A proposed unified framework to describe the management of biological invasions

Peter A. Robertson; Aileen Mill; Ana Novoa; Jonathan M. Jeschke; Franz Essl; Belinda Gallardo; Juergen Geist; Ivan Janic; Xavier Lambin; Camille Musseau; Jan Pergl; Petr Pysek; Wolfgang Rabitsch; Menja von Schmalensee; Mark Shirley; David L. Strayer; Robert A. Stefansson; Kevin Smith; Olaf Booy

doi:10.1007/s10530-020-02298-2

A proposed unified framework to describe the management of biological invasions

Peter A. Robertson^*, Aileen Mill, Ana Novoa, Jonathan M. Jeschke, Franz Essl, Belinda Gallardo, Juergen Geist, Ivan Janic, Xavier Lambin, Camille Musseau, Jan Pergl, Petr Pysek, Wolfgang Rabitsch, Menja von Schmalensee, Mark Shirley, David L. Strayer, Robert A. Stefansson, Kevin Smith, Olaf Booy

^*Corresponding author for this work

Aberdeen Centre For Environmental Sustainability

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

81 Citations (Scopus)

2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Managing the impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) is a great societal challenge. A wide variety of terms have been used to describe the management of invasive alien species and the sequence in which they might be applied. This variety and lack of consistency creates uncertainty in the presentation and description of management in policy, science and practice. Here we expand on the existing description of the invasion process to develop an IAS management framework. We define the different forms of active management using a novel approach based on changes in species status, avoiding the need for stand-alone descriptions of management types, and provide a complete set of potential management activities. We propose a standardised set of management terminology as an emergent feature of this framework. We identified eight key forms of management: (1) pathway management, (2) interception, (3) limits to keeping, (4) secure keeping, (5) eradication, (6) complete reproductive removal, (7) containment and (8) suppression. We recognise four associated terms: prevention; captive management; rapid eradication; and long-term management, and note the use of impact mitigation and restoration as associated forms of management. We discuss the wider use of this framework and the supporting activities required to ensure management is well-targeted, cost-effective and makes best use of limited resources.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	2633-2645
Number of pages	13
Journal	Biological Invasions
Volume	22
Issue number	9
Early online date	30 Jun 2020
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-020-02298-2
Publication status	Published - 1 Sept 2020

Bibliographical note

Acknowledgements This paper arose from a workshop of the Invasion Dynamics Network (InDyNet) in Berlin in 2018, funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) Grant JE 288/8-1, which included a Mercator Fellowship for DLS. Additional support was received through DFG Grants JE 288/9- 1 and JE 288/9-2 to JMJ, the G.E. Hutchinson Chair to DLS and the project ‘‘Capacity Building Neobiota’’ (Austrian Federal Ministry for Sustainability and Tourism) to WR. AN, PP and JP were supported by long-term research development project no. RVO 67985939, project 17-19025S and EXPRO grant 19-28807X (Czech Science Foundation). IJ was supported by the J. E. Purkyneˇ Fellowship of the Czech Academy of Sciences. We also thank the referees for this paper for their critical and constructive comments.

Keywords

Terminology
Management
Prevention
Containment
Eradication
Removal
Keeping

Access to Document

10.1007/s10530-020-02298-2Licence: CC BY

Robertson_etal_BI_A_Proposed_Unified_VOR
This article is licensed under a Creative Com- mons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any med- ium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Final published version, 537 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

Robertson, P. A., Mill, A., Novoa, A., Jeschke, J. M., Essl, F., Gallardo, B., Geist, J., Janic, I., Lambin, X., Musseau, C., Pergl, J., Pysek, P., Rabitsch, W., von Schmalensee, M., Shirley, M., Strayer, D. L., Stefansson, R. A., Smith, K., & Booy, O. (2020). A proposed unified framework to describe the management of biological invasions. Biological Invasions, 22(9), 2633-2645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-020-02298-2

Robertson, PA, Mill, A, Novoa, A, Jeschke, JM, Essl, F, Gallardo, B, Geist, J, Janic, I, Lambin, X, Musseau, C, Pergl, J, Pysek, P, Rabitsch, W, von Schmalensee, M, Shirley, M, Strayer, DL, Stefansson, RA, Smith, K & Booy, O 2020, 'A proposed unified framework to describe the management of biological invasions', Biological Invasions, vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 2633-2645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-020-02298-2

@article{e22a3883e71e4195b5076594521c254c,

title = "A proposed unified framework to describe the management of biological invasions",

abstract = "Managing the impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) is a great societal challenge. A wide variety of terms have been used to describe the management of invasive alien species and the sequence in which they might be applied. This variety and lack of consistency creates uncertainty in the presentation and description of management in policy, science and practice. Here we expand on the existing description of the invasion process to develop an IAS management framework. We define the different forms of active management using a novel approach based on changes in species status, avoiding the need for stand-alone descriptions of management types, and provide a complete set of potential management activities. We propose a standardised set of management terminology as an emergent feature of this framework. We identified eight key forms of management: (1) pathway management, (2) interception, (3) limits to keeping, (4) secure keeping, (5) eradication, (6) complete reproductive removal, (7) containment and (8) suppression. We recognise four associated terms: prevention; captive management; rapid eradication; and long-term management, and note the use of impact mitigation and restoration as associated forms of management. We discuss the wider use of this framework and the supporting activities required to ensure management is well-targeted, cost-effective and makes best use of limited resources.",

