Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Understanding and integrating knowledge to improve invasive species management

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biological Invasions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Most successful control or eradication programs have been implemented in uninhabited regions, where little or no consideration of socio-political factors has been required. A considerable challenge for invasion scientists and decision-makers lies in controlling and eradicating species from inhabited regions, where challenges related to community stakeholder perceptions of the need to act, animal rights and uncertainty surrounding the presence and abundance of invasive species can threaten program development and implementation. We interviewed senior policy advisors and scientists who developed and implemented European red fox eradication policies on the inhabited island state of Tasmania, Australia. Our aim was to understand how they perceived that scientific evidence and community stakeholders’ knowledge and preferences should be involved in developing and implementing policy for fox detection and eradication. Respondents perceived that scientific evidence was best used in determining the need to act, assessing risks, designing eradication operations and monitoring progress. Overall, they perceived that involving community stakeholders was important in creating socially acceptable eradication operations that enable access to private land to implement eradication options. Community stakeholders’ knowledge was perceived, largely by scientists, to be based on misinformation, misconceptions and mistrust in science and, therefore, of limited value in informing policy. Community stakeholders were therefore not viewed as equal partners in the policy-making process by scientists. Only those stakeholders who performed a clear function were considered valuable. We propose that increased likelihood of successful eradication of invasive species from inhabited areas can be achieved by using a functional approach to stakeholder inclusion, to prevent dissent and conflict by legitimizing varied knowledge and capacity, leading to co-production of knowledge within a co-management governance system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Armitage D, Berkes F, Dale A et al (2011) Co-management and the co-production of knowledge: learning to adapt in Canada’s Arctic. Glob Environ Change 21:995–1004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bank W (1999) Report from the international workshop on community-based natural resource management (CBNRM). World Bank, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes F (1994) Co-management: bridging the two solitudes. North Perspect 22:18–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes F (2007) Community-based conservation in a globalized world. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:15188–15193

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berkes F (2009) Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. J Environ Manage 90:1692–1702

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berkes F, George PJ, Preston RJ (1991) Co-management: the evolution of the theory and practice of joint administration of living resources. Alternatives 18:12–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertolino S, Genovesi P (2003) Spread and attempted eradication of the grey squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) in Italy, and consequences for the red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris) in Eurasia. Biol Conserv 109:351–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackman D, Corcoran A, Sarre S (2013) Are there really foxes: Where does the doubt emerge? J Knowl Manag Pract 14

  • Bloomfield T (2002) Review of effectiveness of the fox eradication program in Tasmania (unpublished)

  • Bomford M, O’Brien P (1995) Eradication or control for vertebrate pests? Wildl Soc Bull 23:249–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Bremner A, Park K (2007) Public attitudes to the management of invasive non-native species in Scotland. Biol Conserv 139:306–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer TD, Moon K (2015) Towards a functional typology of small-scale fisheries co-management informed by stakeholder perceptions: a coral reef case study. Mar Policy 51:48–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bridgman P, Davis G (2003) What use is a policy? Plenty, if the aim is clear. Aust J Public Adm 62:98–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryce R, Oliver MK, Davies L et al (2011) Turning back the tide of American mink invasion at an unprecedented scale through community participation and adaptive management. Biol Conserv 144:575–583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryman A (2008) Social research methods. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Buick F, Blackman D, West D et al (2014) Enhancing performance in the Australian Public Service: a case of co-production. In: Power of words: 74th annual meeting of the academy of management. Philadelphia

  • Bungey S (2012) The $50 million fox hunt. The Global Mail, Sydney

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell K, Donlan CJ (2005) Feral goat eradications on islands. Conserv Biol 19:1362–1374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell K, Beek J, Eason CT et al (2015) The next generation of rodent eradications: innovative technologies and tools to improve species specificity and increase their feasibility on islands. Biol Conserv 185:47–58

  • Carey JW, Morgan M, Oxtoby MJ (1996) Intercoder agreement in analysis of responses to open-ended interview questions: examples from tuberculosis research. Cult Anthropol Methods 8:1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson L, Berkes F (2005) Co-management: concepts and methodological implications. J Environ Manage 75:65–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clout MN, Veitch CR (eds) (2002) Turning the tide: the eradication of invasive species. IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group, Gland, pp 1–3

