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

Using the IUCN Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa to inform decision-making

The Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) is an important tool for biological invasion policy and management and has been adopted as an International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) standard to measure the severity of environmental impacts caused by organisms living outside their native ranges. EICAT has already been incorporated into some national and local decision-making procedures, making it a particularly relevant resource for addressing the impact of non-native species. Recently, some of the underlying conceptual principles of EICAT, particularly those related to the use of the precautionary approach, have been challenged. Although still relatively new, guidelines for the application and interpretation of EICAT will be periodically revisited by the IUCN community, based on scientific evidence, to improve the process. Some of the criticisms recently raised are based on subjectively selected assumptions that cannot be generalized and may harm global efforts to manage biological invasions. EICAT adopts a precautionary principle by considering a species' impact history elsewhere because some taxa have traits that can make them inherently more harmful. Furthermore, non-native species are often important drivers of biodiversity loss even in the presence of other pressures. Ignoring the precautionary principle when tackling the impacts of non-native species has led to devastating consequences for human well-being, biodiversity, and ecosystems, as well as poor management outcomes, and thus to significant economic costs. EICAT is a relevant tool because it supports prioritization and management of non-native species and meeting and monitoring progress toward the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) Target 6.

A critical review of the precautionary approach of the IUCN impact classification for non-native taxa

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) proposes the use of the Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa to standardize the classification of introduced species (IS) based on their environmental impact. The IUCN invoked the precautionary principle (PP) via 2 rules: the impact assigned to a taxon must be the maximum recorded impact across different impact assessments, and when the main driver of environmental damage is unclear, it must be assumed to be caused by the IS. The validity of PP is conditioned on the degree of emergency that warrants urgent decisions and on the scientific evidence demonstrating the advantages of applying a preventive measure. The application of an impact classification system does not arise in the context of an emergency that requires management; it occurs before the decision-making phase. Thus, PP should not be used in early steps of the risk analysis process. The IUCN also did not provide enough scientific basis to justify the use of PP. Instead, the PP rules appear to be rooted primarily in the ethical value system underlying conservation science. Conservationists assign intrinsic value to native species by virtue of their roles and relationships within ecological and evolutionary systems and processes; thus, individuals introduced in new environments not only cease to have value because they are no longer part of that natural diversity and lack those links with the rest of the ecosystem, but they become a threat to what conservationists value most. The consequence of this belief is that all introduced taxa will have an impact at some level, suggesting that values justify the PP rules.

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.

Ballast Water Management Strategy to Reduce the Impact of Introductions by Utilizing an Empirical Risk Model

The introduction of non-indigenous aquatic species (NIASs) was identified as one of the major threats to aquatic ecosystems. Shipping is one of the potential invasive pathways for the introduction of marine NIASs, mainly via ballast water, sediments, and ship fouling. In addition, The International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments (BWM Convention) aims to mitigate the introduction risk of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens (HAOPs) via ships’ ballast water and sediment. Some of these species can be very harmful and cause loss of biodiversity, adverse environmental consequences, and economic and social impacts. In this study, an empirical model based on the environmental similarity and the vessel characteristics was used to assess the risk associated with the ballast water, for the incoming vessels to the port of Kaohsiung and port of Riga. The priority for port state control (PSC) inspection was established and recommended for better ballast water management.

Site-specific risk assessment enables trade-off analysis of non-native tree species in European forests

Non-native tree species (NNT) are used in European forestry for many purposes including their growth performance, valuable timber, and resistance to drought and pest or pathogen damage. Yet, cultivating NNT may pose risks to biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, and the provisioning of ecosystem services, and several NNT have been classified as invasive in Europe. Typically, such classifications are based on risk assessments, which do not adequately consider site-specific variations in impacts of the NNT or the extent of affected areas. Here, we present a new methodological framework that facilitates both mitigating risks associated with NNT and taking advantage of their ecosystem services. The framework is based on a stratified assessment of risks posed by NNT which distinguishes between different sites and considers effectiveness of available management strategies to control negative effects. The method can be applied to NNT that already occur in a given area or those NNT that may establish in future. The framework consists of eight steps and is partly based on existing knowledge. If adequate site-specific knowledge on NNT does not yet exist, new evidence on the risks should be obtained, for example, by collecting and analyzing monitoring data or modeling the potential distribution of NNT. However, limitations remain in the application of this method, and we propose several policy and management recommendations which are required to improve the responsible use of NNT.

