Olaf Booy

GB Non-native Species Information Portal: documenting the arrival of non-native species in Britain

Abstract Information on non-native species (NNS) is often scattered among a multitude of sources, such as regional and national databases, peer-reviewed and grey literature, unpublished research projects, institutional datasets and with taxonomic experts. Here we report on the development of a database designed for the collation of information in Britain. The project involved working with volunteer experts to populate a database of NNS (hereafter called “the species register”). Each species occupies a row within the database with information on aspects of the species’ biology such as environment (marine, freshwater, terrestrial etc.), functional type (predator, parasite etc.), habitats occupied in the invaded range (using EUNIS classification), invasion pathways, establishment status in Britain and impacts. The information is delivered through the Great Britain Non-Native Species Information Portal hosted by the Non-Native Species Secretariat. By the end of 2011 there were 1958 established NNS in Britain. There has been a dramatic increase over time in the rate of NNS arriving in Britain and those becoming established. The majority of established NNS are higher plants (1,376 species). Insects are the next most numerous group (344 species) followed by non-insect invertebrates (158 species), vertebrates (50 species), algae (24 species) and lower plants (6 species). Inventories of NNS are seen as an essential tool in the management of biological invasions. The use of such lists is diverse and far-reaching. However, the increasing number of new arrivals highlights both the dynamic nature of invasions and the importance of updating NNS inventories.

Assessing patterns in introduction pathways of alien species by linking major invasion data bases

1. Preventing the arrival of invasive alien species (IAS) is a major priority in managing biological invasions. However, information on introduction pathways is currently scattered across many data bases that often use different categorisations to describe similar pathways. This hampers the identification and prioritisation of pathways to meet the main targets of recent environmental policies. 2. Therefore, we integrate pathway information from two major IAS data bases, IUCNs Global Invasive Species Database (GISD) and the DAISIE European Invasive Alien Species Gateway, applying the new standard categorisation scheme recently adopted by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). We describe the process of mapping pathways from the individual data bases to the CBD scheme and provide, for the first time, detailed descriptions of the standard pathway categories. The combined data set includes pathway information for 8323 species across major taxonomic groups (plants, vertebrates, invertebrates, algae, fungi, other) and environments (terrestrial, freshwater, marine). 3. We analyse the data for major patterns in the introduction pathways, highlighting that the specific research question and context determines whether the combined or an individual data set is the better information source for such analyses. While the combined data set provides an improved basis for direction-setting in invasion management policies on the global level, individual data sets often better reflect regional idiosyncrasies. The combined data set should thus be considered in addition to, rather than replacing, existing individual data sets. 4.Pathway patterns derived from the combined and individual data sets show that the intentional pathways ‘Escape’ and ‘Release’ are most important for plants and vertebrates, while for invertebrates, algae, fungi and micro-organisms unintentional transport pathways prevail. Differences in pathway proportions among marine, freshwater and terrestrial environments are much less pronounced. The results also show that IAS with highest impacts in Europe are on average associated with a greater number of pathways than other alien species and are more frequently introduced both intentionally and unintentionally. 5. Synthesis and applications. Linking data bases on invasive alien species by harmonising and consolidating their pathway information is essential to turn dispersed data into useful knowledge. The standard pathway categorisation scheme recently adopted by the Convention on Biological Diversity may be crucial to facilitate this process. Our study demonstrates the value of integrating major invasion data bases to help managers and policymakers reach robust conclusions about patterns in introduction pathways and thus aid effective prevention and prioritisation in invasion management.

