Elsevier

Ecological Economics

Volume 71, 15 November 2011, Pages 54-62
Ecological Economics

Methods
Allocating biosecurity resources between preventing, detecting, and eradicating island invasions

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.09.009Get rights and content

Abstract

Finding efficient ways to manage the threat of invasive species helps make the most of limited resources. Different management actions reduce the impact of invasions differently: preventing invasion eliminates impacts entirely, surveillance can facilitate early detection and eradication, and removing individuals can reduce future impact. Few studies have examined the trade-off between all three facets of invasion management. Using a simple model of island invasion, we find how resources should be allocated to each action to minimise the total cost of management and impact. We use a case study of black rat (Rattus rattus) invasion on Barrow Island, Western Australia. The optimal amount to invest in each management action depends on the effectiveness of each action, and the magnitude of impact caused by different stages of invasion. If the pest is currently absent, it is more cost-effective to prevent impacts through prevention or surveillance. If the pest is already widespread, it can sometimes be cost-effective to give up rather than attempting eradication. This model of invasion can provide useful decision support by identifying the trade-offs inherent in each candidate management strategy, the thresholds that alter optimal strategies, and the parameters for which we need more information.

Highlights

► We use a simple model of island invasion to find how resources should be allocated between prevention, surveillance, and eradication. ► We illustrate its application with a case study of black rat (Rattus rattus) invasion on Barrow Island, Western Australia. ► Optimal investments depend on the effectiveness of actions and the impacts caused at different levels of invasion. ► Our model provides decision support by identifying the trade-offs inherent in each management strategy.

Introduction

Invasive species are a major threat to biodiversity (Primack, 2006). They also disrupt ecosystem services (Cook et al., 2007), reduce agricultural and forestry productivity (Julia et al., 2007, Yemshanov et al., 2009), and damage public infrastructure (Burnett et al., 2008). Given the scale of the problem, it is important to find smart and efficient ways to manage invasive species and their impact. This is reflected in the number of studies finding cost-effective control and eradication strategies (Epanchin-Niell and Hastings, 2010), and investigating the trade-offs involved in intervening at different stages of invasion (Bogich et al., 2008, Burnett et al., 2006, Burnett et al., 2008, Finnoff and Tschirhart, 2005, Finnoff et al., 2007, Leung et al., 2002, Mehta et al., 2007, Moore et al., 2010, Olson and Roy, 2005).

While removing individuals with a view to eradication can reduce or eliminate further impact of an invasion, investing in quarantine or inspection can prevent invasions at the outset, and surveillance increases the chance of early detection, which increases the chance of successful eradication (Rejmanek and Pitcairn, 2002, Timmins and Braithwaite, 2002). How should managers be allocating limited resources between these three different actions? So far, few studies have examined the relationship between all three facets of management (Carrasco et al., 2010, Polasky, 2010). In this study, we develop a simple model of insular invasion, and find the allocation of resources to prevention, surveillance, and removal that will minimise the total cost of management and impact. We use a case study of black rat (Rattus rattus) invasion on Barrow Island, Western Australia, to illustrate our model and consider the implications of the results.

Our applied conservation focus differentiates this study from previous economic analyses of this problem. Although the model developed here can be applied to any isolated site, a case study of island invasion is particularly relevant for conservation. Islands have more exotic plant species than mainland sites of the same area (Lonsdale, 1999), and invasive mammals such as rodents and cats are a major threat to island biodiversity (Donlan and Wilcox, 2008, Harris, 2009, Jones et al., 2008, Towns et al., 2006). Defending islands from the impact of invaders is, therefore, a key conservation objective.

The main focus of this study is to find optimal pre-emptive strategies that defend an island from the impact of a pest that is currently absent from that island. Prevention is often seen as better than a cure, but is it always more cost-effective? We ask, under what circumstances is each management action optimal? Along with these pre-emptive strategies, we find optimal strategies when the species has already invaded and become widespread. When is it best to eradicate, and when is it more cost-effective to give up and surrender to invasion?

