Forecasting potential invaders to prevent future biological invasions worldwide.

The ever-increasing and expanding globalisation of trade and transport underpins the escalating global problem of biological invasions. Developing biosecurity infrastructures is crucial to anticipate and prevent the transport and introduction of invasive alien species. Still, robust and defensible forecasts of potential invaders are rare, especially for species without known invasion history. Here, we aim to support decision-making by developing a quantitative invasion risk assessment tool based on invasion syndromes (i.e., generalising typical attributes of invasive alien species). We implemented a workflow based on 'Multiple Imputation with Chain Equation' to estimate invasion syndromes from imputed datasets of species' life-history and ecological traits and macroecological patterns. Importantly, our models disentangle the factors explaining (i) transport and introduction and (ii) establishment. We showcase our tool by modelling the invasion syndromes of 466 amphibians and reptile species with invasion history. Then, we project these models to amphibians and reptiles worldwide (16,236 species [c.76% global coverage]) to identify species with a risk of being unintentionally transported and introduced, and risk of establishing alien populations. Our invasion syndrome models showed high predictive accuracy with a good balance between specificity and generality. Unintentionally transported and introduced species tend to be common and thrive well in human-disturbed habitats. In contrast, those with established alien populations tend to be large-sized, are habitat generalists, thrive well in human-disturbed habitats, and have large native geographic ranges. We forecast that 160 amphibians and reptiles without known invasion history could be unintentionally transported and introduced in the future. Among them, 57 species have a high risk of establishing alien populations. Our reliable, reproducible, transferable, statistically robust and scientifically defensible quantitative invasion risk assessment tool is a significant new addition to the suite of decision-support tools needed for developing a future-proof preventative biosecurity globally.

Curbing the major and growing threats from invasive alien species is urgent and achievable.

Although invasive alien species have long been recognized as a major threat to nature and people, until now there has been no comprehensive global review of the status, trends, drivers, impacts, management and governance challenges of biological invasions. The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) Thematic Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and Their Control (hereafter 'IPBES invasive alien species assessment') drew on more than 13,000 scientific publications and reports in 15 languages as well as Indigenous and local knowledge on all taxa, ecosystems and regions across the globe. Therefore, it provides unequivocal evidence of the major and growing threat of invasive alien species alongside ambitious but realistic approaches to manage biological invasions. The extent of the threat and impacts has been recognized by the 143 member states of IPBES who approved the summary for policymakers of this assessment. Here, the authors of the IPBES assessment outline the main findings of the IPBES invasive alien species assessment and highlight the urgency to act now.

The rising global economic costs of invasive Aedes mosquitoes and Aedes-borne diseases.

Invasive Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus mosquitoes transmit viruses such as dengue, chikungunya and Zika, posing a huge public health burden as well as having a less well understood economic impact. We present a comprehensive, global-scale synthesis of studies reporting these economic costs, spanning 166 countries and territories over 45 years. The minimum cumulative reported cost estimate expressed in 2022 US$ was 94.7 billion, although this figure reflects considerable underreporting and underestimation. The analysis suggests a 14-fold increase in costs, with an average annual expenditure of US$ 3.1 billion, and a maximum of US$ 20.3 billion in 2013. Damage and losses were an order of magnitude higher than investment in management, with only a modest portion allocated to prevention. Effective control measures are urgently needed to safeguard global health and well-being, and to reduce the economic burden on human societies. This study fills a critical gap by addressing the increasing economic costs of Aedes and Aedes-borne diseases and offers insights to inform evidence-based policy.

Economic costs of non-native species in Türkiye: A first national synthesis.

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.

Economic costs of invasive non-native species in urban areas: An underexplored financial drain.

