The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Risk assessment for invasive species produces net bioeconomic benefits
Open accessAbstract
International commerce in live organisms presents a policy challenge for trade globalization; sales of live organisms create wealth, but some nonindigenous species cause harm. To reduce damage, some countries have implemented species screening to limit the introduction of damaging species. Adoption of new risk assessment (RA) technologies has been slowed, however, by concerns that RA accuracy remains insufficient to produce positive net economic benefits. This concern arises because only a small proportion of all introduced species escape, spread, and cause harm (i.e., become invasive), so a RA will exclude many noninvasive species (which provide a net economic benefit) for every invasive species correctly identified. Here, we develop a simple cost:benefit bioeconomic framework to quantify the net benefits from applying species prescreening. Because invasive species are rarely eradicated, and their damages must therefore be borne for long periods, we have projected the value of RA over a suitable range of policy time horizons (10–500 years). We apply the model to the Australian plant quarantine program and show that this RA program produces positive net economic benefits over the range of reasonable assumptions. Because we use low estimates of the financial damage caused by invasive species and high estimates of the value of species in the ornamental trade, our results underestimate the net benefit of the Australian plant quarantine program. In addition, because plants have relatively low rates of invasion, applying screening protocols to animals would likely demonstrate even greater benefits.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Emerging evidence shows that even expensive interventions, especially related to prevention, generally result in net benefits.
“Managing invasions is difficult and often expensive, but emerging evidence shows that even expensive interventions, especially related to prevention, generally result in net benefits (Zavaleta, 2000; Keller, Lodge, & Finnoff, 2007).”
From Scientists' warning on invasive alien species (2020) · cites this paper as Keller, Lodge, & Finnoff, 2007
The Abstract reports that Australia's preventive plant-screening program produces positive net economic benefits under a range of reasonable assumptions. The Results and Discussion also project benefits for proposed screening policies. The paper does not establish that expensive invasion-management interventions generally yield net benefits; its analysis concerns species screening under specified conditions. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Global Biodiversity Scenarios for the Year 2100
Sala, O. E., Stuart Chapin, F., III, Armesto, J. J., Berlow, E., Bloomfield, J., Dirzo, R., Huber-Sanwald, E., Huenneke, L. F., Jackson, R. B., et al. (2000) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.287.5459.1770 · Cited by 9,280
Self-citationPimentel, D., Zuniga, R., & Morrison, D. (2005) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.10.002 · Cited by 4,771
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 37
- 10.1111/j.1365-246X.1997.tb06596.x · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1010091918466 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1600-0587.1999.tb00449.x · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9780511614279 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.0501271102 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1126/science.1075753 · DOI
- 10.1890/02-5301 · DOI
- PC Pheloung Determining the Weed Potential of New Plant Introductions to Australia (Agriculture Protection Board, Perth, Australia, 1995).
- PD Champion, JS Clayton Border Control for Potential Aquatic Weeds (Department of Conservation, Wellington, Australia, 2000).
- 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1997.95473.x · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1010002005024 · DOI
- 10.1086/285865 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.272.5259.221 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.06.019 · DOI
- 10.2307/1313438 · DOI
- T Low Feral Future (Penguin, Melbourne, 2001).
- 10.1016/0095-0696(85)90014-2 · DOI
- 10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[0689:BICEGC]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1257/aer.91.1.260 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0921-8009(96)80002-4 · DOI
- 10.1111/1467-8276.00397 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.06.020 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.02864.x · DOI
- 10.1056/NEJMoa032299 · DOI
- I Kowarik Plant Invasions: General Aspects and Special Problems, eds P Pyšek, K Prach, M Rejmánek, PM Wade (SPB Academic Publishing, Amsterdam), pp. 15–38 (1995).
- 10.3201/eid1104.041167 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10530-004-6703-z · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tree.2005.02.011 · DOI
- 10.1890/1540-9295(2004)002[0513:IPIWEM]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement (World Trade Organization, Geneva, 2005).
- J Thorp Report 1997–2002 (National Weeds Strategy Executive Committee, Launceston, Australia), pp. 1997–2002 (2002).
- JG Virtue SJ Bennett RP Randall eds BM Sindel SB Johnson (Weed Society of New South Wales Sydney) pp. 42–48 (2004).
- J Sinden, R Jones, S Hester, D Odom, C Kalisch, R James, O Cacho The Economic Impact of Weeds in Australia (CRC for Australian Weed Management, Adelaide, Australia, 2004).
- New Report Shows Latest Trends in the Australian Garden Market (Nursery and Garden Industry Australia, Sydney, 2004).
- How Important Are Australian Natives in the Trade? (Nursery Industry Association of Australia, Sydney, 1999).
- 10.2307/2845589 · DOI
- PC Pheloung Determining the Weed Potential of New Plant Introductions to Australia (Agriculture Protection Board, Perth, Australia, 1995).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scientists' warning on invasive alien species
Pyšek, P., Hulme, P. E., Simberloff, D., Bacher, S., Blackburn, T. M., Carlton, J. T., Dawson, W., Essl, F., Foxcroft, L. C., Genovesi, P., et al. (2020) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12627 · Cited by 2,234
Gonzalez, A., Mouquet, N., & Loreau, M. (2009) · Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, and Human Wellbeing · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199547951.003.0010 · Cited by 92
Metadata
- Authors
- Keller, R. P., Lodge, D. M., & Finnoff, D. C.
- Affiliations
- University of Notre Dame (US)
- University of Wyoming (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Publisher
- National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2007-01-02
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 203-207
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- PMC
- PMC1765435
- OpenAlex
- W2100987405
- Cited by
- 369
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 23
- FWCI
- 21.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (0213698)
- University of Notre Dame
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine Ecology and Invasive Species
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Biological Control of Invasive Species
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
- Keywords
- invasive species, risk assessment, bioeconomic analysis, species screening, plant quarantine, ornamental plant trade, introduced species, trade globalization, cost-benefit analysis
- MeSH terms
- Commerce, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Plants, Quarantine, Models, Econometric, Ecosystem, Risk Assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review