Explaining the rank order of invasive plants by stakeholder groups

Abstract

25Debates surrounding the use of policies to avoid further spread of invasive species 26 highlight the need to establish priorities in public resource allocations. We explore the 27 consistency or discrepancy among stakeholder groups involved in the risk and control 28 management of invasive species to identify the extent to which different factors 29 influence stakeholder choices of major relevant plant invaders. Based on stakeholder 30 ranking of invasive plants, we explore the reasons behind stakeholders' support for 31 policy management. Data were collected in Galicia, Spain, where a catalogue of 32 prohibited entry and trade of invasive species is currently under debate. We estimate a 33 rank ordered logit model using information from semi-structured interviews conducted 34 with respondents from four stakeholder groups: public administration sector, 35 ornamental sector, research and social groups. The characteristics of plant invaders that 36 provoke stakeholders to rank a species more highly are wide distribution of plant 37 invaders, existence of public control programmes, use and sale of species in the 38 ornamental sector and media coverage. The influence these aspects have in the selection 39 of top-ranked invaders varies across different stakeholder groups and with stakeholders' 40 level of knowledge, awareness and attitudes towards different potential policy 41 measures. A small group of invaders are perceived as top rated by all stakeholder 42 groups. 43

Explaining people's perceptions of invasive alien species: A conceptual framework

“…However, these only gain meaning if we interpret them as socio-cultural factors that relate to socially-shared experiences. This line of research has also compared the views of different stakeholder groups (García-Llorente et al, 2008;Touza et al, 2014;Shackleton et al, 2015), groups of experts (Bardsley and Edwards-Jones, 2008;Humair et al, 2014b), experts and laypeople Fischer et al, 2014;Van der Wal et al, 2015), affected communities and external experts (Estévez et al, 2015) and found links, such as between value orientations (see above) and level of education (Fischer et al, 2011a;Shackleton and Shackleton, 2016). It is worth noting that all of these factors are dynamic and change through learning processes, such as hands-on experience in IAS management or through engagements between stakeholders (Novoa et al, 2016, Pagès et al, in press).…”

Invasive-Plant-Removal Frequency—Its Impact on Species Spread and Implications for Further Integration of Forest-Management Practices

“…In studying why and how different stakeholders rank the importance of different invasive species, Lippitt et al (2008) [21] notes that forestland owners' experiences and challenges in dealing with invasive plant species in forestlands should inform the relevant policies and management strategies. Lippitt et al (2008) [22] also highlights the importance of integrating anthropogenic factors with ecological factors in accurately assessing the risk of invasive-species spread.…”

In lakes but not in minds: stakeholder knowledge of invasive species in prairie lakes

“…Invasive species are a critical threat to freshwater ecosystems in North America (Dextrase and Mandrak 2006). Their spread is tightly linked to human activities (e.g., economic development, disturbance, travel, trade), which can result in accidental or deliberate introductions of non-native species to new habitats (Drake et al 2014;Edwards et al 2016;Gates et al 2009;Touza et al 2014). Therefore, human behavior, including knowledge of environmental issues, should be a key component of efforts regulating the spread of invasive species (Bremner and Park 2007;Jetter and Paine 2004;Shackleton and Shackleton 2016).…”