1
|
Tarkan AS, Bayçelebi E, Giannetto D, Özden ED, Yazlık A, Emiroğlu Ö, Aksu S, Uludağ A, Aksoy N, Baytaşoğlu H, Kaya C, Mutlu T, Kırankaya ŞG, Ergüden D, Per E, Üremiş İ, Candan O, Kekillioğlu A, Yoğurtçuoğlu B, Ekmekçi FG, Başak E, Özkan H, Kurtul I, Innal D, Killi N, Yapıcı S, Ayaz D, Çiçek K, Mol O, Çınar E, Yeğen V, Angulo E, Cuthbert RN, Soto I, Courchamp F, Haubrock PJ. Economic costs of non-native species in Türkiye: A first national synthesis. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2024; 358:120779. [PMID: 38599083 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.120779] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2023] [Revised: 03/01/2024] [Accepted: 03/27/2024] [Indexed: 04/12/2024]
Abstract
Biological invasions are increasingly recognised as a major global change that erodes ecosystems, societal well-being, and economies. However, comprehensive analyses of their economic ramifications are missing for most national economies, despite rapidly escalating costs globally. Türkiye is highly vulnerable to biological invasions owing to its extensive transport network and trade connections as well as its unique transcontinental position at the interface of Europe and Asia. This study presents the first analysis of the reported economic costs caused by biological invasions in Türkiye. The InvaCost database which compiles invasive non-native species' monetary costs was used, complemented with cost searches specific to Türkiye, to describe the spatial and taxonomic attributes of costly invasive non-native species, the types of costs, and their temporal trends. The total economic cost attributed to invasive non-native species in Türkiye (from 202 cost reporting documents) amounted to US$ 4.1 billion from 1960 to 2022. However, cost data were only available for 87 out of 872 (10%) non-native species known for Türkiye. Costs were biased towards a few hyper-costly non-native taxa, such as jellyfish, stink bugs, and locusts. Among impacted sectors, agriculture bore the highest total cost, reaching US$ 2.85 billion, followed by the fishery sector with a total cost of US$ 1.20 billion. Management (i.e., control and eradication) costs were, against expectations, substantially higher than reported damage costs (US$ 2.89 billion vs. US$ 28.4 million). Yearly costs incurred by non-native species rose exponentially over time, reaching US$ 504 million per year in 2020-2022 and are predicted to increase further in the next 10 years. A large deficit of cost records compared to other countries was also shown, suggesting a larger monetary underestimate than is typically observed. These findings underscore the need for improved cost recording as well as preventative management strategies to reduce future post-invasion management costs and help inform decisions to manage the economic burdens posed by invasive non-native species. These insights further emphasise the crucial role of standardised data in accurately estimating the costs associated with invasive non-native species for prioritisation and communication purposes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ali Serhan Tarkan
- Department of Ecology and Vertebrate Zoology, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland; Department of Aquatic Basic Science, Faculty of Fisheries, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla, Türkiye; Department of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth University, Poole, Dorset, United Kingdom.
| | - Esra Bayçelebi
- Faculty of Fisheries, Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Rize, Türkiye
| | - Daniela Giannetto
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla, Türkiye
| | - Emine Demir Özden
- Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Düzce University, Düzce, Türkiye
| | - Ayşe Yazlık
- Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Düzce University, Düzce, Türkiye
| | - Özgür Emiroğlu
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Türkiye
| | - Sadi Aksu
- Vocational School of Health Services, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Türkiye
| | - Ahmet Uludağ
- Plant Protection Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Çanakkale, Türkiye
| | - Necmi Aksoy
- Department of Forest Botany, Faculty of Forestry, Düzce University, Düzce, Türkiye
| | - Hazel Baytaşoğlu
- Faculty of Fisheries, Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Rize, Türkiye
| | - Cüneyt Kaya
- Faculty of Fisheries, Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Rize, Türkiye
| | - Tanju Mutlu
- Vocational School of Technical Sciences, Environmental Protection Technologies Department, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University, Türkiye
| | | | - Deniz Ergüden
- Department of Marine Sciences, Faculty of Marine Sciences and Technology, İskenderun Technical University, İskenderun, Türkiye
| | - Esra Per
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Gazi University, Ankara, Türkiye
| | - İlhan Üremiş
- Plant Protection Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Hatay Mustafa Kemal University, Antakya, Hatay, Türkiye
| | - Onur Candan
- Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Ordu University, Ordu, Türkiye
| | - Aysel Kekillioğlu
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science and Literature, Nevşehir HBV University, Nevşehir, Türkiye
| | - Baran Yoğurtçuoğlu
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Hacettepe University, Beytepe Campus, Ankara, Türkiye
| | - F Güler Ekmekçi
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Hacettepe University, Beytepe Campus, Ankara, Türkiye
| | - Esra Başak
- Project House Cooperative, Moda Caddesi Borucu Han No:20/204 Kadıköy, Istanbul, Türkiye
| | - Hatice Özkan
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Türkiye
| | - Irmak Kurtul
- Department of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth University, Poole, Dorset, United Kingdom; Marine and Inland Waters Sciences and Technology Department, Faculty of Fisheries, Ege University, İzmir, Türkiye
| | - Deniz Innal
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences and Literature, Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Burdur, Türkiye
| | - Nurçin Killi
- Department of Aquatic Basic Science, Faculty of Fisheries, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla, Türkiye
| | - Sercan Yapıcı
- Department of Aquatic Basic Science, Faculty of Fisheries, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla, Türkiye
| | - Dinçer Ayaz
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Ege University, Izmir, Türkiye
| | - Kerim Çiçek
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Ege University, Izmir, Türkiye; Natural History Application and Research Centre, Ege University, Izmir, Türkiye
| | - Oğuzcan Mol
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Türkiye
| | - Emre Çınar
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Türkiye
| | - Vedat Yeğen
- Fisheries Research Institute, Eğirdir, Isparta, Türkiye
| | - Elena Angulo
- Estación Biológica de Doñana, CSIC, Avda. Americo Vespucio 26, 41092, Seville, Spain
| | - Ross N Cuthbert
- Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, BT9 5DL, United Kingdom
| | - Ismael Soto
- Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Vodňany, Czech Republic
| | - Franck Courchamp
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Gif sur Yvette, France
| | - Phillip J Haubrock
- Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Vodňany, Czech Republic; Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Gelnhausen, Germany; CAMB, Center for Applied Mathematics and Bioinformatics, Gulf University for Science and Technology, Kuwait.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hulme PE, Ahmed DA, Haubrock PJ, Kaiser BA, Kourantidou M, Leroy B, McDermott SM. Widespread imprecision in estimates of the economic costs of invasive alien species worldwide. THE SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT 2024; 909:167997. [PMID: 37914135 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167997] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2023] [Revised: 10/12/2023] [Accepted: 10/19/2023] [Indexed: 11/03/2023]
Abstract
Several hundred studies have attempted to estimate the monetary cost arising from the management and/or impacts of invasive alien species. However, the diversity of methods used to estimate the monetary costs of invasive alien species, the types of costs that have been reported, and the spatial scales at which they have been assessed raise important questions as to the precision of these reported monetary costs. Benford's Law has been increasingly used as a diagnostic tool to assess the accuracy and reliability of estimates reported in financial accounts but has rarely been applied to audit data on environmental costs. Therefore, the distributions of first, second- and leading double-digits of the monetary costs arising from biological invasions, as reported in the InvaCost database, were compared with the null expectations under Benford's Law. There was strong evidence that the reported monetary costs of biological invasions departed considerably from Benford's Law and the departures were of a scale equal to that found in global macroeconomic data. The rounding upwards of costs appears to be widespread. Furthermore, numerical heaping, where values cluster around specific numbers was evident with only 901 unique cost values accounting for half of the 13,553 cost estimates within the InvaCost database. Irrespective of the currency, the value of 1,000,000 was the most common cost estimate. An investigation of anomalous data entries concluded that non-peer reviewed official government reports need to provide greater detail regarding how costs are estimated. Despite the undeniably high economic cost of biological invasions worldwide, individual records of costs were often found to be imprecise and possibly inflated and this emphasises the need for greater transparency and rigour when reporting the costs of biological invasions. Identifying whether the irregularities found for the costs of biological invasions are general for other types of environmental costs should be a research priority.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philip E Hulme
- Bioprotection Aotearoa, Lincoln University, PO Box 85084, Christchurch, Canterbury, New Zealand.
| | - Danish A Ahmed
- CAMB, Center for Applied Mathematics and Bioinformatics, Gulf University for Science and Technology, Kuwait
| | - Phillip J Haubrock
- CAMB, Center for Applied Mathematics and Bioinformatics, Gulf University for Science and Technology, Kuwait; Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Clamecystr. 12, 63571 Gelnhausen, Germany; Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic
| | - Brooks A Kaiser
- MERE, SEBE, University of Southern Denmark, Degnevej 14a, 6705 Esbjerg Ø, Denmark
| | - Melina Kourantidou
- MERE, SEBE, University of Southern Denmark, Degnevej 14a, 6705 Esbjerg Ø, Denmark; Université de Bretagne Occidentale, UMR 6308 AMURE, IUEM, 29280, Plouzané, France
| | - Boris Leroy
- UMR 8067, Biologie Des Organismes Et Écosystèmes Aquatiques (BOREA), Sorbonne Université, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Université de Caen Normandie, Université Des Antilles, CNRS, IRD, CP26, 43 Rue Cuvier, 75005 Paris, France
| | - Shana M McDermott
- Department of Economics, Trinity University, San Antonio, TX 78216, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Requier F, Fournier A, Pointeau S, Rome Q, Courchamp F. Economic costs of the invasive Yellow-legged hornet on honey bees. THE SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT 2023; 898:165576. [PMID: 37467993 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.165576] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2022] [Revised: 05/12/2023] [Accepted: 07/14/2023] [Indexed: 07/21/2023]
Abstract
Biological invasions have ecological impacts worldwide with potential massive economic costs. Among other ecosystem services such as nitrogen cycle, carbon sequestration and primary production, invasive alien species are particularly known to impact pollination. By predating honey bees (Apis mellifera), the invasive Yellow-legged hornet (Vespa velutina nigrithorax) increases the mortality risk of European bee colonies; however, little is known about its economic costs. We developed an analytic process combining large-scale field data, niche modelling techniques and agent-based models to spatially assess the ecological and economic impacts of the Yellow-legged hornet on honey bees and beekeeping in France. In particular, we estimated (i) the hornet-related risk of bee colony mortality, (ii) the economic cost of colony loss for beekeepers and (iii) the economic impact of livestock replacement compared to honey revenues at regional and national scales. We estimated an overall density of 1.08 hornet nest/km2 in France, based on the field record of 1260 nests over a searched area of 28,348 km2. However, this predator density was heterogeneously spread out across the country as well as the distribution of managed honey bee colonies. Overall, this hornet-related risk of bee colony mortality could reach up to 29.2 % of the beekeepers' livestock at national scale each year in high predation scenario. This national cost could reach as much as € 30.8 million per year due to colony loss, which represents for beekeepers an economic impact of livestock replacement of 26.6 % of honey revenues. Our results suggest non-negligible ecological and economic impacts of the invasive Yellow-legged hornet on honey bees and beekeeping activities. Moreover, this study meets the urgent need for more numerous and accurate economic estimations, necessary to calculate the impact of biological invasions on biodiversity and human goods, with a view to enhance policies of biodiversity conservation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabrice Requier
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, IRD, UMR Évolution, Génomes, Comportement et Écologie, 91198 Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
| | - Alice Fournier
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France; Biochimie et Toxicologie des Substances Bioactives (BTSB), EA7417 Université de Toulouse, INU Champollion, 81000 Albi, France
| | - Sophie Pointeau
- ITSAP - Institut de l'abeille, Domaine Saint-Paul, CS 40509, 84914 Avignon, France
| | | | - Franck Courchamp
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Evans T, Angulo E, Bradshaw CJA, Turbelin A, Courchamp F. Global economic costs of alien birds. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0292854. [PMID: 37851652 PMCID: PMC10584179 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0292854] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2023] [Accepted: 10/01/2023] [Indexed: 10/20/2023] Open
Abstract
