Decision tools for managing biological invasions: existing biases and future needs

被引:49
|
作者
Dana, Elias D. [1 ]
Jeschke, Jonathan M. [2 ]
Garcia-de-Lomas, Juan [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Almeria, Grp Invest, Transferencia I D Recursos Nat, Almeria, Spain
[2] Tech Univ Munich, Dept Ecol & Ecosyst Management, D-80290 Munich, Germany
[3] Univ Cadiz, Dept Biol, Cadiz, Spain
关键词
Biological invasions; cost-benefit; cost-efficiency; decision-making tools; management; INVASIVENESS SCREENING TOOL; WEED RISK-ASSESSMENT; MULTICRITERIA METHODS; OPTIMAL ALLOCATION; COST-BENEFIT; FUZZY AHP; CONSERVATION; MANAGEMENT; SPREAD; SYSTEMS;
D O I
10.1017/S0030605312001263
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
The increasing number of invasive species and their effects on wildlife conservation, together with a lack of public resources, make it necessary to prioritize management actions. In practice, management decisions are often reached on the basis of subjective reasoning rather than scientific evidence. To develop a more evidence-based and efficient management of biological invasions, decision tools (e.g. multi-criteria frameworks) that help managers prioritize actions most efficiently are key. In this paper we review to what degree such decision tools are currently available. We used a literature search to identify relevant studies. Our analysis indicates that available studies are largely biased towards risk analysis and that only a few authors have proposed cost-benefit or multi-criteria frameworks for decision making. Until now, these frameworks have only been applied at limited regional scales but they could be applied more widely. Our review also shows critical biases in the geographical focus, habitats, and taxonomic groups of available studies. Most studies have focused on Europe, North America or Australia; other continents have largely been ignored. The majority of studies have focused on terrestrial plants; other habitats and taxonomic groups have been poorly covered. Most studies have focused on a single invasive species but practical management tools should consider a wide variety of invaders. We conclude with suggestions for developing improved decision tools.
引用
收藏
页码:56 / 63
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Managing biological invasions in urban environments with the acceptance sampling approach
    Yemshanov, Denys
    Haight, Robert G.
    Chen, Cuicui
    Liu, Ning
    MacQuarrie, Christian J. K.
    Koch, Frank H.
    Venette, Robert
    Ryall, Krista
    PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (08):
  • [22] Managing Existing Bridges - On the Brink of an Exciting Future
    Hajdin, R.
    MAINTENANCE, SAFETY, RISK, MANAGEMENT AND LIFE-CYCLE PERFORMANCE OF BRIDGES, 2018, : 70 - 87
  • [23] Architectural Design Decision: Existing Models and Tools
    Shahin, Mojtaba
    Liang, Peng
    Khayyambashi, Mohammad Reza
    2009 JOINT WORKING IEEE/IFIP CONFERENCE ON SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE AND EUROPEAN CONFERENCE ON SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE, 2009, : 293 - 296
  • [24] Computer-based tools for decision support in agroforestry: Current state and future needs
    Ellis, EA
    Bentrup, G
    Schoeneberger, MM
    AGROFORESTRY SYSTEMS, 2004, 61-2 (01) : 401 - 421
  • [25] Computer-based tools for decision support in agroforestry: Current state and future needs
    E.A. Ellis
    G. Bentrup
    M.M. Schoeneberger
    Agroforestry Systems, 2004, 61-62 : 401 - 421
  • [26] Planted forests and invasive alien trees in Europe: A Code for managing existing and future plantings to mitigate the risk of negative impacts from invasions
    Brundu, Giuseppe
    Richardson, David M.
    NEOBIOTA, 2016, (30) : 5 - 47
  • [27] MANAGING BIOLOGICAL INVASIONS: THE IMPACT OF EXOTIC DISEASES ON PLANT COMMUNITIES IN AUSTRALIA
    Summerell, Brett A.
    ANNALS OF THE MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN, 2017, 102 (02) : 324 - 330
  • [28] A scenario-guided strategy for the future management of biological invasions
    Roura-Pascual, Nuria
    Saul, Wolf-Christian
    Perez-Granados, Cristian
    Rutting, Lucas
    Peterson, Garry D.
    Latombe, Guillaume
    Essl, Franz
    Adriaens, Tim
    Aldridge, David C.
    Bacher, Sven
    Bernardo-Madrid, Ruben
    Brotons, Lluis
    Diaz, Francois
    Gallardo, Belinda
    Genovesi, Piero
    Golivets, Marina
    Gonzalez-Moreno, Pablo
    Hall, Marcus
    Kutlesa, Petra
    Lenzner, Bernd
    Liu, Chunlong
    Pagitz, Konrad
    Pastor, Teresa
    Rabitsch, Wolfgang
    Robertson, Peter
    Roy, Helen E.
    Seebens, Hanno
    Solarz, Wojciech
    Starfinger, Uwe
    Tanner, Rob
    Vila, Montserrat
    Leung, Brian
    Garcia-Lozano, Carla
    Jeschke, Jonathan M.
    FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, 2024, 22 (04)
  • [29] Review of Existing Energy Retrofit Decision Tools for Homeowners
    Seddiki, Mohammed
    Bennadji, Amar
    Laing, Richard
    Gray, David
    Alabid, Jamal M.
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2021, 13 (18)
  • [30] Improving wheelchair prescription: an analysis of user needs and existing tools
    Moody, Louise
    Woodcock, Andree
    Heelis, Mike
    Chichi, Cynthia
    Fielden, Simon
    Stefanov, Dimitar
    WORK-A JOURNAL OF PREVENTION ASSESSMENT & REHABILITATION, 2012, 41 : 1980 - 1984