panoramic review aimed to investigate the environmental, socio-ecological and health risks posed by IAPS as well as the compounded impact of IAPS with habitat fragmentation, climate and land use changes. To this end, the need of an integrated trans-disciplinary research is emphasized for the sustainable management of IAPS. The management prospects can be further strengthened through their linkage with geo-spatial technologies (remote sensing and GIS) by mapping and monitoring the IAPS spread. Further, the horizon of IAPS management is expanded to ecological indicator perspectives of IAPS, biosecurity, and risk assessment protocols with critical discussion. Moreover, positive as well as negative implications of the IAPS on environment, health, ecosystem services and socio-economy (livelihood) are listed so that a judicious policy framework could be developed for the IAPS management in order to mitigate the human health implications.

A preliminary field trial to compare control techniques for invasive Berberis aquifolium in Belgian coastal dunes

Non-native Berberis aquifolium is an invasive species in Belgian coastal dunes. With its strong clonal growth through suckers, this evergreen shrub outcompetes native species and affects dune succession. To prevent further secondary spread and mitigate its impact, there was an urgent need for knowledge on the effectiveness of control measures, both at the plant and habitat level. Here, we report on a first control experiment. Individual B. aquifolium clones were subjected to one of four treatments (manual uprooting, foliar herbicide application, stem cutting followed by herbicide or salt application), with regrowth being measured up to one year after treatment. We analyzed the relationship between kill rate, treatment, dune area, plant volume and number of plant stems using a generalized linear model. Berberis aquifolium plants proved most susceptible to foliar herbicide application (5% glyphosate solution), resulting in 88% (64%–97%) of the clones dying after treatment. The predicted kill rate decreased with an increasing number of stems under all treatments. We discuss the limitations of our experiment and the potential for actual field application of the different treatments. We present some guidelines for future control that may become further refined as experience builds up and we provide some recommendations for tackling invasive alien species in Atlantic dune ecosystems.

Lessons learned from rapid environmental risk assessments for prioritization of alien species using expert panels

Limiting the spread and impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) on biodiversity and ecosystems has become a goal of global, regional and national biodiversity policies. Evidence based management of IAS requires support by risk assessments, which are often based on expert judgment. We developed a tool to prioritize potentially new IAS based on their ecological risks, socio-economic impact and feasibility of management using multidisciplinary expert panels. Nine expert panels reviewed scientific studies, grey literature and expert knowledge for 152 species. The quality assessment of available knowledge revealed a lack of peer-reviewed data and high dependency on best professional judgments, especially for impacts on ecosystem services and feasibility of management. Expert consultation is crucial for conducting and validating rapid assessments of alien species. There is still a lack of attention for systematic and methodologically sound assessment of impacts on ecosystem services and weighting negative and positive effects of alien species.

Advancing impact assessments of non-native species: strategies for strengthening the evidence-base

The numbers and impacts of non-native species (NNS) continue to grow. Multiple ranking protocols have been developed to identify and manage the most damaging species. However, existing protocols differ considerably in the type of impact they consider, the way evidence of impacts is included and scored, and in the way the precautionary principle is applied. These differences may lead to inconsistent impact assessments. Since these protocols are considered a main policy tool to promote mitigation efforts, such inconsistencies are undesirable, as they can affect our ability to reliably identify the most damaging NNS, and can erode public support for NNS management. Here we propose a broadly applicable framework for building a transparent NNS impact evidence base. First, we advise to separate the collection of evidence of impacts from the act of scoring the severity of these impacts. Second, we propose to map the collected evidence along a set of distinguishing criteria: where it is published, which methodological approach was used to obtain it, the relevance of the geographical area from which it originates, and the direction of the impact. This procedure produces a transparent and reproducible evidence base which can subsequently be used for different scoring protocols, and which should be made public. Finally, we argue that the precautionary principle should only be used at the risk management stage. Conditional upon the evidence presented in an impact assessment, decision-makers may use the precautionary principle for NNS management under scientific uncertainty regarding the likelihood and magnitude of NNS impacts. Our framework paves the way for an improved application of impact assessments protocols, reducing inconsistencies and ultimately enabling more effective NNS management.