The adverse impacts of alien birds are widespread and diverse, and associated with costs due to the damage caused and actions required to manage them. We synthesised global cost data to identify variation across regions, types of impact, and alien bird species. Costs amount to US$3.6 billion, but this is likely a vast underestimate. Costs are low compared to other taxonomic groups assessed using the same methods; despite underreporting, alien birds are likely to be less damaging and easier to manage than many other alien taxa. Research to understand why this is the case could inform measures to reduce costs associated with biological invasions. Costs are biassed towards high-income regions and damaging environmental impacts, particularly on islands. Most costs on islands result from actions to protect biodiversity and tend to be low and one-off (temporary). Most costs at mainland locations result from damage by a few, widespread species. Some of these costs are high and ongoing (permanent). Actions to restrict alien bird invasions at mainland locations might prevent high, ongoing costs. Reports increased sharply after 2010, but many are for local actions to manage expanding alien bird populations. However, the successful eradication of these increasingly widespread species will require a coordinated, international response.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Evans
- Ecologie Systématique et Evolution, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
| | - Elena Angulo
- Ecologie Systématique et Evolution, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
- Estación Biológica de Doñana (CSIC), Seville, Spain
| | - Corey J. A. Bradshaw
- Global Ecology | Partuyarta Ngadluku Wardli Kuu, College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
- ARC Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage, EpicAustralia.org.au, Australia
| | - Anna Turbelin
- Ecologie Systématique et Evolution, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
| | - Franck Courchamp
- Ecologie Systématique et Evolution, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ahmed DA, Haubrock PJ, Cuthbert RN, Bang A, Soto I, Balzani P, Tarkan AS, Macêdo RL, Carneiro L, Bodey TW, Oficialdegui FJ, Courtois P, Kourantidou M, Angulo E, Heringer G, Renault D, Turbelin AJ, Hudgins EJ, Liu C, Gojery SA, Arbieu U, Diagne C, Leroy B, Briski E, Bradshaw CJA, Courchamp F. Recent advances in availability and synthesis of the economic costs of biological invasions. Bioscience 2023; 73:560-574. [PMID: 37680688 PMCID: PMC10481418 DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biad060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2023] [Revised: 05/18/2023] [Accepted: 06/14/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Biological invasions are a global challenge that has received insufficient attention. Recently available cost syntheses have provided policy- and decision makers with reliable and up-to-date information on the economic impacts of biological invasions, aiming to motivate effective management. The resultant InvaCost database is now publicly and freely accessible and enables rapid extraction of monetary cost information. This has facilitated knowledge sharing, developed a more integrated and multidisciplinary network of researchers, and forged multidisciplinary collaborations among diverse organizations and stakeholders. Over 50 scientific publications so far have used the database and have provided detailed assessments of invasion costs across geographic, taxonomic, and spatiotemporal scales. These studies have provided important information that can guide future policy and legislative decisions on the management of biological invasions while simultaneously attracting public and media attention. We provide an overview of the improved availability, reliability, standardization, and defragmentation of monetary costs; discuss how this has enhanced invasion science as a discipline; and outline directions for future development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danish A Ahmed
- Center for Applied Mathematics and Bioinformatics, Department of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Gulf University for Science and Technology, Hawally, Kuwait
| | - Phillip J Haubrock
- Center for Applied Mathematics and Bioinformatics, Department of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Gulf University for Science and Technology, Hawally, Kuwait
- Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt,Gelnhausen, Germany
- South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Vodňany, Czech Republic
| | - Ross N Cuthbert
- Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences at Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, NorthernIreland
| | - Alok Bang
- School of Arts and Sciences at Azim Premji University, Bangalore, India
- School of Arts and Sciences, Azim Premji University, Bhopal, India
- Society for Ecology, Evolution, and Development, Wardha, India
| | - Ismael Soto
- South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Vodňany, Czech Republic
| | - Paride Balzani
- South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Vodňany, Czech Republic
| | - Ali Serhan Tarkan
- Department of Basic Sciences in the Faculty of Fisheries at Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, in Muğla, Turkey
- Department of Life and Environmental Sciences in the Faculty of Science and Technology at Bournemouth University, Poole, Dorset, England, United Kingdom
| | - Rafael L Macêdo
- Graduate Program in Conservation and Ecotourism at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro State, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil
- Institute of Biology at Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- Neotropical Limnology Group, at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro State, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, Brasil
| | - Laís Carneiro
- Laboratório de Ecologia e Conservação in the Departamento de Engenharia Ambiental, Setor de Tecnologia, at the Universidade Federal do Paraná, in Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
| | - Thomas W Bodey
- School of Biological Sciences at King's College, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom
| | - Francisco J Oficialdegui
- South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Vodňany, Czech Republic
| | - Pierre Courtois
- Centre for Environmental Economics—Montpellier, National Institute for Research in Agriculture and the Environment, Montpellier, France
| | - Melina Kourantidou
- Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics, University of Southern Denmark, Esbjerg Ø, Denmark
- Université de Bretagne Occidentale, Plouzané, France
| | | | - Gustavo Heringer
- Departamento de Ecologia e Conservação in the Instituto de Ciências Naturais at the Universidade Federal de Lavras, Lavras, Minas Gerais, Brazil
- Nürtingen-Geislingen University, Nürtingen, Germany
| | - David Renault
- Centre National de Recherche Scientifique's Ecosystèmes, Biodiversité, Evolution, University of Rennes, Rennes, France
| | - Anna J Turbelin
- Université Paris–Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
- Great Lakes Forestry Centre at Canadian Forestry Services, part of Natural Resources Canada, Sault Ste Marie, Ontario, Canada
| | - Emma J Hudgins
- Department of Biology at Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Chunlong Liu
- College of Fisheries at the Ocean University of China, Qingdao, China
- Institute of Hydrobiology at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, China
| | - Showkat A Gojery
- Department of Botany at the University of Kashmir, Kashmir, India
| | - Ugo Arbieu
- Université Paris–Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
- Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
- Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, at the National Zoological Park, Front Royal, Virginia, United States
| | - Christophe Diagne
- Centre de Biologie pour la Gestion des Populations, at Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Montferrier-sur-Lez Cedex, France
| | - Boris Leroy
- Unité Biologie des Organismes et des Ecosystèmes Aquatiques, Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Sorbonne Universités, Université de Caen Normandie, Université des Antilles, in Paris, France
