“…Standard approaches and tools for measuring and recording survey effort are currently not developed, and harmonized guidelines will be needed. Examples of relevant data on the survey effort include measures, such as hectares surveyed for IAS per assessment period (Cheney et al., 2018), numbers of inspections of high‐risk establishment sites (Lovell et al., 2021), volume of cargo inspected (Miralles et al., 2021), time spent searching for a specific species (Mehta et al., 2007), number of high conservation value areas surveyed for IAS (Keet et al., 2022), and proportion of cells with expected presences that have relevant observations, the metric underpinning the Species Information Index (Oliver et al., 2021). New monitoring technologies are increasingly available, such as remotely sensed products (e.g., unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), satellite, and camera traps) or eDNA approaches, which through fixed elements of deployment protocols (e.g., area surveyed and number of traps or samples) provide quantifiable, efficient, and effective ways to survey a subset of IAS for rapid and systematic observations (van Rees et al., 2022).…”