Urbanization is an important driver of global change associated with a set of environmental modifications that affect the introduction and distribution of invasive non-native species (species with populations transported by humans beyond their natural biogeographic range that established and are spreading in their introduced range; hereafter, invasive species). These species are recognized as a cause of large ecological and economic losses. Nevertheless, the economic impacts of these species in urban areas are still poorly understood. Here we present a synthesis of the reported economic costs of invasive species in urban areas using the global InvaCost database, and demonstrate that costs are likely underestimated. Sixty-one invasive species have been reported to cause a cumulative cost of US$ 326.7 billion in urban areas between 1965 and 2021 globally (average annual cost of US$ 5.7 billion). Class Insecta was responsible for >99 % of reported costs (US$ 324.4 billion), followed by Aves (US$ 1.4 billion), and Magnoliopsida (US$ 494 million). The reported costs were highly uneven with the sum of the five costliest species representing 80 % of reported costs. Most reported costs were a result of damage (77.3 %), principally impacting public and social welfare (77.9 %) and authorities-stakeholders (20.7 %), and were almost entirely in terrestrial environments (99.9 %). We found costs reported for 24 countries. Yet, there are 73 additional countries with no reported costs, but with occurrences of invasive species that have reported costs in other countries. Although covering a relatively small area of the Earth's surface, urban areas represent about 15 % of the total reported costs attributed to invasive species. These results highlight the conservative nature of the estimates and impacts, revealing important biases present in the evaluation and publication of reported data on costs. We emphasize the urgent need for more focused assessments of invasive species' economic impacts in urban areas.

The wild cost of invasive feral animals worldwide.

Invasive non-native species are a growing burden to economies worldwide. While domesticated animals (i.e. livestock, beasts of burden or pets) have enabled our ways of life and provide sustenance for countless individuals, they may cause substantial impacts when they escape or are released (i.e. become feral) and then become invasive with impacts. We used the InvaCost database to evaluate monetary impacts from species in the Domestic Animal Diversity Information System database. We found a total cost of $141.95 billion from only 18 invasive feral species. Invasive feral livestock incurred the highest costs at $90.03 billion, with pets contributing $50.93 billion and beasts of burden having much lower costs at $0.98 billion. Agriculture was the most affected sector at $80.79 billion, followed by the Environment ($43.44 billion), and Authorities-Stakeholders sectors ($5.52 billion). Damage costs comprised the majority ($124.94 billion), with management and mixed damage-management costs making up the rest ($9.62 and $7.38 billion, respectively). These economic impacts were observed globally, where Oceania, North America and Europe were the most impacted regions. Islands recorded a higher economic burden than continental areas, with livestock species dominating costs more on islands than mainlands compared to other feral species. The costs of invasive feral animals were on average twice higher than those of wild species. The management of invasive feral populations requires higher investment, updated regulations, and comprehensive risk assessments. These are especially complex when considering the potential conflicts arising from interventions with species that have close ties to humans. Effective communication to raise public awareness of the impacts of feral populations and appropriate legislation to prevent or control such invasive feral populations will substantially contribute to minimizing their socioeconomic and environmental impacts.

Global economic costs of alien birds.

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.

Recent advances in availability and synthesis of the economic costs of biological invasions.

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.

Invasive hematophagous arthropods and associated diseases in a changing world.

Biological invasions have increased significantly with the tremendous growth of international trade and transport. Hematophagous arthropods can be vectors of infectious and potentially lethal pathogens and parasites, thus constituting a growing threat to humans-especially when associated with biological invasions. Today, several major vector-borne diseases, currently described as emerging or re-emerging, are expanding in a world dominated by climate change, land-use change and intensive transportation of humans and goods. In this review, we retrace the historical trajectory of these invasions to better understand their ecological, physiological and genetic drivers and their impacts on ecosystems and human health. We also discuss arthropod management strategies to mitigate future risks by harnessing ecology, public health, economics and social-ethnological considerations. Trade and transport of goods and materials, including vertebrate introductions and worn tires, have historically been important introduction pathways for the most prominent invasive hematophagous arthropods, but sources and pathways are likely to diversify with future globalization. Burgeoning urbanization, climate change and the urban heat island effect are likely to interact to favor invasive hematophagous arthropods and the diseases they can vector. To mitigate future invasions of hematophagous arthropods and novel disease outbreaks, stronger preventative monitoring and transboundary surveillance measures are urgently required. Proactive approaches, such as the use of monitoring and increased engagement in citizen science, would reduce epidemiological and ecological risks and could save millions of lives and billions of dollars spent on arthropod control and disease management. Last, our capacities to manage invasive hematophagous arthropods in a sustainable way for worldwide ecosystems can be improved by promoting interactions among experts of the health sector, stakeholders in environmental issues and policymakers (e.g. the One Health approach) while considering wider social perceptions.

