Assessing the assessments: evaluation of four impact assessment protocols for invasive alien species

dc.contributor.author
Turbé, Anne
dc.contributor.author
Senar, Juan Carlos
dc.contributor.author
Shwartz, Assaf
dc.date.accessioned
2019-09-12T15:55:17Z
dc.date.accessioned
2024-07-29T07:31:38Z
dc.date.available
2019-09-12T15:55:17Z
dc.date.available
2024-07-29T07:31:38Z
dc.date.issued
2017
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/2072/361251
dc.description.abstract
ABSTRACTAimEffective policy and management responses to the multiple threats posedby invasive alien species (IAS) rely on the ability to assess their impacts beforeconclusive empirical evidence is available. A plethora of different IAS risk and/or impact assessment protocols have been proposed, but it remains unclearwhether, how and why the outcomes of such assessment protocols may differ.LocationEurope.MethodsHere, we present an in-depth evaluation and informed assessment ofthe consistency of four prominent protocols for assessing IAS impacts (EICAT,GISS, Harmonia+and NNRA), using two non-native parrots in Europe: thewidespread ring-necked parakeet (Psittacula krameri) and the rapidly spreadingmonk parakeet (Myiopsitta monachus).ResultsOur findings show that the procedures used to assess impacts mayinfluence assessment outcomes. We find that robust IAS prioritization can beobtained by assessing species based on their most severe documented impacts,as all protocols yield consistent outcomes across impact categories. Additiveimpact scoring offers complementary, more subtle information that may beespecially relevant for guiding management decisions regarding already estab-lished invasive alien species. Such management decisions will also strongly ben-efit from consensus approaches that reduce disagreement between experts,fostering the uptake of scientific advice into policy-making decisions.Main conclusionsInvasive alien species assessments should take advantage ofthe capacity of consensus assessments to consolidate discussion and agreementbetween experts. Our results suggest that decision-makers could use the assess-ment protocol most fit for their purpose, on the condition they apply a precau-tionary approach by considering the most severe impacts only. We alsorecommend that screening for high-impact IAS should be performed on a morerobust basis than currentad hocpractices, at least using the easiest assessmentprotocols and reporting confidence scores.
eng
dc.format.extent
11 p.
dc.language.iso
eng
dc.relation.ispartof
Diversity and distributions, 23 (2017), p. 297-307
dc.rights
(C) 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
dc.source
RECERCAT (Dipòsit de la Recerca de Catalunya)
dc.subject.other
Animals invasors
dc.subject.other
Ocells
dc.subject.other
Cotorres
dc.subject.other
Europa
dc.title
Assessing the assessments: evaluation of four impact assessment protocols for invasive alien species
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.subject.udc
59
dc.embargo.terms
cap
dc.local.notes
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ddi.12528
dc.identifier.doi
https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12528
dc.rights.accessLevel
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess


Ficheros en el ítem

FicherosTamañoFormatoVer

No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)