Search

Invasive alien plant species threaten agriculture and biodiversity globally and require ongoing management to minimise impacts. However, the large number of invasive species means that a risk-based approach to prioritisation is needed, taking into account the spatial scale of management decisions and myriad of available information. Here, we developed a risk-based inventory of invasive plants in Queensland, Australia, using both current species distribution/abundance and the severity of their impacts. Our assessment followed a comprehensive data collection process including a scoping of local government pest management plans, herbarium records, the published literature and structured elicitation of expert knowledge during a series of regional stakeholder workshops. From ~300 plant species that were identified as established and/or emerging invaders in the State, only one-third were considered by practitioners to pose significant risks across regions to be considered management priorities. We aggregated regional species lists into a statewide priority list and analysed the data set (107 species) for historical, geographical, floristic and ecological patterns. Regions on the mainland eastern seaboard of the State share similar invasive plant communities, suggesting that these regions may form a single management unit, unlike the western/inland and the extreme far north (Torres Strait Islands) regions, which share fewer invasive plant species. Positive correlations were detected between invasiveness and time since introduction for some but not all plant life forms. Stakeholders identified research and management priorities for the invasive plant list, including biological control options, public awareness/education, effective herbicide use, ecology/taxonomy and risk analysis. In the course of the exercise, a statewide invasive plant priority list of high-, medium- and low-impact scores for policy, research and management was compiled. Finally, our approach to invasive plant species prioritisation highlighted that planning and policy documents are not necessarily reflected at the grass-root level in terms of species identity and management priorities.

Background In recent decades a range of advocacy organisations have emerged on the drugs policy landscape seeking to shape the development of policy at national and international levels. This development has been facilitated by the expansion of ‘democratic spaces' for civil society participation in governance fora at national and supranational level. However, little is known about these policy actors – their aims, scope, organisational structure, or the purpose of their engagement. Methods Drug policy advocacy organisations were defined as organisations with a clearly stated aim to influence policy and which were based in Europe. Data on these organisations was collected through a systematic tri-lingual (English, French and Spanish) Internet search, supplemented by information provided by national agencies in the 28 EU member states, Norway and Turkey. In order to differentiate between the diverse range of activities, strategies and standpoints of these groups, information from the websites was used to categorise the organisations by their scope of operation, advocacy tools and policy constituencies; and by three key typologies – the type of advocacy they engaged in, their organisational type, and their advocacy objectives and orientation. Results The study identified over two hundred EU-based advocacy organisations ( N =218) which included civil society associations, NGOs, and large-scale alliances and coalitions, operating at local, national and European levels. Three forms of advocacy emerged from the data analysis – peer, professional and public policy. These groups focused their campaigns on practice development (harm reduction or abstinence) and legislative reform (reducing or strengthening drug controls). Conclusion The findings from this study provide a nuanced profile of civil society advocacy as a policy community in the drugs field; their legitimacy to represent cases, causes, social values and ideals; and their focus on both insider and outsider strategies to achieve their goals. The level of convergence and divergence in Europe in relation to policy positions on service provision ethos and drug control regulation is indicated.