Biological Invasions

, Volume 12, Issue 8, pp 2837–2851 | Cite as

Conundrums of a complex vector for invasive species control: a detailed examination of the horticultural industry

  • Jennifer Drew
  • Neil AndersonEmail author
  • David Andow
Original Paper


Historically the horticultural industry has transformed the US landscape through intentional cultivar introductions and unintentional introductions of weeds, insects and plant diseases. While it has been demonstrated that the horticultural industry, in particular the ornamental subsector, is an important vector for the introduction and dispersal of invasive species, known invasive plants continue to be sold while new cultivars are introduced at an ever increasing rate. This study examines the horticultural trade as a vector for invasive species, its agents, and characterizes the complexity of the distribution channel. Numerous factors have contributed to the recent expansion in marketed cultivars, including technological, industry growth, and marketing developments. The result has been an increased and sophisticated consumer demand with a corresponding aggressive scouring of the planet for new crops, many of which are introduced into the market without sufficient testing for invasive tendencies. Traditional approaches to invasive horticultural crop control (regulation, self-regulation), which target players in the distribution channel before and/or after cultivar release, have had limited effectiveness and buy-in because these approaches do not address the industry’s complexities and economic incentives. Involvement and education of consumers may provide better oversight outcomes by addressing the moral hazard problem while acknowledging the key characteristics of the industry.


Economic commons Horticulture Industry self regulation Invasive species Noninvasive Moral hazard Ornamental plants Oversight Regulation 



This research was supported by a Minnesota Futures, Phase II grant from the University of Minnesota, Office of the Vice President for Research. The authors would like to thank their reviewers, Drs. Sarah Reichard and Barbara Liedl, for their thoughtful input and helpful comments with this manuscript.