keywords = "Terminology, Management, Prevention, Containment, Eradication, Removal, Keeping",

author = "Robertson, {Peter A.} and Aileen Mill and Ana Novoa and Jeschke, {Jonathan M.} and Franz Essl and Belinda Gallardo and Juergen Geist and Ivan Janic and Xavier Lambin and Camille Musseau and Jan Pergl and Petr Pysek and Wolfgang Rabitsch and {von Schmalensee}, Menja and Mark Shirley and Strayer, {David L.} and Stefansson, {Robert A.} and Kevin Smith and Olaf Booy",

note = "Acknowledgements This paper arose from a workshop of the Invasion Dynamics Network (InDyNet) in Berlin in 2018, funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) Grant JE 288/8-1, which included a Mercator Fellowship for DLS. Additional support was received through DFG Grants JE 288/9- 1 and JE 288/9-2 to JMJ, the G.E. Hutchinson Chair to DLS and the project {\textquoteleft}{\textquoteleft}Capacity Building Neobiota{\textquoteright}{\textquoteright} (Austrian Federal Ministry for Sustainability and Tourism) to WR. AN, PP and JP were supported by long-term research development project no. RVO 67985939, project 17-19025S and EXPRO grant 19-28807X (Czech Science Foundation). IJ was supported by the J. E. Purkyneˇ Fellowship of the Czech Academy of Sciences. We also thank the referees for this paper for their critical and constructive comments. ",

year = "2020",

month = sep,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1007/s10530-020-02298-2",

language = "English",

volume = "22",

pages = "2633--2645",

journal = "Biological Invasions",

issn = "1387-3547",

publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A proposed unified framework to describe the management of biological invasions

AU - Robertson, Peter A.

AU - Mill, Aileen

AU - Novoa, Ana

AU - Jeschke, Jonathan M.

AU - Essl, Franz

AU - Gallardo, Belinda

AU - Geist, Juergen

AU - Janic, Ivan

AU - Lambin, Xavier

AU - Musseau, Camille

AU - Pergl, Jan

AU - Pysek, Petr

AU - Rabitsch, Wolfgang

AU - von Schmalensee, Menja

AU - Shirley, Mark

AU - Strayer, David L.

AU - Stefansson, Robert A.

AU - Smith, Kevin

AU - Booy, Olaf

N1 - Acknowledgements This paper arose from a workshop of the Invasion Dynamics Network (InDyNet) in Berlin in 2018, funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) Grant JE 288/8-1, which included a Mercator Fellowship for DLS. Additional support was received through DFG Grants JE 288/9- 1 and JE 288/9-2 to JMJ, the G.E. Hutchinson Chair to DLS and the project ‘‘Capacity Building Neobiota’’ (Austrian Federal Ministry for Sustainability and Tourism) to WR. AN, PP and JP were supported by long-term research development project no. RVO 67985939, project 17-19025S and EXPRO grant 19-28807X (Czech Science Foundation). IJ was supported by the J. E. Purkyneˇ Fellowship of the Czech Academy of Sciences. We also thank the referees for this paper for their critical and constructive comments.

PY - 2020/9/1

Y1 - 2020/9/1

N2 - Managing the impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) is a great societal challenge. A wide variety of terms have been used to describe the management of invasive alien species and the sequence in which they might be applied. This variety and lack of consistency creates uncertainty in the presentation and description of management in policy, science and practice. Here we expand on the existing description of the invasion process to develop an IAS management framework. We define the different forms of active management using a novel approach based on changes in species status, avoiding the need for stand-alone descriptions of management types, and provide a complete set of potential management activities. We propose a standardised set of management terminology as an emergent feature of this framework. We identified eight key forms of management: (1) pathway management, (2) interception, (3) limits to keeping, (4) secure keeping, (5) eradication, (6) complete reproductive removal, (7) containment and (8) suppression. We recognise four associated terms: prevention; captive management; rapid eradication; and long-term management, and note the use of impact mitigation and restoration as associated forms of management. We discuss the wider use of this framework and the supporting activities required to ensure management is well-targeted, cost-effective and makes best use of limited resources.

AB - Managing the impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) is a great societal challenge. A wide variety of terms have been used to describe the management of invasive alien species and the sequence in which they might be applied. This variety and lack of consistency creates uncertainty in the presentation and description of management in policy, science and practice. Here we expand on the existing description of the invasion process to develop an IAS management framework. We define the different forms of active management using a novel approach based on changes in species status, avoiding the need for stand-alone descriptions of management types, and provide a complete set of potential management activities. We propose a standardised set of management terminology as an emergent feature of this framework. We identified eight key forms of management: (1) pathway management, (2) interception, (3) limits to keeping, (4) secure keeping, (5) eradication, (6) complete reproductive removal, (7) containment and (8) suppression. We recognise four associated terms: prevention; captive management; rapid eradication; and long-term management, and note the use of impact mitigation and restoration as associated forms of management. We discuss the wider use of this framework and the supporting activities required to ensure management is well-targeted, cost-effective and makes best use of limited resources.

KW - Terminology

KW - Management

KW - Prevention

KW - Containment

KW - Eradication

KW - Removal

KW - Keeping

U2 - 10.1007/s10530-020-02298-2

DO - 10.1007/s10530-020-02298-2

M3 - Article

SN - 1387-3547

VL - 22

SP - 2633

EP - 2645

JO - Biological Invasions

JF - Biological Invasions

IS - 9

ER -

A proposed unified framework to describe the management of biological invasions

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this