Frameworks used in invasion science: progress and prospects

Tamara B Robinson,Sabrina Kumschick,Julie L Lockwood,Quentin J Groom,Tsungai A Zengeya,David M Richardson,John R U Wilson,Curtis C Daehler,Sven Bacher

doi:10.3897/neobiota.62.58738

Abstract

Our understanding and management of biological invasions relies on our ability to classify and conceptualise the phenomenon. This need has stimulated the development of a plethora of frameworks, ranging in nature from conceptual to applied. However, most of these frameworks have not been widely tested and their general applicability is unknown. In order to critically evaluate frameworks in invasion science, we held a workshop on ‘Frameworks used in Invasion Science’ hosted by the DSI-NRF Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology in Stellenbosch, South Africa, in November 2019, which led to this special issue. For the purpose of the workshop we defined a framework as “a way of organising things that can be easily communicated to allow for shared understanding or that can be implemented to allow for generalisations useful for research, policy or management”. Further, we developed the Stellenbosch Challenge for Invasion Science: “Can invasion science develop and improve frameworks that are useful for research, policy or management, and that are clear as to the contexts in which the frameworks do and do not apply?”. Particular considerations identified among meeting participants included the need to identify the limitations of a framework, specify how frameworks link to each other and broader issues, and to improve how frameworks can facilitate communication. We believe that the 24 papers in this special issue do much to meet this challenge. The papers apply existing frameworks to new data and contexts, review how the frameworks have been adopted and used, develop useable protocols and guidelines for applying frameworks to different contexts, refine the frameworks in light of experience, integrate frameworks for new purposes, identify gaps, and develop new frameworks to address issues that are currently not adequately dealt with. Frameworks in invasion science must continue to be developed, tested as broadly as possible, revised, and retired as contexts and needs change. However, frameworks dealing with pathways of introduction, progress along the introduction-naturalisation-invasion continuum, and the assessment of impacts are being increasingly formalised and set as standards. This, we argue, is an important step as invasion science starts to mature as a discipline.

Highlights

We developed an overall goal of the workshop, dubbed ‘the Stellenbosch Challenge for Invasion Science’: Can invasion science develop and improve frameworks that are useful for research, policy or management, and that are clear as to the contexts in which the frameworks do and do not apply?
In order to critically evaluate frameworks in invasion science, we held a workshop on ‘Frameworks used in Invasion Science’ hosted by the DSI-NRF Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology in Stellenbosch, South Africa, in November 2019, which led to this special issue
The so called Unified Framework for Biological Invasions aimed to link frameworks developed by botanists and zoologists (Blackburn et al 2011); the Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) impact classification framework (Blackburn et al 2014), which has been recently adopted as a standard of the IUCN, aims to facilitate the measurement and reporting of invasive species impacts in a consistent manner (IUCN 2020) (Box 2); and the CBD has proposed an introduction pathway classification framework that bridges decades of debate on how invasive species are transported out of their native range (CBD 2014) (Box 3)

Summary

Introduction

We developed an overall goal of the workshop, dubbed ‘the Stellenbosch Challenge for Invasion Science’: Can invasion science develop and improve frameworks that are useful for research, policy or management, and that are clear as to the contexts in which the frameworks do and do not apply? The papers address the utility of frameworks for research, policy, and management; they clarify the contexts in which the frameworks do and do not apply; and they discuss how the frameworks need to be developed and improved to facilitate shared understanding.

Results

Conclusion