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.

Ranking alien species based on their risks of causing environmental impacts: a global assessment of alien ungulates

For an efficient allocation of the limited resources to alien species management, the most damaging species should be prioritized. Comparing alien species based on their impacts is not straightforward, as the same species can cause different types and magnitudes of impacts when introduced to different contexts, making it difficult to summarize its overall impact. The Environmental Impact Classification of Alien Taxa (EICAT) systematically summarizes and compares detrimental impacts caused by alien populations to native biota and has been adopted by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). For each alien species, all reported impacts to native populations within the introduced range are classified into five levels of severity, from negligible impact to irreversible local extinction. Currently, EICAT only compares alien species based on their highest impact, thereby ignoring variation in impact magnitudes. Here, we used information on the variation in impact magnitudes of alien species to estimate their risks to cause high impacts if introduced to a novel environment. We demonstrate the usefulness of this approach by classifying the global impacts of alien ungulates. We found impact reports for 27 of the 66 alien ungulate species established worldwide, highlighting substantial knowledge gaps in invasion science. We classified a total of 441 impacts to native fauna and flora caused by these 27 species. Twenty-six of the species were found to cause harmful impacts (native population declines or local extinctions). Mouflon (Ovis orientalis, Gmelin, 1774) and dromedary (Camelus dromedarius, Linnaeus, 1758) had a higher risk of causing local extinctions if introduced to a novel environment than sika deer (Cervus nippon, Temminck, 1838) and goats (Capra hircus, Linnaeus, 1758). Including risk of high impacts allows to discriminate among species with the same EICAT classification and improves alien species prioritization for management.

The importance of assessing positive and beneficial impacts of alien species

Extensive literature is available on the diversity and magnitude of impacts that alien species cause on recipient systems. Alien species may decrease or increase attributes of ecosystems (e.g. total biomass or species diversity), thus causing negative and positive environmental impacts. Alien species may also negatively or positively impact attributes linked to local human communities (e.g. the number of people involved in a given activity). Ethical and societal values contribute to define these environmental and socio-economic impacts as deleterious or beneficial. Whilst most of the literature focuses on the deleterious effects of alien taxa, some recognise their beneficial impacts on ecosystems and human activities. Impact assessment frameworks show a similar tendency to evaluate mainly deleterious impacts: only relatively few, and not widely applied, frameworks incorporate the beneficial impacts of alien species. Here, we provide a summary of the frameworks assessing beneficial impacts and briefly discuss why they might have been less frequently cited and applied than frameworks assessing exclusively deleterious impacts. Then, we review arguments that invoke a greater consideration of positive and beneficial impacts caused by alien species across the invasion science literature. We collate and describe arguments from a set of 47 papers, grouping them in two categories (value-free and value-laden), which span from a theoretical, basic science perspective to an applied science perspective. We also provide example cases associated with each argument. We advocate that the development of transparent and evidence-based frameworks assessing positive and beneficial impacts might advance our scientific understanding of impact dynamics and better inform management and prioritisation decisions. We also advise that this development should be achieved by recognising the underlying ethical and societal values of the frameworks and their intrinsic limitations. The evaluation of positive and beneficial impacts through impact assessment frameworks should not be seen as an attempt to outweigh or to discount deleterious impacts of alien taxa but rather as an opportunity to provide additional information for scientists, managers and policymakers.