Economic costs of the invasive Yellow-legged hornet on honey bees.

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.

Unveiling the hidden economic toll of biological invasions in the European Union.

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.

Underexplored and growing economic costs of invasive alien trees.

The high ecological impacts of many invasive alien trees have been well documented. However, to date, we lacked synthesis of their economic impacts, hampering management actions. Here, we summarize the cost records of invasive trees to (I) identify invasive trees with cost information and their geographic locations, (II) investigate the types of costs recorded and sectors impacted by invasive trees and (III) analyze the relationships between categories of uses of invasive trees and the invasion costs attributed to these uses. We found reliable cost records only for 72 invasive trees, accumulating a reported total cost of $19.2 billion between 1960 and 2020. Agriculture was the sector with the highest cost records due to invasive trees. Most costs were incurred as resource damages and losses ($3.5 billion). Close attention to the ornamental sector is important for reducing the economic impact of invasive trees, since most invasive trees with cost records were introduced for that use. Despite massive reported costs of invasive trees, there remain large knowledge gaps on most invasive trees, sectors, and geographic scales, indicating that the real cost is severely underestimated. This highlights the need for further concerted and widely-distributed research efforts regarding the economic impact of invasive trees.

Capacity of countries to reduce biological invasions.

The extent and impacts of biological invasions on biodiversity are largely shaped by an array of socio-economic and environmental factors, which exhibit high variation among countries. Yet, a global analysis of how these factors vary across countries is currently lacking. Here, we investigate how five broad, country-specific socio-economic and environmental indices (Governance, Trade, Environmental Performance, Lifestyle and Education, Innovation) explain country-level (1) established alien species (EAS) richness of eight taxonomic groups, and (2) proactive or reactive capacity to prevent and manage biological invasions and their impacts. These indices underpin many aspects of the invasion process, including the introduction, establishment, spread and management of alien species. They are also general enough to enable a global comparison across countries, and are therefore essential for defining future scenarios for biological invasions. Models including Trade, Governance, Lifestyle and Education, or a combination of these, best explained EAS richness across taxonomic groups and national proactive or reactive capacity. Historical (1996 or averaged over 1996-2015) levels of Governance and Trade better explained both EAS richness and the capacity of countries to manage invasions than more recent (2015) levels, revealing a historical legacy with important implications for the future of biological invasions. Using Governance and Trade to define a two-dimensional socio-economic space in which the position of a country captures its capacity to address issues of biological invasions, we identified four main clusters of countries in 2015. Most countries had an increase in Trade over the past 25 years, but trajectories were more geographically heterogeneous for Governance. Declines in levels of Governance are concerning as they may be responsible for larger levels of invasions in the future. By identifying the factors influencing EAS richness and the regions most susceptible to changes in these factors, our results provide novel insights to integrate biological invasions into scenarios of biodiversity change to better inform decision-making for policy and the management of biological invasions. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11625-022-01166-3.

Economic costs of invasive rodents worldwide: the tip of the iceberg.

