article · Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society
Rapid growth in invasion science since the 1990s has led to inconsistent and convoluted terminology across researchers, legislators, and policymakers. Differing definitions for terms such as non-native, alien, exotic, and pest create confusion when describing ecological damage and planning interventions. To resolve this, a simplified framework consolidates usage into three primary terms: non-native, established non-native, and invasive non-native. This system highlights the importance of clearly defining spread when assessing invasiveness, alongside measuring impact to guide practical management decisions. Additionally, a classification protocol categorises populations based on dispersal mechanisms, species origin, population status, and impact. Translated into 28 languages, this streamlined approach avoids introducing new jargon, instead seeking to align international regulations, strengthen communication, and foster collaboration across diverse stakeholders managing non-native species globally.
Biological invasions pose severe threats to ecosystems and resource management, but conflicting language creates friction between research, legislation, and practical response. Establishing a consistent, internationally translated vocabulary ensures that scientists, environmental managers, and policymakers interpret risks identically. This clarity enables faster, more coordinated interventions and prevents costly misunderstandings in biosecurity and conservation regulations.
The abstract outlines an operational framework rather than a commercial product. The classification protocol and standardised terminology appear ready for immediate application by environmental consultancies, biosecurity agencies, and regulatory bodies to guide risk assessments and intervention strategies. However, the abstract does not indicate any direct pathway to market, commercial product development, or private-sector licensing.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
Standardised terminology in science is important for clarity of interpretation and communication. In invasion science - a dynamic and rapidly evolving discipline - the proliferation of technical terminology has lacked a standardised framework for its development. The result is a convoluted and inconsistent usage of terminology, with various discrepancies in descriptions of damage and interventions. A standardised framework is therefore needed for a clear, universally applicable, and consistent terminology to promote more effective communication across researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers. Inconsistencies in terminology stem from the exponential increase in scientific publications on the patterns and processes of biological invasions authored by experts from various disciplines and countries since the 1990s, as well as publications by legislators and policymakers focusing on practical applications, regulations, and management of resources. Aligning and standardising terminology across stakeholders remains a challenge in invasion science. Here, we review and evaluate the multiple terms used in invasion science (e.g. 'non-native', 'alien', 'invasive' or 'invader', 'exotic', 'non-indigenous', 'naturalised', 'pest') to propose a more simplified and standardised terminology. The streamlined framework we propose and translate into 28 other languages is based on the terms (i) 'non-native', denoting species transported beyond their natural biogeographic range, (ii) 'established non-native', i.e. those non-native species that have established self-sustaining populations in their new location(s) in the wild, and (iii) 'invasive non-native' - populations of established non-native species that have recently spread or are spreading rapidly in their invaded range actively or passively with or without human mediation. We also highlight the importance of conceptualising 'spread' for classifying invasiveness and 'impact' for management. Finally, we propose a protocol for classifying populations based on (i) dispersal mechanism, (ii) species origin, (iii) population status, and (iv) impact. Collectively and without introducing new terminology, the framework that we present aims to facilitate effective communication and collaboration in invasion science and management of non-native species.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1111/brv.13071
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
