Invasive alien species are a major driver of global change, impacting biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human livelihoods. To document these impacts, we present the Global Impacts Dataset of Invasive Alien Species (GIDIAS), a dataset on the positive, negative and neutral impacts of invasive alien species on nature, nature's contributions to people, and good quality of life. This dataset arises from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services' (IPBES) thematic assessment report of this topic. Data were compiled from published sources, including grey literature, reporting a direct observation of an invasive alien species' impact. All impact records contain up to 52 fields of contextual information and attempt to link impacts to the global standard "environmental impact classification for alien taxa" (EICAT) and "socio-economic impact classification for alien taxa" (SEICAT). GIDIAS includes more than 22000 records of impacts caused by 3353 invasive alien species (plants, vertebrates, invertebrates, microorganisms) from all continents and realms (terrestrial, freshwater, marine), extracted from over 6700 sources. We intend GIDIAS to be a global resource for investigating and managing the variety of impacts of invasive alien species across taxa and regions.

• MeSH
• Biodiversity * MeSH
• Ecosystem MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Conservation of Natural Resources MeSH
• Introduced Species * MeSH
• Animals MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Animals MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Dataset MeSH

Biological invasions are a major threat to biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and nature's contributions to people worldwide. However, the effectiveness of invasive alien species (IAS) management measures and the progress toward achieving biodiversity targets remain uncertain due to limited and nonuniform data availability. Management success is usually assessed at a local level and documented in technical reports, often written in languages other than English, which makes such data notoriously difficult to collect at large geographic scales. Here we present the first European assessment of how managers perceive trends in IAS and the effectiveness of management measures to mitigate biological invasions. We developed a structured questionnaire translated into 18 languages and disseminated it to local and regional managers of IAS in Europe. We received responses from 1928 participants from 41 European countries, including 24 European Union (EU) Member States. Our results reveal substantial efforts in IAS monitoring and control, with invasive plants being the primary focus. Yet, there is a general perception of an increase in the numbers, occupied areas, and impacts of IAS across environment and taxonomic groups, particularly plants, over time. This perceived increase is consistent across both EU and non-EU countries, with respondents from EU countries demonstrating more certainty in their responses. Our results also indicate a lack of data on alien vertebrates and invertebrates, reflecting a need for more targeted monitoring and knowledge sharing between managers and policymakers and between countries. Overall, our study suggests that Europe's current strategies are insufficient to substantially reduce IAS by 2030 and hence to meet the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework target.

• Keywords
• environmental perception, exotic species, expert survey, invasive alien species, management practices, non‐native species, policy,
• MeSH
• Biodiversity MeSH
• Surveys and Questionnaires MeSH
• Conservation of Natural Resources * methods   MeSH
• Introduced Species * MeSH
• Animals MeSH
• Check Tag
• Animals MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Geographicals
• Europe MeSH

Many species have been intentionally introduced to new regions for their benefits. Some of these alien species cause damage, others do not (or at least have not yet). There are several approaches to address this problem: prohibit taxa that will cause damage, try to limit damages while preserving benefits, or promote taxa that are safe. In the present article, we unpack the safe list approach, which we define as "a list of taxa alien to the region of interest that are considered of sufficiently low risk of invasion and impact that the taxa can be widely used without concerns of negative impacts." We discuss the potential use of safe lists in the management of biological invasions; disentangle aspects related to the purpose, development, implementation, and impact of safe lists; and provide guidance for those considering to develop and implement such lists.

• Keywords
• biological invasions, list approaches, regulation, stakeholders, trade,
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

Biological invasions are a global challenge that has received insufficient attention. Recently available cost syntheses have provided policy- and decision makers with reliable and up-to-date information on the economic impacts of biological invasions, aiming to motivate effective management. The resultant InvaCost database is now publicly and freely accessible and enables rapid extraction of monetary cost information. This has facilitated knowledge sharing, developed a more integrated and multidisciplinary network of researchers, and forged multidisciplinary collaborations among diverse organizations and stakeholders. Over 50 scientific publications so far have used the database and have provided detailed assessments of invasion costs across geographic, taxonomic, and spatiotemporal scales. These studies have provided important information that can guide future policy and legislative decisions on the management of biological invasions while simultaneously attracting public and media attention. We provide an overview of the improved availability, reliability, standardization, and defragmentation of monetary costs; discuss how this has enhanced invasion science as a discipline; and outline directions for future development.