Background: Rodents are among the most notorious invasive alien species worldwide. These invaders have substantially impacted native ecosystems, food production and storage, local infrastructures, human health and well-being. However, the lack of standardized and understandable estimation of their impacts is a serious barrier to raising societal awareness, and hampers effective management interventions at relevant scales. Methods: Here, we assessed the economic costs of invasive alien rodents globally in order to help overcome these obstacles. For this purpose, we combined and analysed economic cost data from the InvaCost database-the most up-to-date and comprehensive synthesis of reported invasion costs-and specific complementary searches within and beyond the published literature. Results: Our conservative analysis showed that reported costs of rodent invasions reached a conservative total of US$ 3.6 billion between 1930 and 2022 (annually US$ 87.5 million between 1980 and 2022), and were significantly increasing through time. The highest cost reported was for muskrat Ondatra zibethicus (US$ 377.5 million), then unspecified Rattus spp. (US$ 327.8 million), followed by Rattus norvegicus specifically (US$ 156.6 million) and Castor canadensis (US$ 150.4 million). Of the total costs, 87% were damage-related, principally impacting agriculture and predominantly reported in Asia (60%), Europe (19%) and North America (9%). Our study evidenced obvious cost underreporting with only 99 documents gathered globally, clear taxonomic gaps, reliability issues for cost assessment, and skewed breakdowns of costs among regions, sectors and contexts. As a consequence, these reported costs represent only a very small fraction of the expected true cost of rodent invasions (e.g., using a less conservative analytic approach would have led to a global amount more than 80-times higher than estimated here). Conclusions: These findings strongly suggest that available information represents a substantial underestimation of the global costs incurred. We offer recommendations for improving estimates of costs to fill these knowledge gaps including: systematic distinction between native and invasive rodents' impacts; monetizing indirect impacts on human health; and greater integrative and concerted research effort between scientists and stakeholders. Finally, we discuss why and how this approach will stimulate and provide support for proactive and sustainable management strategies in the context of alien rodent invasions, for which biosecurity measures should be amplified globally.

Recovery of insular seabird populations years after rodent eradication.

Seabirds have been particularly affected by invasive non-native species, which has led to the implementation of numerous eradication campaigns for the conservation of these keystone and highly vulnerable species. Although the benefits of eradication of invasive non-native species for seabird conservation have been demonstrated, the recovery kinetics of different seabird populations on islands after eradication remains poorly evaluated. We conducted long-term monitoring of the number of breeding pairs of seven seabird species on a small atoll, Surprise Island, New Caledonia (southwestern tropical Pacific). Marine avifauna of the island were surveyed yearly 4 years before to 4 years after rodent eradication (conducted in 2005), and we conducted multiple one-time surveys from ∼10 years before and ∼15 years after eradication. We sought to determine how different seabird species responded to the eradication of invasive rodents in an insular environment. Three species responded positively (two- to 10-fold increase in population size) to eradication with differences in lag time and sensitivity. The number of breeding pairs increased (effect sizes = 0.49-0.95 and 0.35-0.52) for two species over 4 years post-eradication due to immigration. One species had a longer (at least 5 years) response time than all others; breeding pairs increased for over 10 years after eradication. Long-term sampling was necessary to observe the responses of the seabird populations on the island because of the delayed response of a species to eradication not visible in the first years after eradication. Our results confirmed the positive effects of eradication of invasive non-native species on seabirds and emphasize the importance of mid- and long-term pre- and posteradication surveys to decipher the mechanisms of seabird recovery and confirm the benefits of eradication for conservation purposes.

