12 research outputs found
Why don't we share data and code? Perceived barriers and benefits to public archiving practices
The biological sciences community is increasingly recognizing the value ofopen, reproducible and transparent research practices for science and societyat large. Despite this recognition, many researchers fail to share their dataand code publicly. This pattern may arise from knowledge barriers abouthow to archive data and code, concerns about its reuse, and misalignedcareer incentives. Here, we define, categorize and discuss barriers to dataand code sharing that are relevant to many research fields. We explorehow real and perceived barriers might be overcome or reframed in thelight of the benefits relative to costs. By elucidating these barriers and thecontexts in which they arise, we can take steps to mitigate them and alignour actions with the goals of open science, both as individual scientistsand as a scientific community
Cumulative meta‐analysis identifies declining but negative impacts of invasive species on richness after 20 yr
Economic costs of biological invasions in the United States
Highlights:
• From 1960 to 2020 reported costs of US biological invasions were at least 2 bil in 1960–69 to 896 bil), with lower management investments (510 bil) and terrestrial habitat (4.52 trillion (USD 2017). Considering only observed, highly reliable costs, this total cost reached 19.94 billion/year. These costs increased from 21.08 billion annually between 2010 and 2020. Most costs (73%) were related to resource damages and losses (46.54 billion). Moreover, the majority of costs were reported from invaders from terrestrial habitats (509.55 billion). From a taxonomic perspective, mammals (126.42 billion) were the taxonomic groups responsible for the greatest costs. Considering the apparent rising costs of invasions, coupled with increasing numbers of invasive species and the current lack of cost information for most known invaders, our findings provide critical information for policymakers and managers
Economic Costs of Biological Invasions in the United States
The United States has thousands of invasive species, representing a sizable, but unknown burden to the national economy. Given the potential economic repercussions of invasive species, quantifying these costs is of paramount importance both for national economies and invasion management. Here, we used a novel global database of invasion costs (InvaCost) to quantify the overall costs of invasive species in the United States across spatiotemporal, taxonomic, and socioeconomic scales. From 1960 to 2020, reported invasion costs totaled 1.22 trillion with an average annual cost of 2.00 billion annually between 1960 and 1969 to 896.22 billion), as opposed to management expenditures (643.51 billion, 53%) and agriculture was the most impacted sector (234.71 billion) and insects ($126.42 billion) were the taxonomic groups responsible for the greatest costs. Considering the apparent rising costs of invasions, coupled with increasing numbers of invasive species and the current lack of cost information for most known invaders, our findings provide critical information for policymakers and managers
Economic Costs of Biological Invasions in the United States
The United States has thousands of invasive species, representing a sizable, but unknown burden to the national economy. Given the potential economic repercussions of invasive species, quantifying these costs is of paramount importance both for national economies and invasion management. Here, we used a novel global database of invasion costs (InvaCost) to quantify the overall costs of invasive species in the United States across spatiotemporal, taxonomic, and socioeconomic scales. From 1960 to 2020, reported invasion costs totaled 1.22 trillion with an average annual cost of 2.00 billion annually between 1960 and 1969 to 896.22 billion), as opposed to management expenditures (643.51 billion, 53%) and agriculture was the most impacted sector (234.71 billion) and insects ($126.42 billion) were the taxonomic groups responsible for the greatest costs. Considering the apparent rising costs of invasions, coupled with increasing numbers of invasive species and the current lack of cost information for most known invaders, our findings provide critical information for policymakers and managers
Geographic and taxonomic trends of rising biological invasion costs
Highlights:
• Research interest and economic impacts of biological invasions are globally increasing.
• Invasive alien species costs grew faster than reports of costs.
• Invasive alien species cost trends differ across geographic regions.
• Different taxonomic groups drive global and regional trends differently.
Abstract:
Invasive alien species (IAS) are a growing global ecological problem. Reports on the socio-economic impacts of biological invasions are accumulating, but our understanding of temporal trends across regions and taxa remains scarce. Accordingly, we investigated temporal trends in the economic cost of IAS and cost-reporting literature using the InvaCost database and meta-regression modelling approaches. Overall, we found that both the cost reporting literature and monetary costs increased significantly over time at the global scale, but costs increased faster than reports. Differences in global trends suggest that cost literature has accumulated most rapidly in North America and Oceania, while monetary costs have exhibited the steepest increase in Oceania, followed by Europe, Africa and North America. Moreover, the costs for certain taxonomic groups were more prominent than others and the distribution also differed spatially, reflecting a potential lack of generality in cost-causing taxa and disparate patterns of cost reporting. With regard to global trends within the Animalia and Plantae kingdoms, costs for flatworms, mammals, flowering and vascular plants significantly increased. Our results highlight significantly increasing research interest and monetary impacts of biological invasions globally, but uncover key regional differences driven by variability in reporting of costs across countries and taxa. Our findings also suggest that regions which previously had lower research effort (e.g., Africa) exhibit rapidly increasing costs, comparable to regions historically at the forefront of invasion research. While these increases may be driven by specific countries within regions, we illustrate that even after accounting for research effort (cost reporting), costs of biological invasions are rising
Geographic and taxonomic trends of rising biological invasion costs
International audienceInvasive alien species (IAS) are a growing global ecological problem. Reports on the socio-economic impacts of biological invasions are accumulating, but our understanding of temporal trends across regions and taxa remains scarce. Accordingly, we investigated temporal trends in the economic cost of IAS and cost-reporting literature using the InvaCost database and meta-regression modelling approaches. Overall, we found that both the cost reporting literature and monetary costs increased significantly over time at the global scale, but costs increased faster than reports. Differences in global trends suggest that cost literature has accumulated most rapidly in North America and Oceania, while monetary costs have exhibited the steepest increase in Oceania, followed by Europe, Africa and North America. Moreover, the costs for certain taxonomic groups were more prominent than others and the distribution also differed spatially, reflecting a potential lack of generality in cost-causing taxa and disparate patterns of cost reporting. With regard to global trends within the Animalia and Plantae kingdoms, costs for flatworms, mammals, flowering and vascular plants significantly increased. Our results highlight significantly increasing research interest and monetary impacts of biological invasions globally, but uncover key regional differences driven by variability in reporting of costs across countries and taxa. Our findings also suggest that regions which previously had lower research effort (e.g., Africa) exhibit rapidly increasing costs, comparable to regions historically at the forefront of invasion research. While these increases may be driven by specific countries within regions, we illustrate that even after accounting for research effort (cost reporting), costs of biological invasions are rising
Economic costs of biological invasions within North America
International audienceInvasive species can have severe impacts on ecosystems, economies, and human health. Though the economic impacts of invasions provide important foundations for management and policy, up-to-date syntheses of these impacts are lacking. To produce the most comprehensive estimate of invasive species costs within North America (including the Greater Antilles) to date, we synthesized economic impact data from the recently published InvaCost database. Here, we report that invasions have cost the North America
Recommended from our members
Not just for programmers: How GitHub can accelerate collaborative and reproducible research in ecology and evolution
Researchers in ecology and evolutionary biology are increasingly dependent on computational code to conduct research. Hence, the use of efficient methods to share, reproduce, and collaborate on code as well as document research is fundamental. GitHub is an online, cloud-based service that can help researchers track, organize, discuss, share, and collaborate on software and other materials related to research production, including data, code for analyses, and protocols. Despite these benefits, the use of GitHub in ecology and evolution is not widespread. To help researchers in ecology and evolution adopt useful features from GitHub to improve their research workflows, we review 12 practical ways to use the platform. We outline features ranging from low to high technical difficulty, including storing code, managing projects, coding collaboratively, conducting peer review, writing a manuscript, and using automated and continuous integration to streamline analyses. Given that members of a research team may have different technical skills and responsibilities, we describe how the optimal use of GitHub features may vary among members of a research collaboration. As more ecologists and evolutionary biologists establish their workflows using GitHub, the field can continue to push the boundaries of collaborative, transparent, and open research