Section snippets

Materials and Methods

Let us assume that the steward of an island is concerned about the possibility of a particular species invading the island. If the species invades it may be present as a localised population, or it can grow to be widespread across the island. We assume that localised populations may not be detected, whereas a widespread invasion will certainly be detected. We define four possible states of this system, based on the coverage of the invader and the manager's belief (Fig. 1): absent, localised and

Optimal Pre-emptive Strategies

We first report the optimal allocations to quarantine, surveillance, and removal when the pest is absent. For Barrow Island, it is optimal to invest $250,000 in surveillance only, given the estimated effort curves and costs of impact (using the lower bound of our estimate for the cost of impact of a widespread population). Surveillance is more effective than quarantine and the impact (and cost of eradication) of a localised population is relatively small, making it best to catch and eradicate

Discussion

In this study, we identified when we can expect each of three management approaches to most cost-effectively mitigate the impact of invasive species: prevention through quarantine, catching invasions early with surveillance, and preventing further impact through removal. From our results we can infer some general rules of thumb. When all management actions are equally effective, quarantine is preferred over other actions as it can prevent all impact costs. Quarantine is also preferable when it

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to Cindy Hauser, David Roberts, Andrew Solow, and four anonymous reviewers for helpful comments that improved this manuscript, and to Dorian Moro for discussion of the Barrow Island case study. This work was supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award, the AEDA Commonwealth Environment Research Facility, the Australian Centre of Excellence for Risk Analysis, and an Australian Research Council Discovery Grant (DP110101499). The Australian Research Council funded HPP as a Federation

References (53)

  • U.R. Sumaila et al.

    Intergenerational discounting: a new intuitive approach

    Ecological Economics

    (2005)
  • C. Tisdell et al.

    Policies for saving a rare Australian glider: economics and ecology

    Biological Conservation

    (2005)
  • M.L. Weitzman

    Why the far-distant future shoudl be discounted at its lowest possible rate

    Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

    (1998)
  • I.A.E. Atkinson

    The spread of commensal species of Rattus to oceanic islands and their effects on island avifaunas

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics

    Australian Demographic Statistics, Sep 2010

  • R.E. Bellman

    Dynamic Programming

    (1957)
  • T.L. Bogich et al.

    To sample or eradicate? A cost minimization model for monitoring and managing an invasive species

    Journal of Applied Ecology

    (2008)
  • K.M. Burnett et al.

    Prevention, eradication, and containment of invasive species: illustrations from Hawaii

    Agricultural and Resource Economics Review

    (2006)
  • S.R. Carpenter et al.

    Appropriate discounting leads to forward-looking ecosystem management

    Ecological Research

    (2007)
  • Chevron Corporation

    Gorgon – its time is now.

  • D.C. Cook et al.

    Predicting the economic impact of an invasive species on an ecosystem service

    Ecological Applications

    (2007)
  • Department of the Environment and Water Resources

    Threat Abatement Plan or Management Strategy

    (2008)
  • C.J. Donlan et al.

    Diversity, invasive species, and extinctions in insular ecosystems

    Journal of Applied Ecology

    (2008)
  • Environmental Protection Authority

    Environmental Advice on the Principle of Locating a Gas Processing Complex on Barrow Island Nature Reserve

    (2003)
  • R.S. Epanchin-Niell et al.

    Controlling established invaders: integrating economics and spread dynamics to determine optimal management

    Ecology Letters

    (2010)
  • D. Finnoff et al.

    Take a risk: preferring prevention over control of biological invaders

    Ecological Economics

    (2007)
  • Cited by (50)

    • Analytical Bayesian approach for the design of surveillance and control programs to assess pest-eradication success

      2023, Theoretical Population Biology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Previous studies that have examined the allocation of resources to the management of invasive species using a variety of methods including simulations (for example, Bogich et al., 2008; Samaniego-Herrera et al., 2013) and analytical analysis (for example, Guillera-Arroita et al., 2014; Rout et al., 2011). Typically, such analytical approaches have considered the optimisation of expected costs (Guillera-Arroita et al., 2014), often using techniques such as stochastic dynamic programming (Rout et al., 2014, 2011). The random effects of population growth have seldom been integrated into these analytical expressions although some models incorporate deterministic transitions between ‘localised’ and ‘widespread’ populations (Rout et al., 2014, 2011).

    • A generalised and scalable framework for modelling incursions, surveillance and control of plant and environmental pests

      2021, Environmental Modelling and Software
      Citation Excerpt :

      surveillance and treatment strategies (Parry et al., 2006; Keith and Spring, 2013; Parnell et al., 2014; Baxter et al., 2017), the effect of resource and/or cost constraints on surveillance and treatment (Bogich et al., 2008; Kompas and Che, 2009; Hauser and McCarthy, 2009; Rout et al., 2011; Kompas et al., 2016; Spring et al., 2017). It is, however, very difficult to encompass all aspects of an invasive pest incursion into a single decision support model.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text