4.4 Article

How much is Europe spending on invasive alien species?

Journal

BIOLOGICAL INVASIONS
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages 173-177

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10530-009-9440-5

Keywords

EU; Funding; Alien; Species; Research; Management; LIFE; RTD FP; IAS; European Commission; Indicators; Eradication; Control; Prevention

Funding

  1. European Environment Agency [9,600 EUR]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Over the last 15 years, despite the lack of a specific strategy or a dedicated financial instrument to deal with invasive alien species (IAS), the European Commission (EC) has contributed to financing almost 300 projects addressing this issue, for a total budget exceeding 132 million EUR. Such figures are based on projects funded under two specific EU financial tools: LIFE and the RTD Framework Programmes. The contribution of the two programmes has been characterised by an overall positive trend over the years, in terms of both the number of projects and the budget spent. Such trend can be assumed to reflect an overall increase in both the awareness of the problem among wildlife managers and scientific institutions, and the willingness to pay by the EC institutions and the EU citizens in general. Such data might contribute to the development of a response indicator measuring 'Trends in invasive alien species in Europe', useful to assess progress toward the target of halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010-as a part of the SEBI 2010 process. The results may also contribute to assess the economic impact of IAS in Europe-in terms of costs for reduction and/or prevention of damages-and to support policy decisions and communication campaigns. Finally, the results are encouraging and support the need for the development and the implementation of a sound EU strategy on IAS, so as to regulate and optimise the administration of the available financial resources-whenever appropriate-on the basis of specific priorities.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available