| | | | - Corey J A Bradshaw
- Global Ecology Laboratory, Partuyarta Ngadluku Wardli Kuu, College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia
- ARC Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Franck Courchamp
- Université Paris–Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Zhang X, Du H, Zhao Z, Wu Y, Cao Z, Zhou Y, Sun Y. Risk Assessment Model System for Aquatic Animal Introduction Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Animals (Basel) 2023; 13:2035. [PMID: 37370545 DOI: 10.3390/ani13122035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2023] [Revised: 06/13/2023] [Accepted: 06/17/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xuxin Zhang
- Sanya Nanfan Research Institute, Hainan University, Sanya 572022, China
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Marine Science and Technology, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
- Hainan Provincial Key Laboratory for Tropical Hydrobiology and Biotechnology, College of Marine Science, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
| | - Hehe Du
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Marine Science and Technology, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
- Hainan Provincial Key Laboratory for Tropical Hydrobiology and Biotechnology, College of Marine Science, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
| | - Zhouzhou Zhao
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Marine Science and Technology, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
- Hainan Provincial Key Laboratory for Tropical Hydrobiology and Biotechnology, College of Marine Science, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
| | - Ying Wu
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Marine Science and Technology, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
- Hainan Provincial Key Laboratory for Tropical Hydrobiology and Biotechnology, College of Marine Science, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
| | - Zhenjie Cao
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Marine Science and Technology, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
- Hainan Provincial Key Laboratory for Tropical Hydrobiology and Biotechnology, College of Marine Science, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
| | - Yongcan Zhou
- Sanya Nanfan Research Institute, Hainan University, Sanya 572022, China
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Marine Science and Technology, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
- Hainan Provincial Key Laboratory for Tropical Hydrobiology and Biotechnology, College of Marine Science, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
| | - Yun Sun
- Sanya Nanfan Research Institute, Hainan University, Sanya 572022, China
- Collaborative Innovation Center of Marine Science and Technology, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
- Hainan Provincial Key Laboratory for Tropical Hydrobiology and Biotechnology, College of Marine Science, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Henry M, Leung B, Cuthbert RN, Bodey TW, Ahmed DA, Angulo E, Balzani P, Briski E, Courchamp F, Hulme PE, Kouba A, Kourantidou M, Liu C, Macêdo RL, Oficialdegui FJ, Renault D, Soto I, Tarkan AS, Turbelin AJ, Bradshaw CJA, Haubrock PJ. Unveiling the hidden economic toll of biological invasions in the European Union. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES EUROPE 2023; 35:43. [PMID: 37325080 PMCID: PMC10249565 DOI: 10.1186/s12302-023-00750-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2023] [Accepted: 05/19/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
Background Biological invasions threaten the functioning of ecosystems, biodiversity, and human well-being by degrading ecosystem services and eliciting massive economic costs. The European Union has historically been a hub for cultural development and global trade, and thus, has extensive opportunities for the introduction and spread of alien species. While reported costs of biological invasions to some member states have been recently assessed, ongoing knowledge gaps in taxonomic and spatio-temporal data suggest that these costs were considerably underestimated. Results We used the latest available cost data in InvaCost (v4.1)-the most comprehensive database on the costs of biological invasions-to assess the magnitude of this underestimation within the European Union via projections of current and future invasion costs. We used macroeconomic scaling and temporal modelling approaches to project available cost information over gaps in taxa, space, and time, thereby producing a more complete estimate for the European Union economy. We identified that only 259 out of 13,331 (~ 1%) known invasive alien species have reported costs in the European Union. Using a conservative subset of highly reliable, observed, country-level cost entries from 49 species (totalling US$4.7 billion; 2017 value), combined with the establishment data of alien species within European Union member states, we projected unreported cost data for all member states. Conclusions Our corrected estimate of observed costs was potentially 501% higher (US$28.0 billion) than currently recorded. Using future projections of current estimates, we also identified a substantial increase in costs and costly species (US$148.2 billion) by 2040. We urge that cost reporting be improved to clarify the economic impacts of greatest concern, concomitant with coordinated international action to prevent and mitigate the impacts of invasive alien species in the European Union and globally. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12302-023-00750-3.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgane Henry
- Department of Biology, McGill University, Montréal, QC Canada
| | - Brian Leung
- Department of Biology, McGill University, Montréal, QC Canada
| | - Ross N. Cuthbert
- Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, BT9 5DL UK
| | - Thomas W. Bodey
- School of Biological Sciences, King’s College, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, AB24 3FX UK
| | - Danish A. Ahmed
- Center for Applied Mathematics and Bioinformatics, Department of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Gulf University for Science and Technology, Hawally, Kuwait
| | - Elena Angulo
- Estación Biológica de Doñana, CSIC, Avda. Americo Vespucio 26, 41092 Seville, Spain
| | - Paride Balzani
- Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, South Bohemian Research Centre of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic
| | - Elizabeta Briski
- GEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel, Düsternbrooker Weg 20, 24105 Kiel, Germany
| | - Franck Courchamp
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Gif sur Yvette, France
| | - Philip E. Hulme
- Bioprotection Aotearoa, Lincoln University, Lincoln Canterbury, 7647 New Zealand
| | - Antonín Kouba
- Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, South Bohemian Research Centre of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic
| | - Melina Kourantidou
- Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics, University of Southern Denmark, Degnevej 14, 6705 Esbjerg Ø, Denmark
- UMR 6308, AMURE, Université de Bretagne Occidentale, IUEM, rue Dumont d’Urville, 29280 Plouzané, France
- Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02543 USA
| | - Chunlong Liu
- College of Fisheries, Ocean University of China, Qingdao, 266003 China
- Institute of Hydrobiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, 430072 China
| | - Rafael L. Macêdo
