Fake news and talking up the market: the case of the Compagnie universelle du canal interocéanique de Panama in 1888

Ortiz-Serrano, Miguel Ángel; Laverde, Germán Forero

doi:10.3917/eh.101.0027

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While clarifying the meaning of terms used in studies on biological invasions, we suggest avoiding ‘Lessepsian migration’ (Por, 1971) in view of the controversial history of Viscount Ferdinand Marie de Lesseps. As one of the founders of the ‘Compagnie Universelle du Canal maritime de Suez’, Lesseps was responsible for wide‐scale exploitation of unpaid forced labour (Brown, 1994; Farouk, 2019; Ortiz‐Serrano & Forero‐Laverde, 2020). ‘Lessepsian’ glorifies the person and his actions, thereby perpetuating a legacy of European imperialism and corruption.…”

Section: Separating Ideology From Terminologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science

Soto,

Balzani,

Carneiro

et al. 2024

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standardised terminology in science is important for clarity of interpretation and communication. In invasion science – a dynamic and rapidly evolving discipline – the proliferation of technical terminology has lacked a standardised framework for its development. The result is a convoluted and inconsistent usage of terminology, with various discrepancies in descriptions of damage and interventions. A standardised framework is therefore needed for a clear, universally applicable, and consistent terminology to promote more effective communication across researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers. Inconsistencies in terminology stem from the exponential increase in scientific publications on the patterns and processes of biological invasions authored by experts from various disciplines and countries since the 1990s, as well as publications by legislators and policymakers focusing on practical applications, regulations, and management of resources. Aligning and standardising terminology across stakeholders remains a challenge in invasion science. Here, we review and evaluate the multiple terms used in invasion science (e.g. ‘non‐native’, ‘alien’, ‘invasive’ or ‘invader’, ‘exotic’, ‘non‐indigenous’, ‘naturalised’, ‘pest’) to propose a more simplified and standardised terminology. The streamlined framework we propose and translate into 28 other languages is based on the terms (i) ‘non‐native’, denoting species transported beyond their natural biogeographic range, (ii) ‘established non‐native’, i.e. those non‐native species that have established self‐sustaining populations in their new location(s) in the wild, and (iii) ‘invasive non‐native’ – populations of established non‐native species that have recently spread or are spreading rapidly in their invaded range actively or passively with or without human mediation. We also highlight the importance of conceptualising ‘spread’ for classifying invasiveness and ‘impact’ for management. Finally, we propose a protocol for classifying populations based on (i) dispersal mechanism, (ii) species origin, (iii) population status, and (iv) impact. Collectively and without introducing new terminology, the framework that we present aims to facilitate effective communication and collaboration in invasion science and management of non‐native species.

show abstract

Section: Separating Ideology From Terminologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science

Soto,

Balzani,

Carneiro

et al. 2024

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While clarifying the meaning of terms used in studies on biological invasions, we suggest avoiding 'Lessepsian migration' (Por, 1971) in view of the controversial history of Viscount Ferdinand Marie de Lesseps. As one of the founders of the 'Compagnie Universelle du Canal maritime de Suez', Lesseps was responsible for wide-scale exploitation of unpaid forced labour (Brown, 1994;Farouk, 2019;Ortiz-Serrano & Forero-Laverde, 2020). 'Lessepsian' glorifies the person and his actions, thereby perpetuating a legacy of European imperialism and corruption.…”

Section: Separating Ideology From Terminologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science

Soto Almena,

Balzani,

Carneiro

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standardized terminology in science is important for clarity of interpretation and communication. In invasion science — a dynamic and quickly evolving discipline — the rapid proliferation of technical terminology has lacked a standardized framework for its language development. The result is a convoluted and inconsistent usage of terminology, with various discrepancies in descriptions of damages and interventions. A standardized framework is therefore needed for a clear, universally applicable, and consistent terminology to promote more effective communication across researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers. Inconsistencies in terminology stem from the exponential increase in scientific publications on the patterns and processes of biological invasions authored by experts from various disciplines and countries since the 1990s, as well as publications by legislators and policymakers focusing on practical applications, regulations, and management of resources. Aligning and standardizing terminology across stakeholders remains a prevailing challenge in invasion science. Here, we review and evaluate the multiple terms used in invasion science (e.g. 'non-native', 'alien', 'invasive' or 'invader', 'exotic', 'non-indigenous', 'naturalized, 'pest') to propose a more simplified and standardized terminology. The streamlined framework we propose and translate into 28 other languages is based on the terms (i) 'non-native', denoting species transported beyond their natural biogeographic range, (ii) 'established non-native', i.e. those non-native species that have established self-sustaining populations in their new location(s) in the wild, and (iii) 'invasive non-native' — populations of established non-native species that have recently spread or are spreading rapidly in their invaded range actively or passively with or without human mediation. We also highlight the importance of conceptualizing 'spread' for classifying invasiveness and 'impact' for management. Finally, we propose a protocol for classifying populations based on (1) dispersal mechanism, (2) species origin, (3) population status, and (4) impact. Collectively and without introducing new terminology, the framework that we present aims to facilitate effective communication and collaboration in invasion science and management of non-native species.

show abstract

Recent Articles on French History

Hérubel¹

2022

French Historical Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fake news and talking up the market: the case of the Compagnie universelle du canal interocéanique de Panama in 1888

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science

Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science

Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science

Recent Articles on French History

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About