  • Corbin J, Strauss A (2008) Basics of qualitiative research. SAGE, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Correy B, Correy R (2012) Fox eradication program—community survey. Myriad Research, Hobart

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowan P, Warburton B (2011) Animal welfare and ethical issues in island pest eradication. In: Veitch CR, Clout MN, Towns DR (eds) Island invasives: eradication and management. IUCN and CBB, Gland, pp 418–421

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW (1998) Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling JA (2014) Genetic studies of aquatic biological invasions: closing the gap between research and management. Biol Invasions 17:951–971

  • Dickie IA, Bennett BM, Burrows LE et al (2014) Conflicting values: ecosystem services and invasive tree management. Biol Invasions 16:705–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott C (2013) Manager, Invasive Species Branch, Tasmanian Government Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Environment and Water. Personal Communication

  • Esler KJ, Prozesky H, Sharma GP et al (2010) How wide is the “knowing-doing” gap in invasion biology? Biol Invasions 12:4065–4075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evely AC, Fazey IRA, Pinard M et al (2008) The influence of philosophical perspectives in integrative research: a conservation case study in the Cairngorms National Park. Ecol Soc 13:52

  • Fisher NI, Lee AJ, Cribb JHJ et al (2011) Public perceptions of foxes and fox eradication in Tasmania. Aust Zool 35:576–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García-Llorente M, Martín-López B, González JA et al (2008) Social perceptions of the impacts and benefits of invasive alien species: implications for management. Biol Conserv 141:2969–2983

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardener MR, Atkinson R, Rentería JL (2010) Eradications and people: lessons from the plant eradication program in galapagos. Restor Ecol 18:20–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Genovesi P (2005) Eradications of invasive alien species in Europe: a review. Springer, Netherlands, pp 127–133 (Issues in Bioinvasion Science)

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser BG, Strauss AL (1965) The discovery of grounded theory. Aldine, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Glen AS, Atkinson R, Campbell KJ et al (2013) Eradicating multiple invasive species on inhabited islands: the next big step in island restoration? Biol Invasions 15:2589–2603

  • Gonçalves J, Marks CA, Obendorf D et al (2014) The risks of using “species-specific” PCR assays in wildlife research: the case of red fox (Vulpes vulpes) identification in Tasmania. Forensic Sci Int Genet 11:e9–e11

  • Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L (2006) How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods 18:59–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser CE, McCarthy MA (2009) Streamlining ‘search and destroy’: cost-effective surveillance for invasive species management. Ecol Lett 12:683–692

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Howald G, Donlan CJ, GalvÁN JP et al (2007) Invasive rodent eradication on islands. Conserv Biol 21:1258–1268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jentoft S, McCay B (1995) User participation in fisheries management: lessons drawn from international experiences. Mar Policy 19:227–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapler EJ, Thompson JR, Widrlechner MP (2012) Assessing stakeholder perspectives on invasive plants to inform risk analysis. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 5:194–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendle AD, Rose JE (2000) The aliens have landed! What are the justifications for ‘native only’ policies in landscape plantings? Landsc Urban Plan 47:19–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinnear JE (2003) Eradicating the fox in Tasmania: a review of the fox free Tasmania program. Unpublished report to DPIPWE. Hobart

  • Kinnear JE, Sumner NR, Onus ML (2002) The red fox in Australia—an exotic predator turned biocontrol agent. Biol Conserv 108:335–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn T (1962) Structure of scientific revolution. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Lach D, List P, Steel B et al (2003) Advocacy and credibility of ecological scientists in resource decisionmaking: a regional study. Bioscience 53:170–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson BMH (2007) An alien approach to invasive species: objectivity and society in invasion biology. Biol Invasions 9:947–956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell H (1951) The policy orientation. In: Lerner D, Lasswell H (eds) The policy sciences. Stanford University Press, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu S, Sheppard A, Kriticos D et al (2011) Incorporating uncertainty and social values in managing invasive alien species: a deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach. Biol Invasions 13:2323–2337