  1. Aguirre P (2006) Protection: Plant patents, utility patents, plant breeders’ rights, trademarks, branding, royalties. In: Anderson NO (ed) Flower Breeding & Genetics: Issues challenges, and opportunities for the 21st century. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 75–106Google Scholar
  2. Akerlof GA (1970) The Market for “Lemons”: quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Q J Econ 84:488–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alston JM, Pardey P (2008) Public funding for research into specialty crops. Hort Science 43:1461–1470Google Scholar
  4. Anderson NO (2006) Prevention of invasiveness in floricultural crops. In: Anderson NO (ed) Flower Breeding & Genetics: Issues challenges, and opportunities for the 21st century. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 177–214Google Scholar
  5. Anderson NO, Ascher PD (1993) Male and female fertility of loosestrife (Lythrum) cultivars. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 118:851–858Google Scholar
  6. Anderson NO, Galatowitsch et al (2006a) Selection strategies to reduce invasive potential in introduced plants. Euphytica 148:203–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anderson NO, Gomez N et al (2006b) A non-invasive crop ideotype to reduce invasive potential. Euphytica 148:185–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Anonymous (2008) Nurseries ordered to destroy illegal plants. Am Nurseryman 207:10Google Scholar
  9. Baskin Y (2002) The greening of horticulture: new codes of conduct aim to curb plant invasions. Bioscience 52:464–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brennan MF, Pray CE et al (1999) Impact of industry concentration on innovation in the U.S. plant biotech industry. In: Transitions in agbiotech: economics of strategy and policy. Food Marketing Policy Center. University of Connecticut and Department of Resource Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, pp 153–174Google Scholar
  11. Brzuszek RF, Harkess RL et al (2007) Landscape architects’ use of native plants in the Southeastern United States. HortTechnology 17(1):78–81Google Scholar
  12. Buley N (ed) (2006) J. Frank Schmidt & Son Co. bare root catalog 2006–2007. J. Frank Schmidt & Son Co., Boring OregonGoogle Scholar
  13. Burt JW, Muir AA et al (2007) Preventing horticultural introductions of invasive plants-potential efficacy of voluntary initiatives. Biol Invasions 9:909–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Butterfield B (Director) (1981, 1987, 1992, 1996, 2002, and 2008). National gardening survey. Harris Interactive for the National Gardening Association, South BurlingtonGoogle Scholar
  15. Castriota S, Delmastro M (2009) The economics of collective reputation: minimum quality standards, vertical differentiation and optimal group size, AAWE working paper, American Association of Wine EconomistsGoogle Scholar
  16. Cavaliere A (2000) Overcompliance and voluntary agreements. Environ and Resour Econ 17:195–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Craig R (2003) Creating a more beautiful world: a century of progress in the breeding of floral and nursery plants. HortScience 38:928–936Google Scholar
  18. Dehnen-Schmutz K, Touza J et al (2007a) The horticultural trade and ornamental plant invasions in Britain. Conserv Biol 21:224–231CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Dehnen-Schmutz K, Touza J et al (2007b) A century of the ornamental plant trade and its impact on invasion success. Divers and Distribu 13:527–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dunne N (2004/2005) Sudden oak death-what gardeners need to know about a deadly pathogen on the move. Plants & Gardens News 19 Available at: Accessed Sep 2008
  21. Duvick DN (1996) Plant breeding, an evolutionary concept. Crop Sci 36:539–548Google Scholar
  22. Fernandez-Cornejo J (2004) The seed industry in U.S. agriculture: an exploration of data and information on crop seed markets, regulation, industry structure and research and development. Economic Research Service/USDA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  23. Gagliardi JA, Brand MH (2007) Connecticut nursery and landscape industry preferences for solutions to the sale and use of invasive plants. HorTechnology 17:39–45Google Scholar
  24. Galatowitsch SM, Anderson NO et al (1999) Invasiveness in wetland plants in temperate North America. Wetl 19(4):733–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gehrig T, Jost P-J (1995) Quacks, lemons, and self regulation: a welfare analysis. J Regul Econ 7:309–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Groves RH (1996) Recent incursions of weeds to Australia 1971–1995. CRC Weed Management Systems, Technical Series 3Google Scholar
  27. Hall M (2000) Invasive plants and the nursery industry. Environmental studies, Brown University, Providence Available at: Accessed Sep 2008
  28. Hall CR, Hodges AW et al (2005) Economic Impacts of the Green Industry in the United States: Final Report to the National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Committee. University of Florida IFAS Extension, FL, GainesvilleGoogle Scholar
  29. Hamrick D (2004) The state of breeder’s rights. FloraCulture Int 14(2):1–3Google Scholar
  30. Hanan J (1998) Greenhouses: Advanced technology for protected horticulture. CRC Press, Boca Raton, p 7Google Scholar
  31. Harrington RA, Kujawski R et al (2003) Invasive plants and the green industry. J Arboric 29:42–47Google Scholar
  32. Higginbotham JS (1990) Four centuries of planting and progress: a history of the US nursery industry. Am Nurseryman 171(12):36–59Google Scholar