Las especies invasoras no nativas han afectados en lo particular a las aves marinas, lo que ha derivado en la implementación de numerosas campañas de eliminación para conservar estas especies importantes y muy vulnerables. Aunque se han demostrado los beneficios de la eliminación de especies invasoras no nativas para la conservación de las aves marinas, se conoce poco sobre la cinética de la recuperación de las diferentes poblaciones insulares después de la eliminación. Realizamos un monitoreo a largo plazo del número de parejas reproductoras de siete especies de aves marinas en Isla Surprise, Nueva Caledonia, un atolón pequeño en el suroeste del Pacífico tropical. Censamos anualmente la avifauna marina de la isla cuatro años antes y cuatro años después de la eliminación de roedores (realizada en 2005) y realizamos varios censos únicos de ∼10 años antes y ∼15 años después de la eliminación. Buscamos determinar cómo las diferentes especies de aves marinas respondían a la eliminación de los roedores invasores en un ambiente insular. Tres especies respondieron positivamente (un incremento poblacional de 2 a 10 veces mayor) a la eliminación con diferencias en el tiempo de desfase y en la sensibilidad. El número de parejas reproductoras incrementó (tamaños eficientes = 0.49 a 0.95 y 0.35 a 0.52) para dos especies cuatro años después de la eliminación debido a la inmigración. Una especie tuvo un tiempo de respuesta más largo (al menos cinco años) que las demás; las parejas reproductoras incrementaron más de diez años después de la eliminación. El muestreo a largo plazo fue necesario para observar las respuestas de las poblaciones de aves marinas en la isla porque una especie tuvo una respuesta retardada que no fue visible en los primeros años después de la eliminación. Nuestros resultados confirmaron los efectos positivos que tiene la eliminación de especies invasoras no nativas sobre las aves marinas y recalca la importancia de los censos a mediano y largo plazo antes y después de la eliminación para identificar los mecanismos de la recuperación poblacional y confirmar los beneficios con fines de conservación que tiene este método. Recuperación de las poblaciones de aves marinas insulares años después de la eliminación de roedores.

Economic costs of protecting islands from invasive alien species.

Biological invasions represent a key threat to insular systems and have pronounced impacts across environments and economies. The ecological impacts have received substantial focus, but the socioeconomic impacts are poorly synthesized across spatial and temporal scales. We used the InvaCost database, the most comprehensive assessment of published economic costs of invasive species, to assess economic impacts on islands worldwide. We analyzed socioeconomic costs across differing expenditure types and examined temporal trends across islands that differ in their political geography-island nation states, overseas territories, and islands of continental countries. Over US$36 billion in total costs (including damages and management) has occurred on islands from 1965 to 2020 due to invasive species' impacts. Nation states incurred the greatest total and management costs, and islands of continental countries incurred costs of similar magnitude, both far higher than those in overseas territories. Damage-loss costs were significantly lower, but with qualitatively similar patterns across differing political geographies. The predominance of management spending differs from the pattern found for most countries examined and suggests important knowledge gaps in the extent of many damage-related socioeconomic impacts. Nation states spent the greatest proportion of their gross domestic products countering these costs, at least 1 order of magnitude higher than other locations. Most costs were borne by authorities and stakeholders, demonstrating the key role of governmental and nongovernmental bodies in addressing island invasions. Temporal trends revealed cost increases across all island types, potentially reflecting efforts to tackle invasive species at larger, more socially complex scales. Nevertheless, the already high total economic costs of island invasions substantiate the role of biosecurity in reducing and preventing invasive species arrivals to reduce strains on limited financial resources and avoid threats to sustainable development goals.

