The recorded economic costs of alien invasive species in Italy

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.

Download Full-text

The economic costs of biological invasions in Brazil: a first assessment

NeoBiota ◽

10.3897/neobiota.67.59185 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 67 ◽

pp. 349-374 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

José Ricardo Pires Adelino ◽

Gustavo Heringer ◽

Christophe Diagne ◽

Franck Courchamp ◽

Lucas Del Bianco Faria ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Biological Invasions ◽

Alien Species ◽

Invasive Alien Species ◽

Global Environmental Change ◽

Economic Cost ◽

Well Being ◽

Ecological Impacts ◽

Economic Losses ◽

Economic Costs ◽

Economic Sectors

Biological invasions are one of the leading causes of global environmental change and their impacts can affect biodiversity, ecosystem services, human health and the economy. Yet, the understanding on the impacts of invasive alien species is still limited and mostly related to alien species outbreaks and losses in agricultural yield, followed by the understanding of the ecological impacts on natural systems. Notably, the economic impacts of biological invasions have rarely been quantified. Brazil has at least 1214 known alien species from which 460 are recognized as invasive alien species. Still, there are no comprehensive estimates of the cost of their impact and management. Here, we aimed at filling this gap by providing a comprehensive estimate of the economic cost of biological invasions in Brazil. In order to quantify these costs for species, ecosystems and human well-being we used the InvaCost database which is the first global compilation of the economic costs of biological invasions. We found that Brazil reportedly spent a minimum of USD 105.53 billions over 35 years (1984–2019), with an average spent of USD 3.02 (± 9.8) billions per year. Furthermore, USD 104.33 billion were due to damages and losses caused by invaders, whereas only USD 1.19 billion were invested in their management (prevention, control or eradication). We also found that recorded costs were unevenly distributed across ecosystems, and socio-economic sectors, and were rarely evaluated and published. We found that the economic costs with losses and damages were substantially greater than those used for prevention, control or eradication of IAS. Since our data show costs reported in Brazil for only 16 invasive alien species, our estimates are likely a conservative minimum of the actual economic costs of biological invasions in Brazil. Taken together, they indicate that invasive alien species are an important cause of economic losses and that Brazil has mostly opted for paying for the damage incurred by biological invasions rather than investing in preventing them from happening.

Download Full-text

Economic costs of invasive alien species in Mexico

NeoBiota ◽

10.3897/neobiota.67.63846 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 67 ◽

pp. 459-483 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Axel Eduardo Rico-Sánchez ◽

Phillip J. Haubrock ◽

Ross N. Cuthbert ◽

Elena Angulo ◽

Liliana Ballesteros-Mejia ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Alien Species ◽

Invasive Alien Species ◽

Economic Cost ◽

Biodiversity Loss ◽

Economic Costs ◽

Natural Protected Areas ◽

Agriculture Sector ◽

Management Actions ◽

Terrestrial Environments ◽

Negative Impacts

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.

Download Full-text

InvaCost, a public database of the economic costs of biological invasions worldwide

Scientific Data ◽

10.1038/s41597-020-00586-z ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

C. Diagne ◽

B. Leroy ◽

R. E. Gozlan ◽

A.-C. Vaissière ◽

C. Assailly ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Biological Invasions ◽

Public Awareness ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Economic Cost ◽

Global Scale ◽

Research Management ◽

Economic Losses ◽

Economic Costs ◽

Cost Estimates ◽

Data Validity

Abstract Biological invasions are responsible for tremendous impacts globally, including huge economic losses and management expenditures. Efficiently mitigating this major driver of global change requires the improvement of public awareness and policy regarding its substantial impacts on our socio-ecosystems. One option to contribute to this overall objective is to inform people on the economic costs linked to these impacts; however, until now, a reliable synthesis of invasion costs has never been produced at a global scale. Here, we introduce InvaCost as the most up-to-date, comprehensive, harmonised and robust compilation and description of economic cost estimates associated with biological invasions worldwide. We have developed a systematic, standardised methodology to collect information from peer-reviewed articles and grey literature, while ensuring data validity and method repeatability for further transparent inputs. Our manuscript presents the methodology and tools used to build and populate this living and publicly available database. InvaCost provides an essential basis (2419 cost estimates currently compiled) for worldwide research, management efforts and, ultimately, for data-driven and evidence-based policymaking.

Download Full-text

Warming mediates intraspecific multiple predator effects from an invasive crustacean

Marine Biology ◽

10.1007/s00227-021-03840-z ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 168 (3) ◽

Author(s):

Ross N. Cuthbert ◽

Ryan J. Wasserman ◽

Tatenda Dalu ◽

Elizabeta Briski

Keyword(s):