  33. Isaacson RT, (ed) (1987, 1989, 1993, 1996, 2000 & 2004) Andersen horticultural library’s source list of plants and seeds, 1st–6th eds. Andersen Horticultural Library, University of Minnesota, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  34. Isaacson RT, Allen K (eds) (2008) Plant Information Online. Andersen Horticultural Library, University of Minnesota Available at: Accessed 19 Oct. 2008
  35. Janick J (ed) (1999) Perspectives on new crops and new uses. Proceedings of the Fourth National Symposium New Crops and New Uses: Biodiversity and agricultural sustainability. American Society for Horticultural Science Press, Alexandria, VAGoogle Scholar
  36. Janick J, Goldman IL (2003) Horticulture, horticultural science, and 100 years of ASHS. HortScience 38:883–900Google Scholar
  37. Janick J, Simon JE (eds) (1993) New crops. Wiley, NYGoogle Scholar
  38. Kartesz JT, Meacham CA (1999) Synthesis of the North American flora. North Carolina Botanical Garden, University of North Carolina, Chapel HillGoogle Scholar
  39. Kelley KM, Stumpf JR et al (2005) Invasive plant species: consumer awareness, knowledge, and expectations. HortScience 40(4):1136Google Scholar
  40. King AA, Lenox MJ (2000) Industry self-regulation without sanctions: the chemical industry’s responsible care program. Acad of Manag J 43:698–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Landon S, Smith CE (1998) Quality expectations, reputation, and price. South Econ J 64:628–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mack RN (1990) Catalog of woes. Nat Hist 99:44–53Google Scholar
  43. Mack RN (1991) The commercial seed trade: an early disperser of weeds in the United States. Econ Bot 45:257–273Google Scholar
  44. Mack RN (2000) Cultivation fosters plant naturalization by reducing environmental stochasticity. Biol Invasions 2:111–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mack RN (2003) Global plant dispersal, naturalization, and invasion pathways, modes and circumstances. In: Ruiz GM, Carlton JT (eds) Invasive species: vectors and management strategies. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 3–30Google Scholar
  46. Mack RN (2005) Predicting the identity of plant invaders: future contributions from horticulture. HortScience 40:1168–1174Google Scholar
  47. Mack RN, Erneberg M (2002) The United States naturalized flora: largely the product of deliberate introductions. Ann Mo Bot Gard 89:176–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Maki K, Galatowitsch SM (2004) Movement of invasive aquatic plants into Minnesota (USA) through horticultural trade. Biol Conserv 118:389–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Miller MN (2001) Floriculture industry overview: production, sales and marketing in North America. Acta Hortic 543:23–29Google Scholar
  50. Pauly PJ (2007) Fruits and Plains: The horticultural transformation of America. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  51. Peters WL, Meyer MH et al (2006) Minnesota horticultural industry survey on invasive plants. Euphytica 148:75–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pimentel D, Zuniga R et al (2005) Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecol Econ 52:273–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pyšek P, Jarošík V et al (2009a) The global invasion success of Central European plants is related to distribution characteristics in their native range and species traits. Diversity and Distrib 15:891–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pyšek P, Křivánek M et al (2009b) Planting intensity, residence time, and species traits determine invasion success of alien woody species. Ecology 90:2734–2744CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Randall JM, Marinelli J (eds) (1996) Weeds of the global garden. Brooklyn Botanic Garden, BrooklynGoogle Scholar
  56. Reichard SH, Hamilton CW (1997) Predicting invasions of woody plants introduced into North America. Conserv Biol 11:193–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Reichard SH, White P (2001) Horticulture as a pathway of invasive plant introductions in the United States. Bioscience 51:103–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Reichard SH, Schmitz DC et al (2005) The tragedy of the commons revisited: invasive species. Front in Ecol and the Environ 3:103–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ruiz GM, Carlton JT (2003) Invasion vectors: a conceptual framework for management. In: Ruiz GM, Carlton JT (eds) Invasive species: vectors and management strategies. Island Press, Washington DC, pp 459–504Google Scholar
  60. Strickland R (ed) (2004) Farm income: Cash Receipts, 1924–2004 In: Farm income data files, USDA ERS Available at: Accessed 23 Aug. 2005
  61. Townsley-Brascamp W, Marr NE (1994) Evaluation and analysis of consumer preferences for outdoor ornamental plants. Acta Hort 391:199–206Google Scholar
  62. USDA (2005) Addressing the risks associated with the importation of plants for planting, US Department of agriculture, animal and plant health inspection service, Available at:
  63. USDA and NRCS (2008) The plants database. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge Available at: Accessed Oct. 2008
  64. Vetter H, Karantininis K (2002) Moral hazard, vertical integration, and the public monitoring of credence goods. Eur Rev of Agric Econ 29:271–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Yue C, Hurley T et al. (2009) Do native and invasive labels affect consumer willingness to pay for plants? Evidence from experimental auctions. Selected Paper of Agric and Appl Economics Assoc 2009 Annual Meeting, Milwaukee, WI. Available at: Accessed Dec 2009

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied EconomicsUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA
  2. 2.Department of Horticultural ScienceUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA
  3. 3.Department of EntomologyUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA

Personalised recommendations