Abstract
Biological invasions, as a result of human intervention through trade and mobility, are the second biggest cause of biodiversity loss. The impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) on the environment are well known, however, economic impacts are poorly estimated, especially in mega-diverse countries where both economic and ecological consequences of these effects can be catastrophic. Ecuador, one of the smallest mega-diverse countries, lacks a comprehensive description of the economic costs of IAS within its territory. Here, using "InvaCost", a public database that compiles all recorded monetary costs associated with IAS from English and Non-English sources, we investigated the economic costs of biological invasions. We found that between 1983 and 2017, the reported costs associated with biological invasions ranged between US$86.17 million (when considering only the most robust data) and US$626 million (when including all cost data) belonging to 37 species and 27 genera. Furthermore, 99% of the recorded cost entries were from the Galapagos Islands. From only robust data, the costliest identified taxonomic group was feral goats (Capra hircus; US$20 million), followed by Aedes mosquitoes (US$2.14 million) while organisms like plant species from the genus Rubus, a parasitic fly (Philornis downsi), black rats (Rattus rattus) and terrestrial gastropods (Achatina fulica) represented less than US$2 million each. Costs of "mixed-taxa" (i.e. plants and animals) represented the highest (61% of total robust costs; US$52.44 million). The most impacted activity sector was the national park authorities, which spent about US$84 million. Results from robust data also revealed that management expenditures were the major type of costs recorded in the Galapagos Islands; however, costs reported for medical losses related to Aedes mosquitoes causing dengue fever in mainland Ecuador would have ranked first if more detailed information had allowed us to categorize them as robust data. Over 70% of the IAS reported for Ecuador did not have reported costs. These results suggest that costs reported here are a massive underestimate of the actual economic toll of invasions in the country.
Highlights
Invasive alien species (IAS) are defined as non-native species that, as a result of human transportation or trade, establish in a new ecosystem where they may cause environmental impact, economic harm or affect human health (Convention on Biological Diversity 2009)
Across most activity sectors, the economic costs of biological invasions can be divided into two categories: "Damage", referring to the direct and indirect economic losses caused by invasive species, and "Management" referring to the expenditures on actions dedicated to controlling or eliminating invasive species (Bradshaw et al 2016; Diagne et al 2020a)
Each entry collated in "InvaCost" contains a cost estimate depicted by a unique combination of cost descriptors including: (i) the bibliographic information of the documents reporting the costs; (ii) the information on the impacted area; (iii) the taxonomy of the IAS causing the cost, (iv) the temporal extent over which the cost occurred, or was predicted to occur; and (v) the typology of each reported cost
Summary
Invasive alien species (IAS) are defined as non-native species that, as a result of human transportation or trade, establish in a new ecosystem where they may cause environmental impact, economic harm or affect human health (Convention on Biological Diversity 2009). Most worrisome is that the number of invasive species and invasion events – as well as their associated deleterious impacts in invaded areas – shows no sign of abatement in the near future (Seebens et al 2017, 2018) Whether their introduction has been intentional or accidental (McNeely 2001), IAS pose serious threats to biodiversity, ecosystem stability (Vilà et al 2010), health (Shepard et al 2011; Schaffner et al 2020), human livelihood and well-being (Pejchar and Mooney 2009; Simberloff et al 2013), and the economy (e.g., Pratt et al 2017; Diagne et al 2021a; Cuthbert et al 2021). These economic assessments come from less diverse regions of the world, highlighting the lack of such evaluations for megadiverse countries (i.e. hotspots for biodiversity), where biological invasions might pose bigger ecological threats and where these studies can provide guidance for better redirection of resources (i.e. monitoring, management and mitigation) to counter IAS impacts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
