Biological invasions, ecological resilience and adaptive governance

Abstract

a b s t r a c tIn a world of increasing interconnections in global trade as well as rapid change in climate and land cover, the accelerating introduction and spread of invasive species is a critical concern due to associated negative social and ecological impacts, both real and perceived. Much of the societal response to invasive species to date has been associated with negative economic consequences of invasions. This response has shaped a war-like approach to addressing invasions, one with an agenda of eradications and intense ecological restoration efforts towards prior or more desirable ecological regimes. This trajectory often ignores the concept of ecological resilience and associated approaches of resilience-based governance. We argue that the relationship between ecological resilience and invasive species has been understudied to the detriment of attempts to govern invasions, and that most management actions fail, primarily because they do not incorporate adaptive, learning-based approaches. Invasive species can decrease resilience by reducing the biodiversity that underpins ecological functions and processes, making ecosystems more prone to regime shifts. However, invasions do not always result in a shift to an alternative regime; invasions can also increase resilience by introducing novelty, replacing lost ecological functions or adding redundancy that strengthens already existing structures and processes in an ecosystem. This paper examines the potential impacts of species invasions on the resilience of ecosystems and suggests that resilience-based approaches can inform policy by linking the governance of biological invasions to the negotiation of tradeoffs between ecosystem services.

The progress of interdisciplinarity in invasion science

“…Yet, despite available technological solutions, management interventions were often considered as unsuccessful, possibly due to the lack of an explicit recognition of the role of the human dimension (e.g. McNeely 2001;Simberloff 2001;Chaffin et al 2016). A second reason might be that biodiversity conservation was, until the emergence of the ecosystem services concept in the 2000s (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005), virtually independent of human valuation and social insight.…”

“…Tengö et al 2014;Bennett et al 2017). Framing invasions from a more balanced social-ecological perspective would help to, among other things, clarify distinct viewpoints relating to perceptions of risks and opportunities, and would help in decision-making by applying collaborative and participatory approaches that could not be achieved through traditional approaches (Kueffer and Hirsch Hadorn 2008;Heger et al 2013;Kueffer 2013;Estévez et al 2014;Tassin and Kull 2015;Chaffin et al 2016;Courchamp et al 2017).…”

“…Among other things, it is hoped that more robust social-ecological perspectives will help informing options for management at different stages of invasions (Kueffer and Hirsch Hadorn 2008;N'Guyen et al 2016;Essl et al 2017). Human perception, culture, attitudes, ethics, actions, and adaptive learning-based approaches in invasion management can differ depending on the invasion stage, for example introduction versus spread phases (Rotherham and Lambert 2011;Heger et al 2013;Simberloff et al 2013;Tassin and Kull 2015;Chaffin et al 2016).…”

Allelopathic Effects of Aqueous Extracts of Alternanthera philoxeroides on the Growth of Zoysia matrella

“…Biological invasion refers to the invasion of new environments by alien species from their original habitats through natural or artificial processes and resultant damage to the native ecosystem [1]. Biological invasions can severely affect indigenous biological diversity, natural resources [2], and even global ecosystem balance [3][4], as the invasive species are often more competitive than the native species.…”

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Biosecurity: Enabling Participatory-Design to Help Address Social Licence to Operate Issues

“…Lack of consideration of social and cultural issues in biosecurity technology design has been found to be a major issue [46][47][48]. This is true particularly in the forest sector [14,49,50].…”