Developing a framework of minimum standards for the risk assessment of alien species

1. Biological invasions are a threat to biodiversity, society and the economy. There is an urgent need to provide evidence-based assessments of the risks posed by inva-sive alien species (IAS) to prioritize action. Risk assessments underpin IAS policies in many ways: informing legislation; providing justification of restrictions in trade or consumer activities; prioritizing surveillance and rapid response. There are benefits to ensuring consistency in content of IAS risk assessments globally, and this can be achieved by providing a framework of minimum standards as a checklist for quality assurance. 2. From a review of existing risk assessment protocols, and with reference to the r equirements of the EU Regulation on IAS (1143/2014) and international agreements including the World Trade Organisation, Convention on Biological Diversity and International Plant Protection Convention, coupled with consensus methods, we identified and agreed upon 14 minimum standards (attributes) a risk-assessment scheme should include. 3. The agreed minimum standards were as follows: (1) basic species description; (2) likelihood of invasion; (3) distribution, spread and impacts; (4) assessment of intro-duction pathways; (5) assessment of impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems; (6) Assessment of impact on ecosystem services; (7) assessment of socio-economic impacts; (8) consideration of status (threatened or protected) of species or habitat under threat; (9) assessment of effects of future climate change; (10) completion possible even when there is a lack of information; (11) documents information sources; (12) provides a summary in a consistent and interpretable form; (13) includes uncertainty; (14) includes quality assurance. In deriving these minimum standards, gaps in knowledge required for completing risk assessments and the scope of exist-ing risk assessment protocols were revealed, most notably in relation to assessing benefits, socio-economic impacts and impacts on ecosystem services but also inclu-sion of consideration of climate change. 4. Policy implications. We provide a checklist of components that should be within in-vasive alien species risk assessments and recommendations to develop risk assess-ments to meet these proposed minimum standards. Although inspired by implementation of the European Union Regulation on invasive alien species, and as such developed specifically within a European context, the derived framework and minimum standards could be applied globally.

Risk management to prioritise the eradication of new and emerging invasive non-native species

Abstract Robust tools are needed to prioritise the management of invasive non-native species (INNS). Risk assessment is commonly used to prioritise INNS, but fails to take into account the feasibility of management. Risk management provides a structured evaluation of management options, but has received little attention to date. We present a risk management scheme to assess the feasibility of eradicating INNS that can be used, in conjunction with existing risk assessment schemes, to support prioritisation. The Non-Native Risk Management scheme (NNRM) can be applied to any predefined area and any taxa. It uses semi-quantitative response and confidence scores to assess seven key criteria: Effectiveness, Practicality, Cost, Impact, Acceptability, Window of opportunity and Likelihood of re-invasion. Scores are elicited using expert judgement, supported by available evidence, and consensus-building methods. We applied the NNRM to forty-one INNS that threaten Great Britain (GB). Thirty-three experts provided scores, with overall feasibility of eradication assessed as ‘very high’ (8 species), ‘high’ (6), ‘medium’ (8), ‘low’ (10) and ‘very low’ (9). The feasibility of eradicating terrestrial species was higher than aquatic species. Lotic freshwater and marine species scored particularly low. Combining risk management and existing risk assessment scores identified six established species as priorities for eradication. A further six species that are not yet established were identified as priorities for eradication on arrival as part of contingency planning. The NNRM is one of the first INNS risk management schemes that can be used with existing risk assessments to prioritise INNS eradication in any area.

Impact of Biological Invasions on Infrastructure

Non-native species cause significant damage to hard infrastructure across the globe, affecting buildings, transportation, water and energy supplies. This review provides a broad account of non-native species impacts on infrastructure with links, directly or indirectly, to ecosystem services where relevant. The impacts of non-native species on hard infrastructure are discussed, with examples taken from around the world of some of the most prominent impacts. Of the non-native species listed as among the world’s worst 100 species by the IUCN, 14 are recognised as having impacts on hard infrastructure, with damage to buildings being most common (9 species) followed by energy and water (7 species each) and finally transport (5 species). Several species affect more than one infrastructure type, particularly for water and hydroelectric energy infrastructure. Using Great Britain as a case study, the economic costs arising from infrastructure impacts by non-native species are reviewed. Overall, a conservative estimate of the direct cost of non-native species to infrastructure in 2010 was approximately £310 million per annum, comprising 18 % of the overall cost of non-native species to Great Britain (£1.7billion).