Alien Species ◽

Trophic Interactions ◽

Invasive Alien Species ◽

Ecological Impacts ◽

Feeding Rates ◽

Functional Responses ◽

Multiple Predator Effects ◽

Predator Interactions ◽

The Impact ◽

Predator Effects

AbstractInvasive alien species impacts might be mediated by environmental factors such as climatic warming. For invasive predators, multiple predator interactions could also exacerbate or dampen ecological impacts. These effects may be especially pronounced in highly diverse coastal ecosystems that are prone to profound and rapid regime shifts. We examine emergent effects of warming on the strength of intraspecific multiple predator effects from a highly successful invasive gammarid Gammarus tigrinus, using a functional response approach towards larval chironomids (feeding rates under different prey densities). Single predator maximum feeding rates were three-times higher at 24 °C compared to 18 °C overall, with potentially prey destabilising type II functional responses exhibited. However, pairs of gammarids exhibited intraspecific multiple predator effects that were in turn mediated by temperature regime, whereby synergisms were found at the lower temperature (i.e. positive non-trophic interactions) and antagonisms detected at the higher temperature (i.e. negative non-trophic interactions) under high prey densities. Accordingly, warming scenarios may worsen the impact of this invasive alien species, yet implications of temperature change are dependent on predator–predator interactions. Emergent effects between abiotic and biotic factors should be considered in ecological impact predictions across habitat types for invasive alien species.

Download Full-text

Economic impact of invasive alien species in Argentina: a first national synthesis

NeoBiota ◽

10.3897/neobiota.67.63208 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 67 ◽

pp. 329-348 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Virginia G. Duboscq-Carra ◽

Romina D. Fernandez ◽

Phillip J. Haubrock ◽

Romina D. Dimarco ◽

Elena Angulo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Alien Species ◽

Agricultural Sector ◽

Invasive Alien Species ◽

National Level ◽

Economic Cost ◽

Well Being ◽

Economic Costs ◽

Natural Ecosystems ◽

Actual Distribution ◽

Terrestrial Environments

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.

Download Full-text

Economic costs of invasive alien species across Europe

NeoBiota ◽

10.3897/neobiota.67.58196 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 67 ◽

pp. 153-190 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Phillip J. Haubrock ◽

Anna J. Turbelin ◽

Ross N. Cuthbert ◽

Ana Novoa ◽

Nigel G. Taylor ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Alien Species ◽

Invasive Alien Species ◽

Economic Impacts ◽

Research Effort ◽

Temporal Trends ◽

Ecological Impacts ◽

European Countries ◽

Damage Costs ◽

Taxonomic Groups ◽

The Uk

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.

Download Full-text

The ecology of ponds in the context of human activity and geography – environmental DNA and beyond

ARPHA Conference Abstracts ◽

10.3897/aca.4.e64950 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 4 ◽

Author(s):

Karolina Bacela-Spychalska ◽

Annette Taugbøl ◽

Wiesław Babik ◽

Maciej Pabijan ◽

David Strand ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Alien Species ◽

Invasive Alien Species ◽

Environmental Dna ◽

Genomic Variation ◽

Genomic Diversity ◽

Parasitic Fungus ◽

Detailed Knowledge ◽

Geographic Regions ◽

The Impact ◽

Pond Ecosystems

Pond ecosystems are hotspots of freshwater biodiversity, often containing many rare and protected species that are not commonly found elsewhere (Harper et al. 2018;Harper et al. 2019). However, even if they constitute c.a. 30% of freshwaters by area, still not enough effort has been put into pond monitoring and management and pond ecosystems are hence relatively poorly understood. Results of ECOPOND project will lead to add valuable knowledge upon pond diversity in geographic gradient taking for consideration human impact by comparing rural and urban areas. The sample design in ECOPOND includes six geographic regions, spanning from the south of Poland to the middle of Norway, where we will sample five replicates of urban and rural ponds in close geographic proximity, making it possible to test the impact of urbanization on biodiversity and biotic homogenization across latitude. We will sample all ponds at spring and late summer, making it possible to assess also seasonality in biodiversity. ECOPOND will utilize environmental DNA and RNA to perform biodiversity screening. The extracted eDNA and eRNA fragments will be amplified with the use of several selected markers for vertebrates, invertebrates, fungi and bacteria. Comparisons between eDNA and eRNA metabarcoding are hypothesized to allow inference between present and past diversity, as eRNA is thought to be only available from live organisms in the community. Moreover, ECOPOND aims at testing the effects of selected invasives species that can have on whole ecosystems. By sampling a range of biotic and abiotic parameters describing studied ponds, we will incorporate the available data for the ponds and employ occupancy modelling methods to assess the habitat preferences of selected invasive alien species. Then we will develop a method that can contribute towards an earlywarning system of evaluating threats to ecosystem status. One of the focus species will be the parasitic fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd), an infectious fungal pathogen that has caused a number of amphibian declines and extinctions. The European amphibians seem less affected by the parasite at present. However, the fungi could be a direct driver of reduced genetic variation due to selection, or directly reduce the infected amphibian’s overall fitness by reducing the microbiotic diversity on their skin, which in many cases acts as a second immune system. ECOPOND will therefore provide data on genomic variation (using RADseq) for two amphibian species: the smooth newt (Lissotriton vulgaris) and the common toad (Bufo bufo). We will investigate populations of these species inhabiting ponds that are infected and not infected by Bd as well as collect data on their skin microbes (identified using metabarcoding). We will also contrast the genomic diversity between the replicated urban/rural setup and look for repeatable genomic changes. This setup will also be compared for the genomic variation for a potential native prey, the blue-tailed dragonfly, as will ponds with and without fish and/or amphibians (possibly also comparing between native and IAS top-predators) in order to look for predatory selective sweeps in the genome and transcriptome (experimental setup). All ponds will also be analyzed for over 20 water quality parameters and include data on a range of site characteristics that will be used as explanatory variables in all models. ECOPOND will compare large datasets across large geographic regions and will provide detailed knowledge of biodiversity patterns in vertebrates, invertebrates, fungal and microbial species, as well as genomic composition and skin biodiversity for animals inhabiting the same ponds set in an urban context. As a total, ECOPOND will obtain data on the location and status of biodiversity interests, gather data that can help in preventing the establishment of invasive alien species, and eradicating or controlling species that have already become established. And finally, ECOPOND will work closely with stakeholders and develop statistical techniques that can be used for monitoring, detection and protection of biodiversity.