• Keywords
• InvaCost, economic impacts, environmental management, guiding policy, invasive alien species,
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

BACKGROUND: Biological invasions threaten the functioning of ecosystems, biodiversity, and human well-being by degrading ecosystem services and eliciting massive economic costs. The European Union has historically been a hub for cultural development and global trade, and thus, has extensive opportunities for the introduction and spread of alien species. While reported costs of biological invasions to some member states have been recently assessed, ongoing knowledge gaps in taxonomic and spatio-temporal data suggest that these costs were considerably underestimated. RESULTS: We used the latest available cost data in InvaCost (v4.1)-the most comprehensive database on the costs of biological invasions-to assess the magnitude of this underestimation within the European Union via projections of current and future invasion costs. We used macroeconomic scaling and temporal modelling approaches to project available cost information over gaps in taxa, space, and time, thereby producing a more complete estimate for the European Union economy. We identified that only 259 out of 13,331 (~ 1%) known invasive alien species have reported costs in the European Union. Using a conservative subset of highly reliable, observed, country-level cost entries from 49 species (totalling US$4.7 billion; 2017 value), combined with the establishment data of alien species within European Union member states, we projected unreported cost data for all member states. CONCLUSIONS: Our corrected estimate of observed costs was potentially 501% higher (US$28.0 billion) than currently recorded. Using future projections of current estimates, we also identified a substantial increase in costs and costly species (US$148.2 billion) by 2040. We urge that cost reporting be improved to clarify the economic impacts of greatest concern, concomitant with coordinated international action to prevent and mitigate the impacts of invasive alien species in the European Union and globally. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12302-023-00750-3.

• Keywords
• InvaCost, Invasion costs, Missing data, Monetary impacts, Projection, Temporal trends,
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

Biological invasions are a major component of anthropogenic environmental change, incurring substantial economic costs across all sectors of society and ecosystems. There have been recent syntheses of costs for a number of countries using the newly compiled InvaCost database, but New Zealand-a country renowned for its approach to invasive species management-has so far not been examined. Here we analyse reported economic damage and management costs incurred by biological invasions in New Zealand from 1968 to 2020. In total, US$69 billion (NZ$97 billion) is currently reported over this ∼50-year period, with approximately US$9 billion of this considered highly reliable, observed (c.f. projected) costs. Most (82%) of these observed economic costs are associated with damage, with comparatively little invested in management (18%). Reported costs are increasing over time, with damage averaging US$120 million per year and exceeding management expenditure in all decades. Where specified, most reported costs are from terrestrial plants and animals, with damages principally borne by primary industries such as agriculture and forestry. Management costs are more often associated with interventions by authorities and stakeholders. Relative to other countries present in the InvaCost database, New Zealand was found to spend considerably more than expected from its Gross Domestic Product on pre- and post-invasion management costs. However, some known ecologically (c.f. economically) impactful invasive species are notably absent from estimated damage costs, and management costs are not reported for a number of game animals and agricultural pathogens. Given these gaps for known and potentially damaging invaders, we urge improved cost reporting at the national scale, including improving public accessibility through increased access and digitisation of records, particularly in overlooked socioeconomic sectors and habitats. This also further highlights the importance of investment in management to curtail future damages across all sectors.

• Keywords
• Biosecurity, Eradication, InvaCost, Invasive alien species, Island, Monetary impacts, Resource damages and losses, Socioeconomic sectors,
• MeSH
• Ecosystem * MeSH
• Plants MeSH
• Health Expenditures MeSH
• Introduced Species * MeSH
• Animals MeSH
• Check Tag
• Animals MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Geographicals
• New Zealand MeSH

Species introduced through human-related activities beyond their native range, termed alien species, have various impacts worldwide. The IUCN Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) is a global standard to assess negative impacts of alien species on native biodiversity. Alien species can also positively affect biodiversity (for instance, through food and habitat provisioning or dispersal facilitation) but there is currently no standardized and evidence-based system to classify positive impacts. We fill this gap by proposing EICAT+, which uses 5 semiquantitative scenarios to categorize the magnitude of positive impacts, and describes underlying mechanisms. EICAT+ can be applied to all alien taxa at different spatial and organizational scales. The application of EICAT+ expands our understanding of the consequences of biological invasions and can inform conservation decisions.

• MeSH
• Biodiversity * MeSH
• Ecosystem MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Human Activities MeSH
• Introduced Species * MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH

Public attention and interest in the fate of endangered species is a crucial prerequisite for effective conservation programs. Societal awareness and values will largely determine whether conservation initiatives receive necessary support and lead to adequate policy change. Using text data mining, we assessed general public attention in France, Germany and the United Kingdom toward climate change and biological invasions in relation to endangered amphibian, reptile, bird and mammal species. Our analysis revealed that public attention patterns differed among species groups and countries but was globally higher for climate change than for biological invasions. Both threats received better recognition in threatened than in non-threatened species, as well as in native species than in species from other countries and regions. We conclude that more efficient communication regarding the threat from biological invasions should be developed, and that conservation practitioners should take advantage of the existing attention toward climate change.

• MeSH
• Extinction, Biological * MeSH
• Climate Change * MeSH
• Endangered Species statistics & numerical data   MeSH
• Public Opinion * MeSH
• Conservation of Natural Resources * MeSH
• Introduced Species statistics & numerical data   MeSH
• Animals MeSH
• Check Tag
• Animals MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Comparative Study MeSH