- Graduate Program in Conservation and Ecotourism, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro State, Rio de Janeiro, RJ Brazil
- Neotropical Limnology Group (NEL), Federal University of Rio de Janeiro State, Av. Pasteur, 458, Rio de Janeiro, RJ 22290-240 Brazil
| | - Francisco J. Oficialdegui
- Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, South Bohemian Research Centre of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic
| | - David Renault
- University of Rennes, CNRS, ECOBIO (Ecosystèmes, Biodiversité, Evolution), UMR, 6553 Rennes, France
- Institut Universitaire de France, 1 rue Descartes, 75231 Paris Cedex 05, France
| | - Ismael Soto
- Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, South Bohemian Research Centre of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic
| | - Ali Serhan Tarkan
- Department of Basic Sciences, Faculty of Fisheries, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, 48000 Muğla, Turkey
- Department of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth University, Poole, Dorset UK
| | - Anna J. Turbelin
- Bioprotection Aotearoa, Lincoln University, Lincoln Canterbury, 7647 New Zealand
| | - Corey J. A. Bradshaw
- Global Ecology | Partuyarta Ngadluku Wardli Kuu, College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA 5001 Australia
- ARC Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage (EpicAustralia.org.au), Wollongong, NSW Australia
| | - Phillip J. Haubrock
- Center for Applied Mathematics and Bioinformatics, Department of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Gulf University for Science and Technology, Hawally, Kuwait
- Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, South Bohemian Research Centre of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic
- Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Gelnhausen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Otis GW, Taylor BA, Mattila HR. Invasion potential of hornets (Hymenoptera: Vespidae: Vespa spp.). FRONTIERS IN INSECT SCIENCE 2023; 3:1145158. [PMID: 38469472 PMCID: PMC10926419 DOI: 10.3389/finsc.2023.1145158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2023] [Accepted: 03/30/2023] [Indexed: 03/13/2024]
Abstract
Hornets are large, predatory wasps that have the potential to alter biotic communities and harm honey bee colonies once established in non-native locations. Mated, diapausing females (gynes) can easily be transported to new habitats, where their behavioral flexibility allows them to found colonies using local food and nest materials. Of the 22 species in the genus Vespa, five species are now naturalized far from their endemic populations and another four have been detected either in nature or during inspections at borders of other countries. By far the most likely pathway of long-distance dispersal is the transport of gynes in transoceanic shipments of goods. Thereafter, natural dispersal of gynes in spring and accidental local transport by humans cause shorter-range expansions and contribute to the invasion process. Propagule pressure of hornets is unquantified, although it is likely low but unrelenting. The success of introduced populations is limited by low propagule size and the consequences of genetic founder effects, including the extinction vortex linked to single-locus, complementary sex determination of most hymenopterans. Invasion success is enhanced by climatic similarity between source locality and introduction site, as well as genetic diversity conferred by polyandry in some species. These and other factors that may have influenced the successful establishment of invasive populations of V. velutina, V. tropica, V. bicolor, V. orientalis, and V. crabro are discussed. The highly publicized detections of V. mandarinia in North America and research into its status provide a real-time example of an unfolding hornet invasion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gard W. Otis
- School of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada
- Institute of Bee Health, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Bern and Agroscope, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Benjamin A. Taylor
- Department of Entomology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, United States
| | - Heather R. Mattila
- Department of Biological Sciences, Wellesley College, Wellesley, MA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Oficialdegui FJ, Zamora-Marín JM, Guareschi S, Anastácio PM, García-Murillo P, Ribeiro F, Miranda R, Cobo F, Gallardo B, García-Berthou E, Boix D, Arias A, Cuesta JA, Medina L, Almeida D, Banha F, Barca S, Biurrun I, Cabezas MP, Calero S, Campos JA, Capdevila-Argüelles L, Capinha C, Casals F, Clavero M, Encarnação J, Fernández-Delgado C, Franco J, Guillén A, Hermoso V, Machordom A, Martelo J, Mellado-Díaz A, Morcillo F, Oscoz J, Perdices A, Pou-Rovira Q, Rodríguez-Merino A, Ros M, Ruiz-Navarro A, Sánchez MI, Sánchez-Fernández D, Sánchez-González JR, Sánchez-Gullón E, Teodósio MA, Torralva M, Vieira-Lanero R, Oliva-Paterna FJ. A horizon scan exercise for aquatic invasive alien species in Iberian inland waters. THE SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT 2023; 869:161798. [PMID: 36702272 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.161798] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2022] [Revised: 01/18/2023] [Accepted: 01/19/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
As the number of introduced species keeps increasing unabatedly, identifying and prioritising current and potential Invasive Alien Species (IAS) has become essential to manage them. Horizon Scanning (HS), defined as an exploration of potential threats, is considered a fundamental component of IAS management. By combining scientific knowledge on taxa with expert opinion, we identified the most relevant aquatic IAS in the Iberian Peninsula, i.e., those with the greatest geographic extent (or probability of introduction), severe ecological, economic and human health impacts, greatest difficulty and acceptability of management. We highlighted the 126 most relevant IAS already present in Iberian inland waters (i.e., Concern list) and 89 with a high probability of being introduced in the near future (i.e., Alert list), of which 24 and 10 IAS, respectively, were considered as a management priority after receiving the highest scores in the expert assessment (i.e., top-ranked IAS). In both lists, aquatic IAS belonging to the four thematic groups (plants, freshwater invertebrates, estuarine invertebrates, and vertebrates) were identified as having been introduced through various pathways from different regions of the world and classified according to their main functional feeding groups. Also, the latest update of the list of IAS of Union concern pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 includes only 12 top-ranked IAS identified for the Iberian Peninsula, while the national lists incorporate the vast majority of them. This fact underlines the great importance of taxa prioritisation exercises at biogeographical scales as a step prior to risk analyses and their inclusion in national lists. This HS provides a robust assessment and a cost-effective strategy for decision-makers and stakeholders to prioritise the use of limited resources for IAS prevention and management. Although applied at a transnational level in a European biodiversity hotspot, this approach is designed for potential application at any geographical or administrative scale, including the continental one.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francisco J Oficialdegui
- Department of Zoology and Physical Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, University of Murcia, CEIR Campus Mare Nostrum (CMN), Murcia, Spain.
