Managing conflict-generating invasive species in South Africa: Challenges and trade-offs

Abstract

Background: This paper reviewed the benefits and negative impacts of alien species that are currently listed in the Alien and Invasive Species Regulations of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act no 10 of 2004) and certain alien species that are not yet listed in the regulations for which conflicts of interest complicate management. Objectives: Specifically, it identified conflict-generating species, evaluated the causes and driving forces of these conflicts and assessed how the conflicts have affected management. Method: A simple scoring system was used to classify the alien species according to their relative degree of benefits and negative impacts. Conflict-generating species were then identified and further evaluated using an integrated cognitive hierarchy theory and risk perception framework to identify the value systems (intrinsic and economic) and risk perceptions associated with each conflict. Results: A total of 552 alien species were assessed. Most of the species were classified as inconsequential (55%) or destructive (29%). Beneficial (10%) and conflict-generating (6%) species made a minor contribution. The majority (46%) of the conflict cases were associated with more than one value system or both values and risk perception. The other conflicts cases were based on intrinsic (40%) and utilitarian (14%) value systems. Conclusions: Conflicts based on value and risk perceptions are inherently difficult to resolve because authorities need to balance the needs of different stakeholders while meeting the mandate of conserving the environment, ecosystem services and human well-being. This paper uses the identified conflict-generating species to highlight the challenges and trade-offs of managing invasive species in South Africa.

Invasive alien plant species: Their impact on environment, ecosystem services and human health

“…This issue in context of the protected areas was highlighted during IUCN World Conservation Congress of 2012 and IUCN World Parks Congress held during 2014. Both positive as well as negative ecosystem services of IAPS must be clearly identified to elucidate their cost-benefit to guide the stakeholders and policy makers (Zengeya et al, 2017;Shackleton et al, 2019;Everard et al, 2018).…”

Non-native species in urban environments: patterns, processes, impacts and challenges

“…honey bees; Colla and MacIvor 2017), and many non-natives, including invasive species, are important components of a ''sense of place'' for human urbanites (e.g. Zengeya et al 2017). Such attachment to non-native species is increasingly leading to conflicts over whether to manage urban ecosystems to enhance ecosystem service provision (including services provided by non-native species) or to control certain (often non-native) species to reduce negative effects on native biodiversity and human wellbeing.…”

A four‐component classification of uncertainties in biological invasions: implications for management

“…"Conflict-generating species" (Dickie et al 2014, Zengeya et al 2017, which have both positive and negative ecological and socioeconomic impacts, will also be valued differently by the different stakeholders (i.e., subjective judgment; Box 1). It is therefore crucial to involve all stakeholders in the decision process leading to management activities (Novoa et al 2018).…”