Cited by 220Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesMarine Ecology and Invasive SpeciesBiological Control of Invasive Species

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Developing a framework of minimum standards for the risk assessment of alien species

Open access

Abstract

Biological invasions are a threat to biodiversity, society and the economy. There is an urgent need to provide evidence‐based assessments of the risks posed by invasive alien species ( IAS ) to prioritize action. Risk assessments underpin IAS policies in many ways: informing legislation; providing justification of restrictions in trade or consumer activities; prioritizing surveillance and rapid response. There are benefits to ensuring consistency in content of IAS risk assessments globally, and this can be achieved by providing a framework of minimum standards as a checklist for quality assurance. From a review of existing risk assessment protocols, and with reference to the requirements of the EU Regulation on IAS (1143/2014) and international agreements including the World Trade Organisation, Convention on Biological Diversity and International Plant Protection Convention, coupled with consensus methods, we identified and agreed upon 14 minimum standards (attributes) a risk‐assessment scheme should include. The agreed minimum standards were as follows: (1) basic species description; (2) likelihood of invasion; (3) distribution, spread and impacts; (4) assessment of introduction pathways; (5) assessment of impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems; (6) Assessment of impact on ecosystem services; (7) assessment of socio‐economic impacts; (8) consideration of status (threatened or protected) of species or habitat under threat; (9) assessment of effects of future climate change; (10) completion possible even when there is a lack of information; (11) documents information sources; (12) provides a summary in a consistent and interpretable form; (13) includes uncertainty; (14) includes quality assurance. In deriving these minimum standards, gaps in knowledge required for completing risk assessments and the scope of existing risk assessment protocols were revealed, most notably in relation to assessing benefits, socio‐economic impacts and impacts on ecosystem services but also inclusion of consideration of climate change. Policy implications . We provide a checklist of components that should be within invasive alien species risk assessments and recommendations to develop risk assessments to meet these proposed minimum standards. Although inspired by implementation of the European Union Regulation on invasive alien species, and as such developed specifically within a European context, the derived framework and minimum standards could be applied globally.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1365-2664.13025

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Alien fungi are insufficiently studied.

    “Similarly, alien fungi are insufficiently studied (Roy et al., 2017).”

    From Scientists' warning on invasive alien species (2020) · cites this paper as Roy et al., 2017

    The Data limitations section says information may be scarce for some alien species, but does not identify fungi. Searches for fungi, microorganisms, and taxonomic research gaps found no passage in our copy saying alien fungi are insufficiently studied. Page numbers were not available. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Alien species are a significant source of pathogen pollution.

    “Alien species are also a significant source of ‘pathogen pollution’ (the human‐mediated introduction of pathogens to new hosts or regions; Fisher et al., 2012; Roy et al., 2017).”

    From Scientists' warning on invasive alien species (2020) · cites this paper as Roy et al., 2017

    Section 4 discusses pathways by which alien species enter and spread, but does not say they introduce pathogens to new hosts or regions. Searches for “pathogen pollution,” “pathogens,” and “disease” found no passage making the attributed claim; mentions of pathogens appeared in reference titles. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 55