| | - José M Zamora-Marín
- Department of Zoology and Physical Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, University of Murcia, CEIR Campus Mare Nostrum (CMN), Murcia, Spain
| | - Simone Guareschi
- Geography and Environment Division, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom; Departamento de Biología de la Conservación, Estación Biológica de Doñana (EBD)-CSIC, Sevilla, Spain
| | - Pedro M Anastácio
- Departamento de Paisagem, Ambiente e Ordenamento, MARE-Centro de Ciências do Mar e do Ambiente, Escola de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade de Évora, Évora, Portugal
| | - Pablo García-Murillo
- Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain
| | - Filipe Ribeiro
- MARE-Centro de Ciências do Mar e do Ambiente, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
| | - Rafael Miranda
- Instituto de Biodiversidad y Medioambiente (BIOMA), Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | - Fernando Cobo
- Departamento de Zooloxía, Xenética e Antropoloxía Física, Facultade de Bioloxía, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain
| | - Belinda Gallardo
- Departamento de Biodiversidad y Restauración, Instituto Pirenaico de Ecología (IPE)-CSIC, Zaragoza, Spain
| | | | - Dani Boix
- GRECO, Institut d'Ecologia Aquàtica, Universitat de Girona, Girona, Spain
| | - Andrés Arias
- Departamento de Biología de Organismos y Sistemas, Universidad de Oviedo, Asturias, Spain
| | - Jose A Cuesta
- Departamento de Ecología y Gestión Costera, Instituto de Ciencias Marinas de Andalucía (ICMAN)-CSIC, Cádiz, Spain
| | | | - David Almeida
- Department of Basic Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Universidad San Pablo-CEU, CEU Universities, Urbanización Montepríncipe, Boadilla del Monte, Spain
| | - Filipe Banha
- Departamento de Paisagem, Ambiente e Ordenamento, MARE-Centro de Ciências do Mar e do Ambiente, Escola de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade de Évora, Évora, Portugal
| | - Sandra Barca
- Departamento de Zooloxía, Xenética e Antropoloxía Física, Facultade de Bioloxía, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain
| | - Idoia Biurrun
- Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Facultad de Ciencia y Tecnología, Universidad del País Vasco UPV/EHU, Bilbao, Spain
| | - M Pilar Cabezas
- Centre of Marine Sciences (CCMAR), Universidade do Algarve, Campus de Gambelas, Faro, Portugal
| | - Sara Calero
- Planificación y Gestión Hídrica, Tragsatec, Grupo Tragsa-SEPI, Madrid, Spain
| | - Juan A Campos
- Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Facultad de Ciencia y Tecnología, Universidad del País Vasco UPV/EHU, Bilbao, Spain
| | | | - César Capinha
- Centre of Geographical Studies, Institute of Geography and Spatial Planning, University of Lisbon, Lisboa, Portugal
| | - Frederic Casals
- Departament de Ciència Animal, Universitat de Lleida, Lleida, Spain; Centre Tecnològic Forestal de Catalunya (CTFC), Solsona, Lleida, Spain
| | - Miguel Clavero
- Departamento de Biología de la Conservación, Estación Biológica de Doñana (EBD)-CSIC, Sevilla, Spain
| | - João Encarnação
- Centre of Marine Sciences (CCMAR), Universidade do Algarve, Campus de Gambelas, Faro, Portugal
| | | | - Javier Franco
- AZTI, Marine Research, Marine and Coastal Environmental Management, Pasaia, Gipuzkoa, Spain
| | - Antonio Guillén
- Department of Zoology and Physical Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, University of Murcia, CEIR Campus Mare Nostrum (CMN), Murcia, Spain
| | - Virgilio Hermoso
- Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain
| | - Annie Machordom
- Departamento de Biodiversidad y Biología Evolutiva, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (MNCN)-CSIC, Madrid, Spain
| | - Joana Martelo
- MARE-Centro de Ciências do Mar e do Ambiente, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
| | - Andrés Mellado-Díaz
- Planificación y Gestión Hídrica, Tragsatec, Grupo Tragsa-SEPI, Madrid, Spain
| | - Felipe Morcillo
- Departamento de Biodiversidad, Ecología y Evolución, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - Javier Oscoz
- Departamento de Biología Ambiental, Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | - Anabel Perdices
- Departamento de Biodiversidad y Biología Evolutiva, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (MNCN)-CSIC, Madrid, Spain
| | | | | | - Macarena Ros
- Departamento de Zoología, Facultad de Biología, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain
| | - Ana Ruiz-Navarro
- Department of Zoology and Physical Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, University of Murcia, CEIR Campus Mare Nostrum (CMN), Murcia, Spain; Departamento de Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales, Facultad de Educación, Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain
| | - Marta I Sánchez
- Departamento de Ecología de Humedales, Estación Biológica de Doñana (EBD)-CSIC, Sevilla, Spain
| | | | - Jorge R Sánchez-González
- Departament de Ciència Animal, Universitat de Lleida, Lleida, Spain; Sociedad Ibérica de Ictiología, Departamento de Biología Ambiental, Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona/Iruña, Spain
| | - Enrique Sánchez-Gullón
- Consejería de Sostenibilidad, Medio Ambiente y Economía Azul, Junta de Andalucía, Huelva, Spain
| | - M Alexandra Teodósio
- Centre of Marine Sciences (CCMAR), Universidade do Algarve, Campus de Gambelas, Faro, Portugal
| | - Mar Torralva
- Department of Zoology and Physical Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, University of Murcia, CEIR Campus Mare Nostrum (CMN), Murcia, Spain
| | - Rufino Vieira-Lanero
- Departamento de Zooloxía, Xenética e Antropoloxía Física, Facultade de Bioloxía, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain
| | - Francisco J Oliva-Paterna
- Department of Zoology and Physical Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, University of Murcia, CEIR Campus Mare Nostrum (CMN), Murcia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Santamarina S, Mateo RG, Alfaro-Saiz E, Acedo C. On the importance of invasive species niche dynamics in plant conservation management at large and local scale. Front Ecol Evol 2023. [DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2022.1049142] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Predicting the distribution of Invasive alien species (IAS) using species distribution models is promising for conservation planning. To achieve accurate predictions, it is essential to explore species niche dynamics. New approaches are necessary for bringing this analysis to real conservation management needs. Using multi-site comparisons can provide great useful insights to better understand invasion processes. Exploring the fine-scale niche overlap between IAS and native species sharing a location can be a key tool for achieving the implementation of local species conservation actions, which can play a fundamental role in the global management of IAS. This can also increase society’s awareness of the threat of IAS. In this context, here, we explored two key research demands. First, we studied the large-scale niche dynamics of the invasive species Paraserianthes lophantha (Willd.) I.C. Nielsen’s considering different invaded areas. The analysis compared niches of the native range (South Western Australia) with the Australian invaded range (eastern Australia); the native range with the European invaded range, and its full Australian range (native plus invaded range) with the European invaded range. Second, we perform a fine-scale niche overlap analysis at landscape scale in Spain. We studied the niche overlap between P. lophantha and a species with remarkable conservation interest (Quercus lusitanica Lam). All the niche analyses were realized following a well-established ordination (principal component analysis) approach where important methodological aspects were compared and analyzed. Our multi-site study of P. lophantha large-scale niche dynamics detected niche shifts between the Australian ranges demonstrating that the species is labile and may potentially adapt to further European climate conditions and spread its invasive range. Comparative analysis between the European and the full Australian ranges supports that calibrate models including the Australian invasive information is promising to accurate predict P. lophantha European potential distribution. The fine-scale study of niche overlap further explained the potential of this IAS and can be used as a model example of how these local studies can be used to promote the implementation of conservation actions in situ as a complement to large-scale management strategies.
