The economic costs of biological invasions in Africa: a growing but neglected threat?

Diagne, Christophe; Turbelin, Anna J.; Moodley, Desika; Novoa, Ana; Leroy, Boris; Angulo, Elena; Adamjy, Tasnime; Dia, Cheikh A.K.M.; Taheri, Alireza; Tambo, Justice A.; Dobigny, Gauthier; Courchamp, Franck

doi:10.3897/neobiota.67.59132

Cited by 53 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Management costs were similarly very low in Central and South America (2.1%, Herigner et al 2021). In other continents, management expenses were always higher than in Asia, yet consistently much lower than damage and loss costs: Africa (27%, Diagne et al 2021), Europe (16%, Haubrock et al 2021), or North America (<20%, Crystal-Ornelas et al 2021). This suggests the necessity of increasing funding for invasion management in Asia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Economic costs of biological invasions in Asia

Liu¹,

Diagne²,

Angulo³

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasive species have caused severe impacts on biodiversity and human society. Although the estimation of environmental impacts caused by invasive species has increased in recent years, economic losses associated with biological invasions are only sporadically estimated in space and time. In this study, we synthesized the losses incurred by invasions in Asia, based on the most comprehensive database of economic costs of invasive species worldwide, including 560 cost records for 88 invasive species in 22 countries. We also assessed the differences in economic costs across taxonomic groups, geographical regions and impacted sectors, and further identified the major gaps of current knowledge in Asia. Reported economic costs of biological invasions were estimated between 1965 and 2017, and reached a total of US$ 432.6 billion (2017 value), with dramatic increases in 2000–2002 and in 2004. The highest costs were recorded for terrestrial ectotherms, for species estimated in South Asia, and for species estimated at the country level, and were related to more than one impacted sector. Two taxonomic groups with the highest reported costs were insects and mammals, and two countries with the highest costs were India and China. Non-English data covered all of 12 taxonomic groups, whereas English data only covered six groups, highlighting the importance of considering data from non-English sources to have a more comprehensive estimation of economic costs associated with biological invasions. However, we found that the estimation of economic costs was lacking for most Asian countries and for more than 96% of introduced species in Asia. Further, the estimation is heavily biased towards insects and mammals and is very limited concerning expenditures on invasion management. To optimize the allocation of limited resources, there is an important need to better and more widely study the economic costs of invasive alien species. In this way, improved cost reporting and more collaborations between scientists and stakeholders are needed across Asia.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Economic costs of biological invasions in Asia

Liu¹,

Diagne²,

Angulo³

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By 2050 the population of sub-Saharan Africa is predicted to increase by 86%, with both native and invasive crop pests being one of the biggest threats to food production (Oerke and Dehne, 2004;Rosegrant et al, 2009). From 1970 to the present day biological invasions have cost sub-Saharan Africa's economy between $18.2 and $80 billion, incurred mainly by a small number of insects species including Chilo partellus (Spotted stem borer) Tuta absoluta (Tomato leafminer) and Spodoptera frugiperda (Fall armyworm) (Diagne et al, 2021). Among the 21 economically important lepidopteran stemborer species in Africa (Maes, 1997), indigenous species such as Busseola fusca (maize stalk borer) and Chilo partellus (Spotted stem borer) are highly devastating.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological control interventions and botanical pesticides for insect pests of crops in sub-Saharan Africa: A mapping review

Ratto

Bruce

Chipabika

et al. 2022

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural productivity can be increased sustainably in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) by reducing crop losses due to insect pest damage. As an alternative to environmentally-damaging chemical pesticides, biological control interventions and botanical pesticides show potential to achieve both high yields and profits. However, synthesized information of their performance and understanding of their adoption among smallholder farmers is limited. Here, 173 studies of biological control interventions and botanical pesticides of insect pests for 35 crops from 20 sub-Saharan countries from 2005 to 2021 were systematically reviewed. Drawing on published datasets, we found that cereals, particularly maize, were the most studied crop (59%). Research on botanical pesticides constituted 32% of the studies, followed by augmentation/introduction biocontrol (29%), and push-pull (21%). Studies evaluating the technical performance of biocontrol interventions dominated (73%), with a regional clustering of push-pull studies in Kenya. Few studies investigated each intervention on each crop type, across different farming contexts and scales, highlighting an urgent need for landscape-scale studies to elucidate land-use impacts on biocontrol effectiveness. Limited evidence also exists on the synergistic effects of biocontrol on multiple ecosystem services and on non-target/beneficial organisms. We found an absence of interdisciplinary studies that addressed the wider indirect benefits of not using chemical pesticides, the social-economic outcomes, and barriers to adoption by farmers, which we argue are necessary to identify pathways to greater adoption and to support policy advocacy of biocontrol interventions in SSA.

show abstract

“…2 ), with a potentially worrying increase in the gap between management spend and damage incurred in the most recent decade (although this is necessarily caveated by incomplete reporting for the most recent years given inevitable publication lags (mean = 6 years)). This situation is reflected in many parts of the world where economic losses from damage far outstrip management costs ( Crystal-Ornelas et al, 2021 ; Diagne et al, 2021b ; Haubrock et al, 2021 ; Liu et al, 2021 ). Although the overall management spend in New Zealand does not appear sufficient to maintain pace with reported damages, the specific focus of investment into protecting taonga ( i.e.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building a synthesis of economic costs of biological invasions in New Zealand

Bodey

Carter

Haubrock

et al. 2022

PeerJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological invasions are a major component of anthropogenic environmental change, incurring substantial economic costs across all sectors of society and ecosystems. There have been recent syntheses of costs for a number of countries using the newly compiled InvaCost database, but New Zealand—a country renowned for its approach to invasive species management—has so far not been examined. Here we analyse reported economic damage and management costs incurred by biological invasions in New Zealand from 1968 to 2020. In total, US$69 billion (NZ$97 billion) is currently reported over this ∼50-year period, with approximately US$9 billion of this considered highly reliable, observed (c.f. projected) costs. Most (82%) of these observed economic costs are associated with damage, with comparatively little invested in management (18%). Reported costs are increasing over time, with damage averaging US$120 million per year and exceeding management expenditure in all decades. Where specified, most reported costs are from terrestrial plants and animals, with damages principally borne by primary industries such as agriculture and forestry. Management costs are more often associated with interventions by authorities and stakeholders. Relative to other countries present in the InvaCost database, New Zealand was found to spend considerably more than expected from its Gross Domestic Product on pre- and post-invasion management costs. However, some known ecologically (c.f. economically) impactful invasive species are notably absent from estimated damage costs, and management costs are not reported for a number of game animals and agricultural pathogens. Given these gaps for known and potentially damaging invaders, we urge improved cost reporting at the national scale, including improving public accessibility through increased access and digitisation of records, particularly in overlooked socioeconomic sectors and habitats. This also further highlights the importance of investment in management to curtail future damages across all sectors.

show abstract

The economic costs of biological invasions in Africa: a growing but neglected threat?

Cited by 53 publications

References 79 publications

Economic costs of biological invasions in Asia

Economic costs of biological invasions in Asia

Biological control interventions and botanical pesticides for insect pests of crops in sub-Saharan Africa: A mapping review

Building a synthesis of economic costs of biological invasions in New Zealand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About