Download Full-text

Aliens in the Aegean – a sea under siege (ALAS)

Research Ideas and Outcomes ◽

10.3897/rio.6.e53057 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 6 ◽

Author(s):

Stelios Katsanevakis ◽

Konstantinos Tsirintanis ◽

Maria Sini ◽

Vasilis Gerovasileiou ◽

Nikoletta Koukourouvli

Keyword(s):

Remote Sensing ◽

Invasive Species ◽

High Resolution ◽

Alien Species ◽

Invasive Alien Species ◽

Aegean Sea ◽

Ecological Impacts ◽

Cumulative Impacts ◽

Cumulative Impact ◽

Marine Habitats

ALAS aims to fill knowledge gaps on the impacts of marine alien species in the Aegean Sea, and support marine managers and policy makers in prioritizing mitigation actions. The project will focus on under-studied alien-native interactions, priority and vulnerable habitats (such as shallow forests of canopy algae and underwater caves), and apply a multitude of approaches. It will apply a standardized, quantitative method for mapping Cumulative IMpacts of invasive Alien species on marine ecosystems (CIMPAL), according to which cumulative impact scores are estimated on the basis of the distributions of invasive species and ecosystems, and both the reported magnitude of ecological impacts and the strength of such evidence. Towards that direction, ALAS will improve our knowledge base and compile the needed information to estimate CIMPAL by (1) conducting a series of field experiments and surveys to investigate the impacts of selected invasive alien species on marine habitats, (2) producing high-resolution habitat maps in the coastal zone, refining the results of previous research efforts through fieldwork, remote sensing and satellite imaging, (3) producing species distribution models for all invasive species, based on extensive underwater surveys for the collection of new data and integrating all existing information. ALAS will incorporate skills and analyses in novel ways and provide high-resolution results at a large scale; couple classic and novel tools and follow a trans-disciplinary approach, combining knowledge from the fields of invasion biology, conservation biology, biogeography, fisheries science, marine ecology, remote sensing, statistical modelling; conduct for the first time in the Aegean Sea a comprehensive, high-resolution analysis of cumulative impacts of invasive alien species; and report results in formats appropriate for decision-makers and society, thus transferring research-based knowledge to inform and influence policy decisions.

Download Full-text

Managing alien bird species: Time to move beyond “100 of the worst” lists?

Bird Conservation International ◽

10.1017/s0959270915000167 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 26 (2) ◽

pp. 154-163 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

SABRINA KUMSCHICK ◽

TIM M. BLACKBURN ◽

DAVID M. RICHARDSON

Keyword(s):

Invasive Species ◽

Alien Species ◽

Expert Opinion ◽

Bird Species ◽

Alien Invasive Species ◽

Common Myna ◽

Acridotheres Tristis ◽

Pycnonotus Cafer ◽

Selection Of Species ◽

The Impact

SummaryAlien species can cause severe impacts in their introduced ranges and management is challenging due to the large number of such species and the diverse nature and context of their impacts. Lists of the most harmful species, like the “100 of the World’s Worst” list collated by the Invasive Species Specialist Group of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) or the “100 of the Worst” invaders in Europe collated by the Delivering Alien Invasive Species Inventories in Europe (DAISIE) project, raise awareness about these impacts among the public, and can guide management decisions. Such lists are mainly based on expert opinion, but in recent years a more objective comparison of impacts has become possible, even between highly diverse taxa. In this study, we use a semi-quantitative generic impact scoring system to assess impacts of the three birds listed among the “100 of the World’s Worst” IUCN list (IUCN100) and the four birds on the list of “100 of the Worst” European invaders by DAISIE (DAISIE100) and to compare their impacts with those of other alien birds not present on the respective lists. We found that generally, both lists include some of the species with the highest impacts in the respective regions (global or Europe), and these species therefore deserve the dubious honour of being listed among the “worst”. However, there are broad overlaps between some species with regards to the impact mechanisms and the related issues of invasions, especially those of the Common Myna Acridotheres tristis and Red-vented Bulbul Pycnonotus cafer on the IUCN100, are very similar which might not warrant listing both species. To make the selection of species on such lists more transparent we suggest moving beyond lists based on expert opinion to a more transparent and defendable system for listing alien species based on published records of their impacts and related mechanisms.

Download Full-text