Collapse
|
11
|
Pazos T, Álvarez-Figueiró P, Cortés-Vázquez JA, Jácome MA, Servia MJ. Of Fears and Budgets: Strategies of Control in Vespa velutina Invasion and Lessons for Best Management Practices. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2022; 70:605-617. [PMID: 35900590 PMCID: PMC9439987 DOI: 10.1007/s00267-022-01690-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2022] [Accepted: 07/13/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
Implementing management practices for the control of invasive species can be a complex task with multiple dimensions, where the identification of stakeholders and drivers of those practices is of paramount importance. The invasive hornet Vespa velutina has spread across Europe and Asia from its native range in SE Asia in recent years. A common control method is the removal and destruction of its nests on citizens' request to call centers. In this paper we have explored the knowledge and main factors that influence the perceptions of the citizens on the species in an invaded municipality in NW Spain, as well as the management practices of the municipal emergency unit responsible for nest removal activities. Our analysis brings out multiple drivers of management practices that derive both from the citizens' and practitioners' knowledge, and highlights several points of conflict between both stakeholder groups connected to (1) the degree of service provided to the local population, (2) the risk of allergic reactions as a motive to urge removals, or (3) the quality of information provided by mass media. Our results support the crucial importance of environmental education programs that seek to increase the knowledge of the general public about the threats of invasive species. Such programs might be incorporated to implement and optimize management plans of V. velutina by enhancing communication between experts and local population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tamara Pazos
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, University of A Coruña, UDC, Campus da Zapateira s/n, 15071A, Coruña, Spain
| | - Patricia Álvarez-Figueiró
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, University of A Coruña, UDC, Campus da Zapateira s/n, 15071A, Coruña, Spain
| | - Jose A Cortés-Vázquez
- Department of Sociology and Communication, Faculty of Sociology, University of A Coruña, UDC, Campus de Elviña s/n, 15071A, Coruña, Spain
| | - María Amalia Jácome
- Department of Mathematics MODES Group, Faculty of Science, CITIC University of A Coruña, UDC, Campus da Zapateira s/n, 15071A, Coruña, Spain
| | - María J Servia
- Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, University of A Coruña, UDC, Campus da Zapateira s/n, 15071A, Coruña, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Vaissière AC, Courtois P, Courchamp F, Kourantidou M, Diagne C, Essl F, Kirichenko N, Welsh M, Salles JM. The nature of economic costs of biological invasions. Biol Invasions 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s10530-022-02837-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|
13
|
Economic costs of invasive alien ants worldwide. Biol Invasions 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s10530-022-02791-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
Abstract
AbstractInvasive ants are amongst the most destructive and widespread invaders across the globe; they can strongly alter invaded ecosystems and are responsible for the loss of native ant species. Several studies have reported that invasive ants can also lead to substantial economic costs. In this study, we search, describe and analyse 1342 reported costs of invasive ants compiled in the InvaCost database. Economic costs, reported since 1930 for 12 ant species in 27 countries, totalled US$ 51.93 billion, from which US$ 10.95 billion were incurred, and US$ 40.98 billion were potential costs (i.e., expected or predicted costs). More than 80% of total costs were associated with only two species, Solenopsis invicta and Wasmannia auropunctata; and two countries, the USA and Australia. Overall, damage costs amounted to 92% of the total cost, mainly impacting the agriculture, public and social welfare sectors. Management costs were primarily post-invasion management (US$ 1.79 billion), with much lower amounts dedicated to prevention (US$ 235.63 million). Besides the taxonomic bias, cost information was lacking for an average of 78% of the invaded countries. Moreover, even in countries where costs were reported, such information was available for only 56% of the invaded locations. Our synthesis suggests that the global costs of invasive ants are massive but largely biased towards developed economies, with a huge proportion of underreported costs, and thus most likely grossly underestimated. We advocate for more and improved cost reporting of invasive ants through better collaborations between managers, practitioners and researchers, a crucial basis for adequately informing future budgets and improving proactive management actions of invasive ants.
Collapse
|
14
|
Assessing the Invasion Risk of Humulus scandens Using Ensemble Species Distribution Modeling and Habitat Connectivity Analysis. PLANTS 2022; 11:plants11070857. [PMID: 35406837 PMCID: PMC9002559 DOI: 10.3390/plants11070857] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2022] [Revised: 03/20/2022] [Accepted: 03/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Given the rapid spread of invasive alien plant species in Europe and limited information regarding their distribution and dispersion patterns, we analyzed the invasive risk of Humulus scandens, a species with an increased invasive potential. We collected occurrence records from Romania within an EU funded project and literature data, in order to perform an ensemble distribution model. Environmental variables varied from downscaled topoclimatic continuous entries to categorical ones, such as soil class, texture, or land use. Results showed potential core areas of the species within the study region. By inverting the probability output of the models, we have created a resistance surface which helped us model its dispersion patterns. Further, we assessed the probability of invasion for each resulted corridor using the species dispersion ecology and created an invasion risk map. H. scandens is highly influenced by milder climates and areas with constant flooding events, thus we found that the Tisa basin and its tributaries can be under a high invasion risk, spreading through the entire catchment, in Central, Western, and Northern Romania, towards the Eastern Carpathians. The Danube acted as a dispersion corridor for major river systems in southern Romania, but the dispersion capability of the species dropped in steppe areas with higher aridity and limited water course network. This approach is useful for creating adequate action plans in relation to invasive alien plant species, and should urgently be regarded, as results show a potentially large distribution of H. scandens across entire water catchment areas, with devastating effects on natural ecosystems.
Collapse
|
15
|
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
|
16
|
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
|
17
|
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
|
18
|
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
|
19
|
Kirichenko N, Haubrock PJ, Cuthbert RN, Akulov E, Karimova E, Shneider Y, Liu C, Angulo E, Diagne C, Courchamp F. Economic costs of biological invasions in terrestrial ecosystems in Russia. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.58529] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Terrestrial ecosystems, owing to the presence of key socio-economic sectors such as agriculture and forestry, may be particularly economically affected by biological invasions. The present study uses a subset of the recently developed database of global economic costs of biological invasions (InvaCost) to quantify the monetary costs of biological invasions in Russia, the largest country in the world that spans two continents. From 2007 up to 2019, invasions costed the Russian economy at least US$ 51.52 billion (RUB 1.38 trillion, n = 94 cost entries), with the vast majority of these costs based on predictions or extrapolations (US$ 50.86 billion; n = 87) and, therefore, not empirically observed. Most cost entries exhibited low geographic resolution, being split between European and Asian parts of Russia (US$ 44.17 billion; n = 72). Just US$ 7.35 billion (n = 22) was attributed to the European part solely and none to the Asian part. Invasion costs were documented for 72 species and particularly insects (37 species). The empirically-observed costs, summing up to US$ 660 million (n = 7), were reported only for four species: two insects Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire and Cydalima perspectalis (Walker) and two plants Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. and Heracleum sosnowskyi Manden. The vast majority of economic costs were related to resource damages and economic losses, with very little reported expenditures on managing invasions in terrestrial ecosystems. In turn, agriculture (US$ 37.42 billion; n = 68) and forestry (US$ 14.0 billion; n = 20) were the most impacted sectors. Overall, we report burgeoning economic costs of invasions in Russia and identify major knowledge gaps, for example, concerning specific habitat types (i.e. aquatic) and management expenditures, as well as for numerous known invasive taxa with no reported economic costs (i.e. vertebrates). Given this massive, largely underestimated economic burden of invasions in Russia, our work is a call for improved reporting of costs nationally and internationally.
