A systematization of information on Brazilian Federal protected areas with management actions for Animal Invasive Alien Species

Guimarães, Tainah Corrêa Seabra; Schmidt, Isabel Belloni

doi:10.1016/j.pecon.2017.06.005

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although some adequate initiatives might exist, the general rule for protected areas seems to be the absence of adequate training and practical action. For animals, a recent review indicated that 87% (n=101) of the protected areas with invasive alien animal species had management recommendations in the management plan; 79% (n=81) of these had some control measures implemented (Guimarães & Schmidt 2017). However, the authors considered that most of the recommendations were generic, and none of the plans had specific IAS control programs (Guimarães & Schmidt 2017).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For animals, a recent review indicated that 87% (n=101) of the protected areas with invasive alien animal species had management recommendations in the management plan; 79% (n=81) of these had some control measures implemented (Guimarães & Schmidt 2017). However, the authors considered that most of the recommendations were generic, and none of the plans had specific IAS control programs (Guimarães & Schmidt 2017). For both animals and plants, we see a similar pattern: generic guidelines for invasive alien species, low level of knowledge and training, and a small number of control actions in place.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…ICMBio is responsible for national protected areas. Although the presence of many invasive alien species in many protected areas throughout the country has been widely recorded (Sampaio & Schmidt 2013;Ziller & Dechoum 2013;Guimarães & Schmidt 2017), ICMBio does not have a department in charge of practical management. Practical actions therefore are difficult to implement even by those willing to act due to the current institutional framework of the organization.…”

Section: Public Policies Strategies and Action Plans In Brazilmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Invasive species and the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation: how close has Brazil come to achieving Target 10?

Dechoum

Sampaio

Ziller³

et al. 2018

Rodriguésia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Target 10 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation establishes that "Effective management plans are in place to prevent new biological invasions and to manage important areas for plant diversity that are invaded" by 2020. The rationale for the target is that invasive alien species are a major threat to native plants, and thus should be excluded from areas reserved for the conservation of plant species, especially when endemic and/or threatened. In Brazil, although most management plans report the presence of invasive alien species and the need for management in federal protected areas, there are only a very limited number of management plans implemented. The national strategy on invasive alien species, published as CONABIO Resolution 05/2009, has not been implemented, so progress on policies and legislation focused on invasive alien species at the federal level has been slow. In order to reach an effective development of public policies in Brazil, federal environmental agencies must function as focal points and be in charge of coordinating actions aimed at (1) identifying priority areas for preventing and managing biological invasions, and (2) managing invasive alien species and reduce their impacts.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Public Policies Strategies and Action Plans In Brazilmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Invasive species and the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation: how close has Brazil come to achieving Target 10?

Dechoum

Sampaio

Ziller³

et al. 2018

Rodriguésia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, in tropical regions, IAS impact can be more severe and threat human well-being substantially by spreading multiple zoonotic diseases (i.e., dengue, chikungunya, and zika virus spread by species of the genus Aedes), consequently causing severe economic impact associated with human care (Teichi et al 2017). Finally, IAS spread diseases into Forestry plantations (Schnell e Schühli et al 2016) and imposes severe costs with IAS management and eradication in conservation areas (Guimarães et al 2017). Therefore, partitioning of the economic impact of IAS over multiple activity sectors is central for understanding and planning effective impact reduction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Adelino¹,

Heringer²,

Diagne³

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

The impact of catch-and-release on feeding responses and aggressive behavior in Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus)

Camargo-dos-Santos

Rossi

Gonçalves

et al. 2021

Marine and Freshwater Behaviour and Physiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A systematization of information on Brazilian Federal protected areas with management actions for Animal Invasive Alien Species

Cited by 3 publications

References 11 publications

Invasive species and the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation: how close has Brazil come to achieving Target 10?

Invasive species and the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation: how close has Brazil come to achieving Target 10?

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

The impact of catch-and-release on feeding responses and aggressive behavior in Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About