Economic impact of invasive alien species in Argentina: a first national synthesis

Duboscq-Carra, Virginia G.; Fernández, Romina; Haubrock, Phillip J.; Dimarco, Romina D.; Angulo, Elena; Ballesteros‐Mejia, Liliana; Diagne, Christophe; Courchamp, Franck; Núñez, Martín A.

doi:10.3897/neobiota.67.63208

Cited by 24 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Adelino et al (2021) found a higher accumulated cost than us for Brazil because they did not remove entries from the original InvaCost dataset (USD 105.5 billion vs. USD 76.8 billion). For the same reason, Duboscq-Carra et al (2021) found an accumulated cost USD 5.5 million higher than us for Argentina (USD 6,907.6 million vs. USD 6,902.1 million). Conversely, Ballesteros-Mejia et al (2021) found smaller costs for Ecuador because one of the entries with high economic impact was classified in their study as low reliability and therefore removed from the main analyses (USD 86.2 million vs. USD 604.9 million; see details at Ballesteros-Mejia et al 2021).…”

Section: General Patternsmentioning

confidence: 64%

The economic costs of biological invasions in Central and South America: a first regional assessment

Heringer¹,

Angulo²,

Ballesteros‐Mejia³

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasive alien species are responsible for a high economic impact on many sectors worldwide. Nevertheless, there is a scarcity of studies assessing these impacts in Central and South America. Investigating costs of invasions is important to motivate and guide policy responses by increasing stakeholders’ awareness and identifying action priorities. Here, we used the InvaCost database to investigate (i) the geographical pattern of biological invasion costs across the region; (ii) the monetary expenditure across taxa and impacted sectors; and (iii) the taxa responsible for more than 50% of the costs (hyper-costly taxa) per impacted sector and type of costs. The total of reliable and observed costs reported for biological invasions in Central and South America was USD 102.5 billion between 1975 and 2020, but about 90% of the total costs were reported for only three countries (Brazil, Argentina and Colombia). Costs per species were associated with geographical regions (i.e., South America, Central America and Islands) and with the area of the countries in km2. Most of the expenses were associated with damage costs (97.8%), whereas multiple sectors (77.4%), agriculture (15%) and public and social welfare (4.2%) were the most impacted sectors. Aedes spp. was the hyper-costly taxon for the terrestrial environment (costs of USD 25 billion) and water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) was the hyper-costly taxon for the aquatic environment (USD 179.9 million). Six taxa were classified as hyper-costly for at least one impacted sector and two taxa for at least one type of cost. In conclusion, invasive alien species caused billions of dollars of economic burden in Central and South America, mainly in large countries of South America. Costs caused by invasive alien species were unevenly distributed across countries, impacted sectors, types of costs and taxa (hyper-costly taxa). These results suggest that impacted sectors should drive efforts to manage the species that are draining financial sources.

show abstract

Section: General Patternsmentioning

confidence: 64%

The economic costs of biological invasions in Central and South America: a first regional assessment

Heringer¹,

Angulo²,

Ballesteros‐Mejia³

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, we remained conservative here and used only highly reliable cost entries. Second, many existing costs are simply unknown, or unreported, because the scientific literature reporting the economic consequences of biological invasions is still in its infancy in France, as evidenced by the 3% of currently introduced or invasive species having cost entries in InvaCost in France (Diagne et al 2020b, Angulo et al 2020. Out of the 2,621 invasive species in total, the remaining 97% of species likely represent a very high additional cost, as shown by the high extrapolations derived for invasive alien species invading France but with known costs only outside France.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As cost entries were obtained from different years and currencies, all costs were standardised to a unique and common currency, i.e. 2017 equivalent US dollars (US$) using official market exchange rates and taking into account the inflation since the year of cost estimation (see Diagne et al 2020b for complete details about formulas and calculations associated with the cost standardisation, as well as Diagne et al 2020a for a detailed description of the different steps of the construction of the InvaCost database). The latest version of this updatable database (9,823 cost entries), along with all related details and associated information, is fully accessible and openly available online (version 3.0; https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.12668570).…”

Section: Data Collection Compilation and Filteringmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Authors: David Renault, Eléna Manfrini, Boris Leroy, Christophe Diagne, Liliana Ballesteros-Mejia, Elena Angulo, Franck Courchamp Data type: Description of the structure of the database Explanation note: Spreadsheet 'DB-Descriptor': summary of the content of the descriptive columns of the database used in this study (from Diagne et al 2020b). The different columns (i.e.…”