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Low T (2001) From ecology to politics: the human side of alien invasions. In: McNeely JA (ed) The great reshuffling human dimensions of invasive alien species. IUCN Biodiversity Policy Coordination Division, Gland, pp 35–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Mack RN, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM et al (2000) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol Appl 10:689–710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacQueen KM, McLellan E, Kay K et al (1998) Codebook development for team-based qualitative analysis. Cultural Anthropology Methods 10:31–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Madden F, McQuinn B (2014) Conservation’s blind spot: the case for conflict transformation in wildlife conservation. Biol Conserv 178:97–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marks CA, Obendorf D, Pereira F et al (2014) The dispersion and detection patterns of mtDNA assigned red fox Vulpes vulpes scats in Tasmania are anomalous. J Appl Ecol 51:1033–1040

  • Martin S (2010) Co-production of social research: strategies for engaged scholarship. Public Money Manag 30:211–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton D, Climo D, Laboudallon V et al (2002) Alien mammal eradication and quarantine on inhabited islands in the Seychelles. In: Clout MN, Veitch CR (eds) Turning the tide: the eradication of invasive species. IUCN SCC Invasive Species Specialist Group, Gland, pp 182–198

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Sage, Beverly Hills

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon K, Blackman D (2014) A guide to understanding social science research for natural scientists. Conserv Biol 28:1167–1177

  • Morgan MG, Fischoff B, Bostrom A et al (2002) Risk communication: a mental models approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison S, Faulkner K, Vermeer L et al (2011) The essential non-science of eradication programmes: creating conditions for success island invasives: eradication and management. IUCN, Gland, pp 461–466

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse JM (1994) Designing funded qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Handbook of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 220–235

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers JH, Simberloff D, Kuris AM et al (2000) Eradication revisited: dealing with exotic species. Trends Ecol Evol 15:316–320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie AJ, Collins KM (2007) A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. Qual Rep 12:281–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppel S, Beaven BM, Bolton M et al (2011) Eradication of invasive mammals on islands inhabited by humans and domestic animals. Conserv Biol 25:232–240

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parkes J, Anderson D (2009) Review of the program to eradicate foxes (Vulpes vulpes) from Tasmania. Landcare Research, Lincoln

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkes JP, Macdonald N, Leaman G (2002) An attempt to eradicate feral goats from Lord Howe Island. In: Clout MN, Veitch CR (eds) Turning the tide: the eradication of invasive species. IUCN SCC Invasive Species Specialist Group, Gland, pp 233–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative research and evaluation methods. SAGE, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Plummer R, Fitzgibbon J (2004) Co-management of natural resources: a proposed framework. Environ Manage 33:876–885

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL, Bottrill MC (2008) Opportunism, threats, and the evolution of systematic conservation planning. Conserv Biol 22:1340–1345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey DSL, Parkes J, Morrison SA (2009) Quantifying eradication success: the removal of feral pigs from Santa Cruz Island, California. Conserv Biol 23:449–459

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond CM, Fazey I, Reed MS et al (2010) Integrating local and scientific knowledge for environmental management. J Environ Manage 91:1766–1777

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sarre SD, MacDonald AJ, Barclay C et al (2012) Foxes are now widespread in Tasmania: DNA detection defines the distribution of this rare but invasive carnivore. J Appl Ecol 50:459–468

  • Saunders G, Lane C, Harris S et al (2006) Foxes in Tasmania: a report on an incursion by an invasive species. Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Selge S, Fischer A, van der Wal R (2011) Public and professional views on invasive non-native species—a qualitative social scientific investigation. Biol Conserv 144:3089–3097

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharpe LM (2014) Public perspectives on genetic biocontrol technologies for controlling invasive fish. Biol Invasions 16:1241–1256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw JD, Wilson JRU, Richardson DM (2010) Initiating dialogue between scientists and managers of biological invasions. Biol Invasions 12:4077–4083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short J, Smith A (1994) Mammal decline and recovery in Australia. J Mammal 75:288–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (1997) Eradication. In: Simberloff D, Schmitz DC, Brown TC (eds) Strangers in paradise. Impact and management of nonindigenous species in Florida. Island Press, Washington, pp 221–228

    Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (2001) Eradication of island invasives: practical actions and results achieved. Trends Ecol Evol 16:273–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (2003a) Confronting introduced species: a form of xenophobia? Biol Invasions 5:179–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (2003b) Eradication—preventing invasions at the outset. Weed Sci 51:247–253

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (2003c) How much information on population biology is needed to manage introduced species? Conserv Biol 17:83–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (2009) We can eliminate invasions or live with them. Successful management projects. Biol Invasions 11:149–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singleton SG (1998) Constructing cooperation: the evolution of institutions of comanagement. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoll-Kleemann S, O’Riordan T, Jaeger CC (2001) The psychology of denial concerning climate mitigation measures: evidence from Swiss focus groups. Glob Environ Change 11:107–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sully A (2009) Feral Peril. ABC1, Australia, pp 55 minutes

  • Tam J, McDaniels TL (2013) Understanding individual risk perceptions and preferences for climate change adaptations in biological conservation. Environ Sci Policy 27:114–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tershy BR, Donlan CJ, Keitt BS et al (2002) Island conservation in north-west Mexico: a conservation model integrating research, education and exotic mammal eradication. In: Clout MN, Veitch CR (eds) Turning the tide: the eradication of invasive species. IUCN SCC Invasive Species Specialist Group, Gland, pp 293–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Varnham K, Glass T, Stringer C (2011) Involving the community in rodent eradication on Tristan da Cunha. In: Veitch CR, Clout MN, Towns DR (eds) Island invasives: eradication and management. IUCN and CBB, Gland, pp 504–507

    Google Scholar 

  • Veitch CR, Clout MN, Towns DR (2011) Island invasives: eradication and management. In: Proceedings of the international conference on island invasives. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN and Auckland, New Zealand: CBB, pp xii + 542

  • Vitousek PM, D’Antonio CM, Loope LL et al (1996) Biological invasions as global environmental change. Am Sci 84:468–478

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren P (2001) Dealing with the human dimensions of invasive alien species within New Zealand’s biosecurity system. In: McNeely JA (ed) The great reshuffling human dimensions of invasive alien species. IUCN Biodiversity Policy Coordination Division, Gland, pp 103–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson A (2013) Misunderstanding the “Nature” of co-management: a geography of regulatory science and indigenous knowledges (IK). Environ Manage 52:1085–1102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Western D, Wright RM (1994) Natural connections. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson IS, Priddel D (2011) Rodent eradication on Lord Howe Island: challenges posed by people, livestock, and threatened endemics. In: Veitch CR, Clout MN, Towns DR (eds) Island invasives: eradication and management. IUCN and CBB, Gland, pp 508–514

    Google Scholar 

  • World Conservation Monitoring Centre (1992) Global biodiversity: status of the Earth’s living resources. Chapman & Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Yokomizo H, Possingham HP, Thomas MB et al (2009) Managing the impact of invasive species: the value of knowing the density–impact curve. Ecol Appl 19:376–386

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Young AM, Larson BMH (2011) Clarifying debates in invasion biology: a survey of invasion biologists. Environ Res 111:893–898

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zabala J, Zuberogoitia I, González-Oreja J (2010) Estimating costs and outcomes of invasive American mink (Neovison vison) management in continental areas: a framework for evidence based control and eradication. Biol Invasions 12:2999–3012

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Applied Ecology/Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, 2601, Australia

    Katie Moon

  2. School of Business, University of New South Wales, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia

    Deborah A. Blackman

  3. Northern Institute, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT, 0909, Australia

    Tom D. Brewer

  4. Arafura Timor Research Facility, Australian Institute of Marine Science, 23 Ellengowan Dr., Brinkin, NT, 0810, Australia

    Tom D. Brewer

Authors
  1. Katie Moon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Deborah A. Blackman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tom D. Brewer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katie Moon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moon, K., Blackman, D.A. & Brewer, T.D. Understanding and integrating knowledge to improve invasive species management. Biol Invasions 17, 2675–2689 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-015-0904-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-015-0904-5

Keywords