Collapse
|
20
|
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
|
21
|
Haubrock PJ, Turbelin AJ, Cuthbert RN, Novoa A, Taylor NG, Angulo E, Ballesteros-Mejia L, Bodey TW, Capinha C, Diagne C, Essl F, Golivets M, Kirichenko N, Kourantidou M, Leroy B, Renault D, Verbrugge L, Courchamp F. Economic costs of invasive alien species across Europe. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.58196] [Citation(s) in RCA: 57] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
Biological invasions continue to threaten the stability of ecosystems and societies that are dependent on their services. Whilst the ecological impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) have been widely reported in recent decades, there remains a paucity of information concerning their economic impacts. Europe has strong trade and transport links with the rest of the world, facilitating hundreds of IAS incursions, and largely centralised decision-making frameworks. The present study is the first comprehensive and detailed effort that quantifies the costs of IAS collectively across European countries and examines temporal trends in these data. In addition, the distributions of costs across countries, socioeconomic sectors and taxonomic groups are examined, as are socio-economic correlates of management and damage costs. Total costs of IAS in Europe summed to US$140.20 billion (or €116.61 billion) between 1960 and 2020, with the majority (60%) being damage-related and impacting multiple sectors. Costs were also geographically widespread but dominated by impacts in large western and central European countries, i.e. the UK, Spain, France, and Germany. Human population size, land area, GDP, and tourism were significant predictors of invasion costs, with management costs additionally predicted by numbers of introduced species, research effort and trade. Temporally, invasion costs have increased exponentially through time, with up to US$23.58 billion (€19.64 billion) in 2013, and US$139.56 billion (€116.24 billion) in impacts extrapolated in 2020. Importantly, although these costs are substantial, there remain knowledge gaps on several geographic and taxonomic scales, indicating that these costs are severely underestimated. We, thus, urge increased and improved cost reporting for economic impacts of IAS and coordinated international action to prevent further spread and mitigate impacts of IAS populations.
Collapse
|
22
|
Zenni RD, Essl F, García-Berthou E, McDermott SM. The economic costs of biological invasions around the world. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.69971] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Not applicable
Collapse
|
23
|
Ballesteros-Mejia L, Angulo E, Diagne C, Cooke B, Nuñez MA, Courchamp F. Economic costs of biological invasions in Ecuador: the importance of the Galapagos Islands. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.59116] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Biological invasions, as a result of human intervention through trade and mobility, are the second biggest cause of biodiversity loss. The impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) on the environment are well known, however, economic impacts are poorly estimated, especially in mega-diverse countries where both economic and ecological consequences of these effects can be catastrophic. Ecuador, one of the smallest mega-diverse countries, lacks a comprehensive description of the economic costs of IAS within its territory. Here, using "InvaCost", a public database that compiles all recorded monetary costs associated with IAS from English and Non-English sources, we investigated the economic costs of biological invasions. We found that between 1983 and 2017, the reported costs associated with biological invasions ranged between US$86.17 million (when considering only the most robust data) and US$626 million (when including all cost data) belonging to 37 species and 27 genera. Furthermore, 99% of the recorded cost entries were from the Galapagos Islands. From only robust data, the costliest identified taxonomic group was feral goats (Capra hircus; US$20 million), followed by Aedes mosquitoes (US$2.14 million) while organisms like plant species from the genus Rubus, a parasitic fly (Philornis downsi), black rats (Rattus rattus) and terrestrial gastropods (Achatina fulica) represented less than US$2 million each. Costs of "mixed-taxa" (i.e. plants and animals) represented the highest (61% of total robust costs; US$52.44 million). The most impacted activity sector was the national park authorities, which spent about US$84 million. Results from robust data also revealed that management expenditures were the major type of costs recorded in the Galapagos Islands; however, costs reported for medical losses related to Aedes mosquitoes causing dengue fever in mainland Ecuador would have ranked first if more detailed information had allowed us to categorize them as robust data. Over 70% of the IAS reported for Ecuador did not have reported costs. These results suggest that costs reported here are a massive underestimate of the actual economic toll of invasions in the country.
Collapse
|
24
|
Haubrock PJ, Cuthbert RN, Sundermann A, Diagne C, Golivets M, Courchamp F. Economic costs of invasive species in Germany. NEOBIOTA 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.59502] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
Invasive alien species are a well-known and pervasive threat to global biodiversity and human well-being. Despite substantial impacts of invasive alien species, quantitative syntheses of monetary costs incurred from invasions in national economies are often missing. As a consequence, adequate resource allocation for management responses to invasions has been inhibited, because cost-benefit analysis of management actions cannot be derived. To determine the economic cost of invasions in Germany, a Central European country with the 4th largest GDP in the world, we analysed published data collected from the first global assessment of economic costs of invasive alien species. Overall, economic costs were estimated at US$ 9.8 billion between 1960 and 2020, including US$ 8.9 billion in potential costs. The potential costs were mostly linked to extrapolated costs of the American bullfrog Lithobates catesbeianus, the black cherry Prunus serotina and two mammals: the muskrat Ondatra zibethicus and the American mink Neovison vison. Observed costs were driven by a broad range of taxa and mostly associated with control-related spending and resource damages or losses. We identified a considerable increase in costs relative to previous estimates and through time. Importantly, of the 2,249 alien and 181 invasive species reported in Germany, only 28 species had recorded economic costs. Therefore, total quantifications of invasive species costs here should be seen as very conservative. Our findings highlight a distinct lack of information in the openly-accessible literature and governmental sources on invasion costs at the national level, masking the highly-probable existence of much greater costs of invasions in Germany. In addition, given that invasion rates are increasing, economic costs are expected to further increase. The evaluation and reporting of economic costs need to be improved in order to deliver a basis for effective mitigation and management of invasions on national and international economies.
Collapse
|