MODELS D’ANÀLISI DE RISC: eines per a la gestió d’espècies exòtiques Núria Roura‐Pascual
RISK ASSESSMENT = Evaluation of the probability of the introduction and spread of an alien species and of the associated potential biological and socio‐economic consequences using science‐based information
PRIORITIZATION !!
TEASI framework We organized risk according to the major stages in the invasion process (Transport, Establishment, Abundance, Spread) and Impact RISK = probability invasion * severity impact of invasion
SCORINGÂ APPROACHES
QUANTITATIVEÂ APPROACHES
QUANTITATIVEÂ APPROACHES
OBJECTIVES 1) to review and compare existing risk approaches and to assess the current state of the literature; 2) to integrate individual RA models reviewed and the major concepts in invasion biology into a coherent full RA model, both verbally and mathematically.
METHODS We reviewed quantitative and scoring RAs, integrating >300 publications into arguably the most rigorous quantitative RA framework currently existing, and mapping each study onto the TEASI framework
SCORING APPROACHES •
QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES
57% of scoring approaches (n=70) applied formally or informally by governments or other stakeholders
•
Academic research focused on refining quantitative predictive models
*
*
•
A‐WRA being the most influential (i.e. 30% applications)
*http://www.disability‐europe.net/theme/eu‐law‐and‐policy; https://www.eurolaser.com/es/servicio‐al‐cliente/eurolaser‐academy/
SCORING APPROACHES
QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES
•
Broad coverage of TEASI components (50% of reviewed RAs include at least 3 components and 18% include all 5; n=70)
•
Most RAs examine a single TEASI component (78%; n=236)
•
The frequency of TEASI components included range from 47% (Transport) to 87% (Impact)
•
Establishment is the most commonly estimated component (79% of all models)
•
Applied to a large number of species (average 100), although predominantly for vascular plants
•
Most quantitative models have been based on single species (96%)
SCORING APPROACHES •
The coverage of questions was uneven within studies E
•
There was a diversity in methods to combine scores to obtain a risk score, with additive approaches being the most common (44%)
•
Linguistic and epistemic (or incertitude) uncertainties were considered in some approaches, although mainly separated from the general procedure. Stochasticity (or natural variation) was not considered
I
A
T/S
SCORING APPROACHES
QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES
•
The coverage of questions was uneven within studies
•
Establishment is the most commonly estimated component because of the popularity of species distribution models
•
There was a diversity in methods to combine scores to obtain a risk score, with additive approaches being the most common (44%)
•
Recent models integrate multiple components, but most often these have still only synthesized a small subset of the components underlying risk
•
Linguistic and epistemic (or incertitude) uncertainties were considered in some approaches, although mainly separated from the general procedure. Stochasticity (or natural variation) was not considered
•
Virtually all quantitative models examined some form of uncertainty, but the approaches were diverse
CONCLUSIONS • Models are abstractions of nature, but some are better than others. The appropriate question is: which is the best choice amongst available models? • •
Not all components of the TEASI framework need to be estimated to yield a useful risk assessment. Research should demonstrate when quantitative approaches yield benefits over qualitative ones.
• Uncertainty exist, but regardless, decision must be made. Risk assessments should be based on best accessible information, while characterizing the levels of uncertainty that exist.
Ready?
PREVENCIÓ
ca.elportdelaselva.cat
ADF
EXTINCIÓ I CONTROL
comunitat.regio7.cat
Imatges extretes de: http://www.gencat.cat
Pla Exocat?