Management feasibility of established invasive plant species in Queensland, Australia: A stakeholders' perspective

Managing and monitoring invasive alien species (IAS) is costly, and because resources are limited, prioritization decisions are required for planning and management. We present findings on plant pest prioritization for 63 established invader species of natural and grazing ecosystems of Queensland, Australia. We used an expert elicitation approach to assess risk (species occurrence, spread, and impact) and feasibility of control for each IAS. We elicit semi-quantitative responses from diverse expert stakeholders to score IAS on three management approaches (biocontrol, chemical and mechanical) in relation to cost, effectiveness and practicality, and incorporate uncertainty in expert inputs and model outputs. In the process, we look for promising management opportunities as well as seek general trends across species' ecological groups and management methods. Stakeholders were cautiously optimistic about the feasibility of managing IAS. Taking into consideration all factors, the overall feasibility of control was uncorrelated with the stakeholders' level of confidence. However, within individual management criterion, positive trend was observed for the same bivariate traits for chemical control, and negative trends for biocontrol and mechanical controls. Utility and confidence in IAS management options were in the order: chemical > biocontrol = mechanical, with practicality and effectiveness being the main driver components. Management feasibility differed significantly between IAS life forms but not between habitats invaded. Lastly, we combined IAS risk assessment and management feasibility scores to create a risk matrix to guide policy goals (i.e. eradication, spread containment, protection of sensitive sites, targeted control, site management, monitoring, and limited action). The matrix identifies promising species to target for each of these policy outcomes. Overall, our general approach illustrates (i) the importance of understanding the feasibility of IAS control actions and the factors that drive it, and (ii) demonstrates how quantifying management feasibility can be used to enhance traditional risk assessment rankings to improve policy outcomes.

Assessing the ecological and societal impacts of alien parrots in Europe using a transparent and inclusive evidence-mapping scheme

Globally, the number of invasive alien species (IAS) continues to increase and management and policy responses typically need to be adopted before conclusive empirical evidence on their environmental and socioeconomic impacts are available. Consequently, numerous protocols exist for assessing IAS impacts and differ considerably in which evidence they include. However, inclusive strategies for building a transparent evidence base underlying IAS impact assessments are lacking, potentially affecting our ability to reliably identify priority IAS. Using alien parrots in Europe as a case study, here we apply an evidence-mapping scheme to classify impact evidence and evaluate the consequences of accepting different subsets of available evidence on impact assessment outcomes. We collected environmental and socioeconomic impact data in multiple languages using a “wiki-review” process, comprising a systematic evidence search and an online editing and consultation phase. Evidence was classified by parrot species, impact category (e.g. infrastructure), geographical area (e.g. native range), source type (e.g. peer-review), study design (e.g. experimental) and impact direction (deleterious, beneficial and no impact). Our comprehensive database comprised 386 impact entries from 233 sources. Most evidence was anecdotal (50%). A total of 42% of entries reported damage to agriculture (mainly in native ranges), while within Europe most entries concerned interspecific competition (39%). We demonstrate that the types of evidence included in assessments can strongly influence impact severity scores. For example, including evidence from the native range or anecdotal evidence resulted in an overall switch from minimal-moderate to moderate-major overall impact scores. We advise using such an evidence-mapping approach to create an inclusive and updatable database as the foundation for more transparent IAS impact assessments. When openly shared, such evidence-mapping can help better inform IAS research, management and policy.

