Biological Invasions

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 173–177 | Cite as

How much is Europe spending on invasive alien species?

Original Paper


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.


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


  1. Born W, Rauschmayer F, Brauer I (2005) Economic evaluation of biological invasions—a survey. Ecol Econ 55(3):321–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. EC (2003) Thematic report on alien invasive species. Second report of the European Community to the conference of the parties of the Convention on Biological DiversityGoogle Scholar
  3. EEA (2005) The European environment. State and outlook 2005. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, p 576Google Scholar
  4. EEA (2007) Halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010: proposal for a first set of indicators to monitor progress in Europe. EEA technical report No 11/2007. European Environmental Agency—EEA, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  5. Genovesi P, Shine C (2004) European strategy on invasive alien species. Nature and environment, n. 137. Council of Europe publishing, Strasbourg (67)Google Scholar
  6. Gheorghe A, Stanners D, Henrichs T, Kristensen P (eds) (2007) Europe’s environment: the fourth assessment. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, p 452Google Scholar
  7. Gren I-M (2008) Economics of alien invasive species management—choices of targets and policies. Boreal Environ Res 13:17–32Google Scholar
  8. Hulme PE, Roy DB, Cunha T, Larsson T-B (2008) A pan-European inventory of alien species: rationale, implementation and implications for managing biological invasions. In: DAISIE (ed) The handbook of European alien species. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  9. Kettunen M, Genovesi P, Gollasch S, Pagad S, Starfinger U, ten Brink P, Shine C (2008) Technical support to EU strategy on invasive species (IS)—assessment of the impacts of IS in Europe and the EU (Final module report for the European Commission). Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP), Brussels (40pp.+Annexes., May 2008 (DG ENV contract))Google Scholar
  10. Mace GM, Baillie JEM (2007) The 2010 biodiversity indicators: challenges for science and policy. Conserv Biol 21(6):1406–1413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McGeoch MA, Chown SL, Kalwij JM (2006) A global indicator for biological invasion. Conserv Biol 20:1635–1646. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00579.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. McNeely JA (2004) Control of the spread of invasive species as a global public good. Background paper prepared for the book project “The new public finance: responding to global challenges”. UNDP, New York, 17 pGoogle Scholar
  13. Miller C, Kettunen M (2007) Financing natura 2000: guidance handbook. European Commission—General Directorate for the Environment, BruxellesGoogle Scholar
  14. Miller C, Kettunen M, Shine C (2006) Scope options for EU action on invasive alien species (IAS) Final report to the European Commission. Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP), Brussels (109pp+Annexes)Google Scholar
  15. Reaser JK, Meyerson LA, Cronk Q, de Poorter M, Eldrege LG, Green E, Kairo M, Latasi P, Mack RN, Mauremootoo J, O’Dowd D, Orapa W, Sastroutomo S, Saunders A, Shine C, Thrainsson S, Vaiutu L (2007) Ecological and socioeconomic impacts of invasive alien species in island ecosystems. Environ Conserv 34(2):1–14. doi:10.1017/S0376892907003815 Google Scholar
  16. Scalera R, Zaghi D (2004) Alien species and nature conservation in the EU: the role of the LIFE program. European Commission, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 56 pGoogle Scholar
  17. Smeets E, Weterings R (1999) Environmental indicators: typology and overviews. EEA technical report No 25/1999. European Environmental Agency—EEA, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations