1
|
Cuthbert RN, Diagne C, Hudgins EJ, Turbelin A, Ahmed DA, Albert C, Bodey TW, Briski E, Essl F, Haubrock PJ, Gozlan RE, Kirichenko N, Kourantidou M, Kramer AM, Courchamp F. Biological invasion costs reveal insufficient proactive management worldwide. Sci Total Environ 2022; 819:153404. [PMID: 35148893 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153404] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2021] [Revised: 01/21/2022] [Accepted: 01/21/2022] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
The global increase in biological invasions is placing growing pressure on the management of ecological and economic systems. However, the effectiveness of current management expenditure is difficult to assess due to a lack of standardised measurement across spatial, taxonomic and temporal scales. Furthermore, there is no quantification of the spending difference between pre-invasion (e.g. prevention) and post-invasion (e.g. control) stages, although preventative measures are considered to be the most cost-effective. Here, we use a comprehensive database of invasive alien species economic costs (InvaCost) to synthesise and model the global management costs of biological invasions, in order to provide a better understanding of the stage at which these expenditures occur. Since 1960, reported management expenditures have totalled at least US$95.3 billion (in 2017 values), considering only highly reliable and actually observed costs - 12-times less than damage costs from invasions ($1130.6 billion). Pre-invasion management spending ($2.8 billion) was over 25-times lower than post-invasion expenditure ($72.7 billion). Management costs were heavily geographically skewed towards North America (54%) and Oceania (30%). The largest shares of expenditures were directed towards invasive alien invertebrates in terrestrial environments. Spending on invasive alien species management has grown by two orders of magnitude since 1960, reaching an estimated $4.2 billion per year globally (in 2017 values) in the 2010s, but remains 1-2 orders of magnitude lower than damages. National management spending increased with incurred damage costs, with management actions delayed on average by 11 years globally following damage reporting. These management delays on the global level have caused an additional invasion cost of approximately $1.2 trillion, compared to scenarios with immediate management. Our results indicate insufficient management - particularly pre-invasion - and urge better investment to prevent future invasions and to control established alien species. Recommendations to improve reported management cost comprehensiveness, resolution and terminology are also made.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ross N Cuthbert
- GEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel, 24105 Kiel, Germany; School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, BT9 5DL Belfast, United Kingdom.
| | - Christophe Diagne
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France
| | - Emma J Hudgins
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, Canada
| | - Anna Turbelin
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France
| | - Danish A Ahmed
- Center for Applied Mathematics and Bioinformatics, Department of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Gulf University for Science and Technology, P.O. Box 7207, Hawally 32093, Kuwait
| | - Céline Albert
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France
| | - Thomas W Bodey
- School of Biological Sciences, King's College, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB24 3FX, United Kingdom
| | - Elizabeta Briski
- GEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel, 24105 Kiel, Germany
| | - Franz Essl
- BioInvasions, Global Change, Macroecology-Group, Department of Botany and Biodiversity Research, University of Vienna, Rennweg 14, 1030 Vienna, Austria
| | - Phillip J Haubrock
- University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Faculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, Zátiší 728/II, 389 25 Vodňany, Czech Republic; Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Gelnhausen, Germany
| | - Rodolphe E Gozlan
- ISEM UMR226, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, IRD, EPHE, 34090 Montpellier, France
| | - Natalia Kirichenko
- Sukachev Institute of Forest, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Federal Research Center "Krasnoyarsk Science Center SB RAS", Krasnoyarsk 660036, Russia; Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk 660041, Russia; Saint Petersburg State Forest Technical University, Saint Petersburg 194021, Russia
| | - Melina Kourantidou
- University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics, Degnevej 14, 6705 Esbjerg Ø, Denmark; Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole, MA 02543, United States; Institute of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters, Hellenic Center for Marine Research, Athens 164 52, Greece
| | - Andrew M Kramer
- Department of Integrative Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33620, United States
| | - Franck Courchamp
- Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, 91405 Orsay, France.
| |
Collapse
|