Tracking non-indigenous fishes in lotic ecosystems: Invasive patterns at different spatial scales in Greece

Mediterranean lotic waters such as rivers, streams and springs are poorly monitored for non-indigenous fish species (NIFS). Since these systems are stressed by multiple anthropogenic pressures, it is important to build robust procedures to track NIFS distribution and spread. This study applies a multi-faceted assessment of NIFS in the lotic ecosystems of Greece at different spatial scales by providing: a) a historical review of temporal patterns and arrival pathways of fish introductions in river basins of Greece (140 basins) across 100years; b) an analysis of occurrence and abundance data of NIFS assemblages at the lotic site scale (644 electrofished sites); c) the mapping of NIFS distributional patterns at river basin (75 basins) and regional scales (7 freshwater ecoregions); and, d) a vector analysis of fish translocations using an ecoregional framework. In total, 55 NIFS were recorded (25 alien and 30 translocated); however, there is a low incidence of NIFS in lotic waters at the site scale (30 NIFS recorded in the field samples; 10 alien and 20 translocated). NIFS introductions in Greece appear to be influenced by specific socio-historical periods, indicating a gradual increase since late 1970s. Despite this increase, our study provides evidence that only four alien species are currently widespread and common in the rivers and streams of Greece: Gambusia holbrooki, Carassius gibelio, Pseudorasbora parva, and Lepomis gibbosus (in order of recorded abundance). NIFS tend to be absent or distributed in very low numbers in upland streams and in smaller river basins. However, the issue of translocated fish species is shown to be a sorely neglected problem that is difficult to track. This review tests a readily transferable screening procedure, contributes to the application of the European Union Regulation on Invasive Alien Species; it suggests gaps and uncertainties, and proposes conservation and management actions.

Consistency of impact assessment protocols for non-native species

Standardized tools are needed to identify and prioritize the most harmful non-native species (NNS). A plethora of assessment protocols have been developed to evaluate the current and potential impacts of non-native species, but consistency among them has received limited attention. To estimate the consistency across impact assessment protocols, 89 specialists in biological invasions used 11 protocols to screen 57 NNS (2614 assessments). We tested if the consistency in the impact scoring across assessors, quantified as the coefficient of variation (CV), was dependent on the characteristics of the protocol, the taxonomic group and the expertise of the assessor. Mean CV across assessors was 40%, with a maximum of 223%. CV was lower for protocols with a low number of score levels, which demanded high levels of expertise, and when the assessors had greater expertise on the assessed species. The similarity among protocols with respect to the final scores was higher when the protocols considered the same impact types. We conclude that all protocols led to considerable inconsistency among assessors. In order to improve consistency, we highlight the importance of selecting assessors with high expertise, providing clear guidelines and adequate training but also deriving final decisions collaboratively by consensus.

Assessing the environmental impacts of invasive alien plants: a review of assessment approaches

Assessing the impacts of alien plant species is a major task in invasion science and vitally important for supporting invasion-related policies. Since 1993, a range of assessment approaches have been developed to support decisions on the introduction or management of alien species. Here we review the extent to which assessments (27 approaches) appraised the following: (i) different types of environmental impacts, (ii) context dependence of environmental impacts, (iii) prospects for successful management, and (iv) transparency of assessment methods and criteria, underlying values and terminology. While nearly all approaches covered environmental effects, changes in genetic diversity and the incorporation of relevant impact parameters were less likely to be included. Many approaches considered context dependence by incorporating information about the actual or potential range of alien species. However, only a few went further and identified which resources of conservation concern might be affected by specific alien plant species. Only some approaches acknowledged underlying values by distinguishing negative from positive impacts or by considering the conservation value of affected resources. Several approaches directly addressed the feasibility of management, whereas relevant factors such as availability of suitable management methods were rarely considered. Finally, underlying values were rarely disclosed, and definitions of value-laden or controversial terms were often lacking. We conclude that despite important progress in assessing the manifold facets of invasion impacts, opportunities remain for further developing impact assessment approaches. These changes can improve assessment results and their acceptance in invasion-related environmental policies.