Section: Supplementary Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Biological invasions in France: Alarming costs and even more alarming knowledge gaps

Renault¹,

Manfrini²,

Leroy³

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ever-increasing number of introduced species profoundly threatens global biodiversity. While the ecological and evolutionary consequences of invasive alien species are receiving increasing attention, their economic impacts have largely remained understudied, especially in France. Here, we aimed at providing a general overview of the monetary losses (damages caused by) and expenditures (management of) associated with invasive alien species in France. This country has a long history of alien species presence, partly due to its long-standing global trade activities, highly developed tourism, and presence of overseas territories in different regions of the globe, resulting in a conservative minimum of 2,750 introduced and invasive alien species. By synthesizing for the first time the monetary losses and expenditures incurred by invasive alien species in Metropolitan France and French overseas territories, we obtained 1,583 cost records for 98 invasive alien species. We found that they caused a conservative total amount ranging between US$ 1,280 million and 11,535 million in costs over the period 1993–2018. We extrapolated costs for species invading France, for which costs were reported in other countries but not in France, which yielded an additional cost ranging from US$ 151 to 3,030 millions. Damage costs were nearly eight times higher than management expenditure. Insects, and in particular the Asian tiger mosquito Aedes albopictus and the yellow fever mosquito Ae. aegypti, totalled very high economic costs, followed by non-graminoid terrestrial flowering and aquatic plants (Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Ludwigia sp. and Lagarosiphon major). Over 90% of alien species currently recorded in France had no costs reported in the literature, resulting in high biases in taxonomic, regional and activity sector coverages. To conclude, we report alarming costs and even more alarming knowledge gaps. Our results should raise awareness of the importance of biosecurity and biosurveillance in France, and beyond, as well as the crucial need for better reporting and documentation of cost data.

show abstract

“…Despite most of the economic costs in Singapore being related to the control of invasive species and the costs of healthcare, it can be assumed that other damage or losses have not yet been estimated. For example, similarly data-poor studies found major costs for agriculture in Argentina or the UK (Duboscq-Carra et al 2021;Cuthbert et al 2021a) or forestry in Sweden (Haubrock et al 2021b). In each case, it seemed clear that these trends were driven by few records, suggesting that a richer cost record might, in each case, reveal costs for other activity sectors, substantially raising the overall estimates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological invasions in Singapore and Southeast Asia: data gaps fail to mask potentially massive economic costs

Haubrock¹,

Cuthbert²,

Yeo³

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impacts of invasive alien species are well-known and are categorised as a leading contributor to biodiversity loss globally. However, relatively little is known about the monetary costs incurred from invasions on national economies, hampering management responses. In this study, we used published data to describe the economic cost of invasions in Southeast Asia, with a focus on Singapore – a biodiversity-rich, tropical island city state with small size, high human density and high trade volume, three factors likely to increase invasions. In this country, as well as in others in Southeast Asia, cost data were scarce, with recorded costs available for only a small fraction of the species known to be invasive. Yet, the overall available economic costs to Singapore were estimated to be ~ US$ 1.72 billion in total since 1975 (after accounting for inflation), which is approximately one tenth of the total cost recorded in all of Southeast Asia (US$ 16.9 billion). These costs, in Singapore and Southeast Asia, were mostly linked to insects in the family Culicidae (principally Aedes spp.) and associated with damage, resource loss, healthcare and control-related spending. Projections for 11 additional species known to be invasive in Singapore, but with recorded costs only from abroad, amounted to an additional US$ 893.13 million, showing the potential huge gap between recorded and actual costs (cost records remain missing for over 90% of invasive species). No costs within the database for Singapore – or for other Southeast Asian countries – were exclusively associated with proactive management, highlighting that a shortage of reporting on the costs of invasions is mirrored by a lack of investment in management. Moreover, invasion cost entries in Singapore were under-reported relative to import levels, but total costs exceeded expectations, based on land area and population size, and to a greater extent than in other Southeast Asian countries. Therefore, the evaluation and reporting of economic costs of invasions need to be improved in this region to provide efficient data-based support for mitigation and management of their impacts.

show abstract

Economic impact of invasive alien species in Argentina: a first national synthesis

Cited by 24 publications

References 52 publications

The economic costs of biological invasions in Central and South America: a first regional assessment

The economic costs of biological invasions in Central and South America: a first regional assessment

Biological invasions in France: Alarming costs and even more alarming knowledge gaps

Biological invasions in Singapore and Southeast Asia: data gaps fail to mask potentially massive economic costs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About