Search

Globally, the number of invasive alien species (IAS) continues to increase and management and policy responses typically need to be adopted before conclusive empirical evidence on their environmental and socioeconomic impacts are available. Consequently, numerous protocols exist for assessing IAS impacts and differ considerably in which evidence they include. However, inclusive strategies for building a transparent evidence base underlying IAS impact assessments are lacking, potentially affecting our ability to reliably identify priority IAS. Using alien parrots in Europe as a case study, here we apply an evidence-mapping scheme to classify impact evidence and evaluate the consequences of accepting different subsets of available evidence on impact assessment outcomes. We collected environmental and socioeconomic impact data in multiple languages using a >wiki-review> process, comprising a systematic evidence search and an online editing and consultation phase. Evidence was classified by parrot species, impact category (e.g. infrastructure), geographical area (e.g. native range), source type (e.g. peer-review), study design (e.g. experimental) and impact direction (deleterious, beneficial and no impact). Our comprehensive database comprised 386 impact entries from 233 sources. Most evidence was anecdotal (50%). A total of 42% of entries reported damage to agriculture (mainly in native ranges), while within Europe most entries concerned interspecific competition (39%). We demonstrate that the types of evidence included in assessments can strongly influence impact severity scores. For example, including evidence from the native range or anecdotal evidence resulted in an overall switch from minimal-moderate to moderate-major overall impact scores. We advise using such an evidence-mapping approach to create an inclusive and updatable database as the foundation for more transparent IAS impact assessments. When openly shared, such evidence-mapping can help better inform IAS research, management and policy., We acknowledge the support provided by the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST Action ES1304: ParrotNet) for the development of this article. Diederik Strubbe was funded by a Marie Skłodowska‐Curie Action under the Horizon 2020 call (H2020‐MSCA‐IF‐2015; grant number: 706318) and acknowledges the Danish National Research Foundation for support to the Center for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate (grant number: DNRF96).

A study of factors impacting landslide displacement rates was conducted on the Ripley Landslide within the Thompson River valley in British Columbia, Canada for the International Programme on Landslides’ project #202. Seasonal and multiyear changes in atmospheric factors cause cyclic fluctuation of matric suction in the vadose zone through changes to the in situ water content. The ingress of moisture is shown to contribute to multiyear and seasonal loss of stability causing increasing landslide displacement rates, often disregarded in slope stability calculations. However, the water content in the unsaturated zone is important, especially in semi-arid to arid climates where the water table is low and large portions of the slope are unsaturated. Additional tools for studying long-term variations in climate and seasonal changes in water content are presented. These tools are used to characterize historical climate and compare several factors that have resulted in changing landslide displacement rates and magnitude. Infiltration of precipitation and snowmelt directly contributes to matric suction loss in the head scarp and is exacerbated by the presence of tension cracks. While groundwater levels are often correlated to changing displacement rates, changes in matric suction can also influence the rates of displacement. Climatic trends over subsequent years alter the long-term soil water accumulation which impacts rates of landslide displacement. By accounting for additional strength, or potentially a loss in strength due to increasing water content, it is possible to develop a more complete understanding of the mechanisms of climate change which drive displacement rates in the translational, metastable earthen slides that dominate the Thompson River valley. These mechanisms can be applied to comparable river valleys around the world.

Positive relationships between biodiversity and urban ecosystem services (UES) are widely implied within both the scientific and policy literatures, along with the tacit suggestion that enhancing urban green infrastructure will automatically improve both biodiversity and UES. However, it is unclear how much published empirical evidence exists to support these assumptions. We conducted a review of studies published between 1990 and May 2017 that examined urban biodiversity ecosystem service (BES) relationships. In total, we reviewed 317 publications and found biodiversity and UES metrics mentioned 944 times. Only 228 (24%) of the 944 mentions were empirically tested. Among these, 119 (52%) demonstrated a positive BES relationship. Our review showed that taxonomic metrics were used most often as proxies for biodiversity, with very little attention given to functional biodiversity metrics. Similarly, the role of particular species, including non-natives, and specific functional traits are understudied. Finally, we found a paucity of empirical evidence underpinning urban BES relationships. As urban planners increasingly incorporate UES delivery consideration to their decision-making, researchers need to address these substantial knowledge gaps to allow potential trade-offs and synergies between biodiversity conservation and the promotion of UES to be adequately accounted for.

Global phenomena, including urbanization, agricultural intensification, and biotic homogenization, have led to extensive ecosystem degradation, species extinctions, and, consequently, a reduction in biodiversity. However, although it is now widely asserted in the research, policy, and practice arenas that interacting with nature is fundamental to human health and well-being, there is a paucity of nuanced evidence characterizing how the living components of nature, biodiversity, play a role in this accepted truth. Understanding these human–biodiversity\ud relationships is essential if the conservation agenda is to be aligned successfully with that of public health by policymakers and practitioners. Here, we show that an apparent “people–biodiversity paradox” is emerging from the literature, comprising a mismatch between (a) people’s biodiversity preferences and how these inclinations relate to personal subjective well-being and (b) the limited ability of individuals to accurately perceive the biodiversity surrounding them. In addition, we present a conceptual framework for understanding the complexity underpinning human–biodiversity interactions.