Peyton J, Preda C, Roques A, Rorke SL, Scalera R, Schindler S, Schönrogge K, Sewell J, Solarz W, Stewart AJA, Tricarico E, Vanderhoeven S, van der Velde G, Vilà M, Wood CA, Zenetos A, Rabitsch W. Developing a list of invasive alien species likely to threaten biodiversity and ecosystems in the European Union

The European Union (EU) has recently published its first list of invasive alien species (IAS) of EU concern to which current legislation must apply. The list comprises species known to pose great threats to biodiversity and needs to be maintained and updated. Horizon scanning is seen as critical to identify the most threatening potential IAS that do not yet occur in Europe to be subsequently risk assessed for future listing. Accordingly, we present a systematic consensus horizon scanning procedure to derive a ranked list of potential IAS likely to arrive, establish, spread and have an impact on biodiversity in the region over the next decade. The approach is unique in the continental scale examined, the breadth of taxonomic groups and environments considered, and the methods and data sources used. International experts were brought together to address five broad thematic groups of potential IAS. For each thematic group the experts first independently assembled lists of potential IAS not yet established in the EU but potentially threatening biodiversity if introduced. Experts were asked to score the species within their thematic group for their separate likelihoods of i) arrival, ii) establishment, iii) spread, and iv) magnitude of the potential negative impact on biodiversity within the EU. Experts then convened for a 2-day workshop applying consensus methods to compile a ranked list of potential IAS. From an initial working list of 329 species, a list of 66 species not yet established in the EU that were considered to be very high (8 species), high (40 species) or medium (18 species) risk species was derived. Here, we present these species highlighting the potential negative impacts and the most likely biogeographic regions to be affected by these potential IAS.

The relevance of using various scoring schemes revealed by an impact assessment of feral mammals

Impact scoring schemes are useful for identifying to what extent alien species cause damage. Quantifying the similarity and differences between impact scoring schemes can help determine how to optimally use these tools for policy decisions. Using feral mammals (including rats and mice) as a case study, environmental and socio-economic impacts were assessed using three schemes, namely the Generic Impact Scoring System (GISS), Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) and Socio-Economic Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (SEICAT). The results show that socio-economic impacts scores differ between the respective schemes (GISS and SEICAT) possibly because they assess different aspects of social life and economy. This suggests that both scoring schemes should ideally be applied in concert to get a complete picture of socio-economic impacts. In contrast, environmental impact scores are correlated between GISS and EICAT assessments and this similarity is consistent over most mechanisms except for predation and ecosystems, suggesting that one scoring scheme is sufficient to capture all the environmental impacts. Furthermore, we present evidence for the island susceptibility hypothesis as impacts of feral mammals were found to be higher on islands compared to mainlands.

Cost-benefit analysis for invasive species control: the case of greater Canada goose Branta canadensis in Flanders (northern Belgium)

Background

Sound decisions on control actions for established invasive alien species (IAS) require information on ecological as well as socio-economic impact of the species and of its management. Cost-benefit analysis provides part of this information, yet has received relatively little attention in the scientific literature on IAS.

Methods

We apply a bio-economic model in a cost-benefit analysis framework to greater Canada goose Branta canadensis, an IAS with documented social, economic and ecological impacts in Flanders (northern Belgium). We compared a business as usual (BAU) scenario which involved non-coordinated hunting and egg destruction with an enhanced scenario based on a continuation of these activities but supplemented with coordinated capture of moulting birds. To assess population growth under the BAU scenario we fitted a logistic growth model to the observed pre-moult capture population. Projected damage costs included water eutrophication and damage to cultivated grasslands and were calculated for all scenarios. Management costs of the moult captures were based on a representative average of the actual cost of planning and executing moult captures.

Results

Comparing the scenarios with different capture rates, different costs for eutrophication and various discount rates, showed avoided damage costs were in the range of 21.15 M€ to 45.82 M€ under the moult capture scenario. The lowest value for the avoided costs applied to the scenario where we lowered the capture rate by 10%. The highest value occurred in the scenario where we lowered the real discount rate from 4% to 2.5%.

Discussion

The reduction in damage costs always outweighed the additional management costs of moult captures. Therefore, additional coordinated moult captures could be applied to limit the negative economic impact of greater Canada goose at a regional scale. We further discuss the strengths and weaknesses of our approach and its potential application to other IAS.