Biological invasions are a major concern in conservation, especially because global transport of species is still increasing rapidly. Conservationists hope to anticipate and thus prevent future invasions by identifying and regulating potentially invasive species through species risk assessments and international trade regulations. Among many introduction pathways of non-native species, horticulture is a particularly important driver of plant invasions. In recent decades, the horticultural industry expanded globally and changed structurally through the emergence of new distribution channels, including internet trade (e-commerce). Using an automated search algorithm, we surveyed, on a daily basis, e-commerce trade on 10 major online auction sites (including eBay) of approximately three-fifths of the world's spermatophyte flora. Many recognized invasive plant species (>500 species) (i.e., species associated with ecological or socio-economic problems) were traded daily worldwide on the internet. A markedly higher proportion of invasive than non-invasive species were available online. Typically, for a particular plant family, 30-80% of recognized invasive species were detected on an auction site, but only a few percentages of all species in the plant family were detected on a site. Families that were more traded had a higher proportion of invasive species than families that were less traded. For woody species, there was a significant positive relationship between the number of regions where a species was sold and the number of regions where it was invasive. Our results indicate that biosecurity is not effectively regulating online plant trade. In the future, automated monitoring of e-commerce may help prevent the spread of invasive species, provide information on emerging trade connectivity across national borders, and be used in horizon scanning exercises for early detection of new species and their geographic source areas in international trade.

Understanding the diverging opinions of academic experts, stakeholders and the public is important for effective conservation management. This is especially so when a consensus is needed for action to minimize future risks but the knowledge upon which to base this action is uncertain or missing. How to manage non-native, invasive species (NIS) is an interesting case in point: the issue has long been controversial among stakeholders, but publicly visible, major disagreement among experts is recent.To characterize the multitude of experts' understanding and valuation of non-native, NIS we performed structured qualitative interviews with 26 academic experts, 13 of whom were invasion biologists and 13 landscape experts. Within both groups, thinking varied widely, not only about basic concepts (e.g., non-native, invasive) but also about their valuation of effects of NIS. The divergent opinions among experts, regarding both the overall severity of the problem in Europe and its importance for ecosystem services, contrasted strongly with the apparent consensus that emerges from scientific synthesis articles and policy documents. We postulate that the observed heterogeneity of expert judgments is related to three major factors: (1) diverging conceptual understandings, (2) lack of empirical information and high scientific uncertainties due to complexities and contingencies of invasion processes, and (3) missing deliberation of values. Based on theory from science studies, we interpret the notion of an NIS as a boundary object, i.e., concepts that have a similar but not identical meaning to different groups of experts and stakeholders. This interpretative flexibility of a concept can facilitate interaction across diverse groups but bears the risk of introducing misunderstandings. An alternative to seeking consensus on exact definitions and risk assessments would be for invasive species experts to acknowledge uncertainties and engage transparently with stakeholders and the public in deliberations about conflicting opinions, taking the role of honest brokers of policy alternatives rather than of issue advocates. NeoBiotaFranziska Humair et al. / NeoBiota 20: 1-30 (2014) 2

Horticultural trade is recognized as an important vector in promoting the introduction and dispersal of harmful non-native plant species. Understanding horticulturists' perceptions of biotic invasions is therefore important for effective species risk management. We conducted a large-scale survey among horticulturists in Switzerland (N = 625) to reveal horticulturists' risk and benefit perceptions from ornamental plant species, their attitudes towards the regulation of non-native species, as well as the factors decisive for environmental risk perceptions and horticulturists' willingness to engage in risk mitigation behavior. Our results suggest that perceived familiarity with a plant species had a mitigating effect on risk perceptions, while perceptions of risk increased if a species was perceived to be non-native. However, perceptions of the non-native origin of ornamental plant species were often not congruent with scientific classifications. Horticulturists displayed positive attitudes towards mandatory trade regulations, particularly towards those targeted against known invasive species. Participants also expressed their willingness to engage in risk mitigation behavior. Yet, positive effects of risk perceptions on the willingness to engage in risk mitigation behavior were counteracted by perceptions of benefits from selling non-native ornamental species. Our results indicate that the prevalent practice in risk communication to emphasize the non-native origin of invasive species can be ineffective, especially in the case of species of high importance to local industries and people. This is because familiarity with these plants can reduce risk perceptions and be in conflict with scientific concepts of non-nativeness. In these cases, it might be more effective to focus communication on well-documented environmental impacts of harmful species.

Building relationships with stakeholders involved in species introductions is increasingly considered as an effective means to mitigate invasion risks. The horticultural industry is of particular importance to the regulation of alien plants. This paper presents the initial experiences with a recently implemented environmental policy called ‘Duty to Inform’ which aims to limit the risk of plant invasions through alien horticultural plants in Switzerland. The Duty to Inform requires horticulturalists to inform their customers about risks of black‐listed plants and watch list plants. In a joint effort with the Swiss horticultural industry and Swiss authorities, the authors examined customers’ acceptance of plant labels as a means to supply information, and horticulturalists’ attitudes towards the Duty to Inform regulation, and their willingness to act pro‐environmentally. Plant labels were found to be an effective means to inform customers about plant invasion risks and appropriate handling of risk species. The results indicate that among Swiss horticulturalists the awareness of the invasive species problem and the willingness to act is high. Horticulturalists had positive attitudes towards the Duty to Inform regulation and other actions to reduce invasion risks. The authors suggest that these positive attitudes might stem from an active participation of horticulturalists in the development of invasive species regulations in Switzerland.