  1. Bacher S., 2017, Socio‐economic impact classification of alien taxa (SEICAT), Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 1
  2. Baker R. Black R. Copp G. H. Haysom K. A. Hulme P. E. Thomas M. B. …Ward N. L.(2008).The UK risk assessment scheme for all non‐native species.Biological Invasions – from Ecology to Conservation(eds W. Rabitsch F. Essl & F. Klingenstein) pp. 46‐57. Neobiota.
  3. 10.1098/rsbl.2015.0623 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1111/conl.12150 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/s10530-010-9804-x · DOI
  6. Biosecurity New Zealand, 2006, Risk analysis procedures, version 1
  7. Bomford M., 2006, Risk assessment for the establishment of exotic vertebrates in Australia: Recalibration and refinement of models
  8. Bomford M., 2004, Risk assessment model for the import and keeping of exotic freshwater and estuarine finfish
  9. Bomford M., 2005, Risk assessment model for the import and keeping of exotic reptiles and amphibians
  10. Bomford M., 2008, Risk assessment models for establishment of exotic vertebrates in Australia and New Zealand
  11. Branquart E, 2009, Guidelines for environmental impact assessment and list classification of non‐native organisms in Belgium: version 2.6
  12. 10.1111/j.1365-2338.2010.02423.x · DOI
  13. CEC, 2009, Trinational risk assessment guidelines for aquatic alien invasive species
  14. Copp G. H., 2005, Risk identification and assessment of non‐native freshwater fishes: concepts and perspectives on protocols for the UK, 32
  15. 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01159.x · DOI
  16. Copp G. H., 2008, Risk assessment protocols and decision making tools for use of alien species in aquaculture and stock enhancement, 84
  17. 10.3391/mbi.2016.7.4.04 · DOI
  18. 10.1007/s10530-015-0843-1 · DOI
  19. EFSA Panel on Plant Health, 2011, Guidance on the environmental risk assessment of plant pests, EFSA Journal, 9, 2460, 10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2460 · DOI
  20. 10.1016/j.jnc.2011.08.005 · DOI
  21. European Union, 2014, Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species, Official Journal of the European Union, 57, 35
  22. 10.1007/s10530-015-0986-0 · DOI
  23. Gederaas L., 2013, Alien species in Norway: with the Norwegian Black List 2012
  24. 10.1007/s10530-014-0817-8 · DOI
  25. 10.2137/145960611795163088 · DOI
  26. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00951.x · DOI
  27. 10.1371/journal.pone.0062111 · DOI
  28. 10.1126/science.1075753 · DOI
  29. 10.1890/09-1452.1 · DOI
  30. 10.3897/neobiota.15.3323 · DOI
  31. 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.07.023 · DOI
  32. 10.1111/ele.12003 · DOI
  33. 10.1007/s10584-010-9827-4 · DOI
  34. 10.1007/s10530-015-1013-1 · DOI
  35. Mumford J. D., 2010, Aspects of Applied Biology, 104, 49
  36. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01289.x · DOI
  37. 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2007.01.010 · DOI
  38. 10.1016/S1001-0742(08)62198-1 · DOI
  39. 10.1614/WS-06-168 · DOI
  40. 10.3897/neobiota.28.4824 · DOI
  41. Pheloung P. C., 2001, Weed risk assessment, 83
  42. 10.1007/s10531-012-0394-z · DOI
  43. 10.1890/0012-9615(1999)069[0025:EPSIHS]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  44. 10.1111/j.2041-210X.2010.00083.x · DOI
  45. Tollington S., 2015, Making the EU legislation on invasive species a conservation success, Conservation Letters, 10, 112, 10.1111/conl.12214 · DOI
  46. 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01255.x · DOI
  47. 10.1016/S0301-4797(95)90347-X · DOI
  48. 10.1111/geb.12517 · DOI
  49. 10.1007/s00267-009-9311-y · DOI
  50. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01804.x · DOI
  51. 10.1007/s10530-017-1434-0 · DOI
  52. Verbrugge L. N. H., 2010, Evaluation of international risk assessment protocols for exotic species, Reports on Environmental Science, 352, 1
  53. 10.1016/j.tree.2009.06.008 · DOI · Paper page
  54. 10.1007/s00040-008-1013-6 · DOI
  55. 10.1007/s00035-005-0115-2 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Roy, H. E., Rabitsch, W., Scalera, R., Stewart, A., Gallardo, B., Genovesi, P., Essl, F., Adriaens, T., Bacher, S., Booy, O., Branquart, E., Brunel, S., Copp, G. H., Dean, H., D'hondt, B., Josefsson, M., Kenis, M., Kettunen, M., Linnamagi, M., Lucy, F., Martinou, A., Moore, N., Nentwig, W., Nieto, A., Pergl, J., Peyton, J., Roques, A., Schindler, S., Schönrogge, K., Solarz, W., Stebbing, P. D., Trichkova, T., Vanderhoeven, S., van Valkenburg, J., & Zenetos, A.
Affiliations
  • UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (GB)
  • Environment Agency Austria (AT)
  • IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group Rome Italy
  • University of Sussex (GB)
  • Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
  • Istituto Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale (IT)
  • University of Vienna (AT)
  • Research Institute for Nature and Forest (BE)
  • University of Fribourg (CH)
  • Animal and Plant Health Agency (GB)
  • Belgian Biodiversity Platform Belgian Science Policy Office Brussels Belgium
  • Organisation Européenne et Méditerranéenne pour la Protection de Plantes (FR)
  • Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (GB)
  • Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (SE)
  • CABI Switzerland (CH)
  • Finnish Environment Institute (FI)
  • Estonian Ministry of Environment Tallinn Estonia
  • Institute of Technology Sligo (IE)
  • Joint Services Health Unit RAF Akrotiri Akrotiri Cyprus
  • University of Bern (CH)
  • IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) 64 Brussels Belgium
  • Czech Academy of Sciences (CZ)
  • Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA) Orléans France
  • Institute of Nature Conservation (PL)
  • Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (BG)
  • Belgian Federal Science Policy Office (BE)
  • Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority National Reference Centre (NRC) Wageningen the Netherlands
  • Hellenic Centre for Marine Research (GR)
Corresponding author
Roy, Helen E.
Venue
Journal of Applied Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-11-16
Volume
55
Issue
2
Pages
526-538
ISSN
  • 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2664
OpenAlex
W2761444092
Cited by
220
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 14
FWCI
16.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • NERC Open Research Archive (Natural Environment Research Council) (acceptedVersion)
  • RERO DOC (Universität Bern) (submittedVersion)
  • SUNScholar (Stellenbosch University) (submittedVersion)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • Bern Open Repository and Information System (University of Bern) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
Directorate-General for the Environment (ENV.B.2/ETU/2013/0026)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • 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
Keywords
invasive species, risk assessment, minimum standards, biological invasions, EU Regulation 1143/2014, risk assessment checklist, quality assurance, ecosystem services, socio-economic impacts, climate change impacts, introduction pathways, biodiversity impacts, trade barriers, Convention on Biological Diversity, International Plant Protection Convention, World Trade Organization

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