Costos económicos de proteger a las islas de las especies invasoras Resumen Las invasiones biológicas representan una amenaza importante para los sistemas insulares, además de tener impactos pronunciados en el ambiente y en la economía. Los impactos ecológicos han recibido atención sustancial, mientras que los impactos socioeconómicos se encuentran pobremente sintetizados en las escalas temporales y espaciales. Usamos la base de datos InvaCost, el análisis más completo de los costos económicos de las especies invasoras, para evaluar los impactos económicos sobre las islas a nivel mundial. Analizamos los costos socioeconómicos en varios tipos de gastos y examinamos las tendencias temporales en las islas que difieren en su geografía política - islas estado-nación, territorios ultramarinos e islas de países continentales. En las islas han ocurrido gastos de más de $36 mil millones de dólares entre 1965 y 2020 debido a los impactos de las especies invasoras. Las islas estado-nación produjeron los mayores costos de manejo y el mayor total, mientras que las islas de los países continentales produjeron costos de una magnitud similar, ambas con gastos mucho más elevados que los de los territorios ultramarinos. Los costos de las pérdidas por daños fueron significativamente más bajas, aunque con patrones cualitativamente similares entre las diferentes geografías políticas. El predominio del gasto en el manejo difiere del patrón hallado en la mayoría de los países analizados y sugiere que hay vacíos importantes en el conocimiento del alcance de muchos de los impactos socioeconómicos relacionados con los daños. Las islas estado-nación gastaron la mayor proporción de su producto interno bruto en contrarrestar estos costos, al menos una orden de magnitud mayor que las otras localidades. La mayoría de los costos fueron asumidos por las autoridades y los accionistas, lo que demuestra el papel clave que tienen los organismos gubernamentales y no gubernamentales en cómo se atienden las invasiones insulares. Las tendencias temporales revelaron incrementos en el costo en todos los tipos de islas, lo que potencialmente refleja los esfuerzos por combatir a las especies invasoras a escalas más grandes y socialmente más complejas. Aun así, el elevado costo económico total de las invasiones insulares fundamenta la función que tiene la bioseguridad en la reducción y prevención de la llegada de especies invasoras para reducir presiones sobre los recursos financieros limitados y evitar amenazas para las metas de desarrollo sustentable.

The economic costs, management and regulation of biological invasions in the Nordic countries.

A collective understanding of economic impacts and in particular of monetary costs of biological invasions is lacking for the Nordic region. This paper synthesizes findings from the literature on costs of invasions in the Nordic countries together with expert elicitation. The analysis of cost data has been made possible through the InvaCost database, a globally open repository of monetary costs that allows for the use of temporal, spatial, and taxonomic descriptors facilitating a better understanding of how costs are distributed. The total reported costs of invasive species across the Nordic countries were estimated at $8.35 billion (in 2017 US$ values) with damage costs significantly outweighing management costs. Norway incurred the highest costs ($3.23 billion), followed by Denmark ($2.20 billion), Sweden ($1.45 billion), Finland ($1.11 billion) and Iceland ($25.45 million). Costs from invasions in the Nordics appear to be largely underestimated. We conclude by highlighting such knowledge gaps, including gaps in policies and regulation stemming from expert judgment as well as avenues for an improved understanding of invasion costs and needs for future research.

Building a synthesis of economic costs of biological invasions in New Zealand.

Biological invasions are a major component of anthropogenic environmental change, incurring substantial economic costs across all sectors of society and ecosystems. There have been recent syntheses of costs for a number of countries using the newly compiled InvaCost database, but New Zealand-a country renowned for its approach to invasive species management-has so far not been examined. Here we analyse reported economic damage and management costs incurred by biological invasions in New Zealand from 1968 to 2020. In total, US$69 billion (NZ$97 billion) is currently reported over this ∼50-year period, with approximately US$9 billion of this considered highly reliable, observed (c.f. projected) costs. Most (82%) of these observed economic costs are associated with damage, with comparatively little invested in management (18%). Reported costs are increasing over time, with damage averaging US$120 million per year and exceeding management expenditure in all decades. Where specified, most reported costs are from terrestrial plants and animals, with damages principally borne by primary industries such as agriculture and forestry. Management costs are more often associated with interventions by authorities and stakeholders. Relative to other countries present in the InvaCost database, New Zealand was found to spend considerably more than expected from its Gross Domestic Product on pre- and post-invasion management costs. However, some known ecologically (c.f. economically) impactful invasive species are notably absent from estimated damage costs, and management costs are not reported for a number of game animals and agricultural pathogens. Given these gaps for known and potentially damaging invaders, we urge improved cost reporting at the national scale, including improving public accessibility through increased access and digitisation of records, particularly in overlooked socioeconomic sectors and habitats. This also further highlights the importance of investment in management to curtail future damages across all sectors.

Highlighting the positive aspects of being a PhD student.

Articles about doing a PhD tend to focus on the difficulties faced by research students. Here we argue that the scientific community should also highlight the positive elements of the PhD experience.