Advertisement

Biological Invasions

, Volume 17, Issue 12, pp 3433–3453 | Cite as

How environmental managers perceive and approach the issue of invasive species: the case of Japanese knotweed s.l. (Rhône River, France)

  • Marylise CottetEmail author
  • Florence Piola
  • Yves-François Le Lay
  • Soraya Rouifed
  • Anne Rivière-Honegger
Original Paper

Abstract

Studying the perceptions of stakeholders or interested parties is a good way to better understand behaviours and decisions. This is especially true for the management of invasive species such as Japanese knotweed s.l. This plant has spread widely in the Rhône basin, where significant financial resources have been devoted to its management. However, no control technique is recognized as being particularly effective. Many uncertainties remain and many documents have been produced by environmental managers to disseminate current knowledge about the plant and its management. This article aims at characterizing the perceptions that environmental managers have of Japanese knotweed s.l. A discourse analysis was conducted on the printed documentation produced about Japanese knotweed s.l. by environmental managers working along the Rhône River (France). The corpus was both qualitatively and quantitatively analysed. The results indicated a diversity of perceptions depending on the type of environmental managers involved, as well as the geographical areas and scales on which they acted. Whereas some focused on general knowledge relating to the origins and strategies of colonization, others emphasized the diversity and efficacy of the prospective eradication techniques. There is a real interest in implementing targeted actions to meet local issues. To do so, however, these issues must be better defined. This is a challenging task, as it must involve all types of stakeholders.

Keywords

Discourse analyses Environmental managers Invasive species Japanese knotweed s.lManagement Perceptions 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank the anonymous referees for their helpful comments. We are grateful to the regional water agency (in partnership with the LTER-ZABR) and the IngECOTech programme (INEE-CNRS) for funding and supporting this research. We extend our appreciation to Céline Cordani, who collected the data during a master 1 internship and also participated in the first discussions, to Hervé Tronchère for his help with Fig. 2, and to John Stella for his valuable reading and comments. We finally wish to thank all environmental managers who took the time to gather the documentation included in our analysis corpus.

References

  1. Allison SK (2011) The paradox of invasive species in ecological restoration: do restorationists worry about them too much or too little? In: Rotherham ID, Lambert RA (eds) Invasive and introduced plants and animals: human perceptions, attitudes and approaches to management. Routledge, London, pp 265–276Google Scholar
  2. Andreu J, Vilà M, Hulme PE (2009) An assessment of stakeholder perceptions and management of noxious alien plants in Spain. Environ Manag 43:1244–1255. doi: 10.1007/s00267-009-9280-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bailey JP, Conolly AP (2000) Prize-winners to pariahs—a history of Japanese knotweed s.l. (Polygonaceae) in the British Isles. Watsonia 23:93–110Google Scholar
  4. Bailey JP, Bímová K, Mandák B (2009) Asexual spread versus sexual reproduction and evolution in Japanese Knotweed s.l. sets the stage for the “battle of the clones”. Biol Invasions 11:1189–1203. doi: 10.1007/s10530-008-9381-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bardsley D, Edwards-Jones G (2006) Stakeholders’ perceptions of the impacts of invasive exotic plant species in the Mediterranean region. GeoJournal 65:199–210. doi: 10.1007/s10708-005-2755-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bardsley DK, Edwards-Jones G (2007) Invasive species policy and climate change: social perceptions of environmental change in the Mediterranean. Environ Sci Policy 10:230–242. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2006.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beerling DJ, Bailey JP, Conolly AP (1994) Fallopia japonica (Houtt.) Ronse Decraene. J Ecol 82:959–979. doi: 10.2307/2261459 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Binimelis R, Monterroso I, Rodríguez-Labajos B (2007) A social analysis of the bioinvasions of Dreissena polymorpha in Spain and Hydrilla verticillata in Guatemala. Environ Manag 40:555–566. doi: 10.1007/s00267-006-0206-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boyer M (2005) L’invasion des cours d’eau par les renouées du Japon s.l.: réflexions et propositions pour des stratégies de lutte efficaces. Parcs et Réserves 60:21–29Google Scholar
  10. Boyer M, Laval F (2001) Cartographie des renouées du Japon sur le réseau hydrographique du bassin Rhône Méditerranée Corse (hors Saône Doubs). Agence de l’Eau Rhône Méditerranée CorseGoogle Scholar
  11. Bremner A, Park K (2007) Public attitudes to the management of invasive non-native species in Scotland. Biol Conserv 139:306–314. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2007.07.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brochet F, Dubourdieu D (2001) Wine descriptive language supports cognitive specificity of chemical senses. Brain Lang 77:187–196. doi: 10.1006/brln.2000.2428 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Child L, Wade PM (2000) Japanese Knotweed manual: the management and control of an invasive alien weed (Fallopia japonica). Packard Publishing, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  14. Child LE, Wade M, Wagner M (1998) Cost effective control of Fallopia japonica using combination treatments. In: Starfinger U, Edwards K, Kowarik I, Williamson M (eds) Plant invasions: ecological mechanisms and human responses. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp 143–154Google Scholar
  15. Colautti RI, Richardson DM (2009) Subjectivity and flexibility in invasion terminology: too much of a good thing? Biol Invasions 11(6):1225–1229. doi: 10.1007/s10530-008-9333-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Colautti RI, Bailey SA, van Overdijk CDA et al (2006) Characterised and projected costs of nonindigenous species in Canada. Biol Invasions 8:45–59. doi: 10.1007/s10530-005-0236-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dassonville N, Vanderhoeven S, Gruber W, Meerts P (2007) Invasion by Fallopia japonica increases topsoil mineral nutrient concentrations. Ecoscience 14:230–240. doi: 10.2980/1195-6860(2007)14[230:IBFJIT]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dassonville N, Guillaumaud N, Piola F et al (2011) Niche construction by the invasive Asian knotweeds (species complex Fallopia): impact on activity, abundance and community structure of denitrifiers and nitrifiers. Biol Invasions 13:1115–1133. doi: 10.1007/s10530-011-9954-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Davis MA (2009) Invasion biology. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Davis MA, Thompson K, Grime JP (2001) Charles S. Elton and the dissociation of invasion ecology from the rest of ecology. Divers Distrib 7:97–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Delbart E, Mahy G, Weickmans B et al (2012) Can land managers control Japanese knotweed? Lessons from control tests in Belgium. Environ Manage 50:1089–1097. doi: 10.1007/s00267-012-9945-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Dransfield E, Morrot G, Martin J-F, Ngapo T (2004) The application of a text clustering statistical analysis to aid the interpretation of focus group interviews. Food Qual Prefer 15:477–488. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2003.08.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dufour S, Piégay H (2009) From the myth of a lost paradise to targeted river restoration: forget natural references and focus on human benefits. River Res Appl 24:1–14. doi: 10.1002/rra.1239 Google Scholar
  24. Ehrenfeld JG (2010) Ecosystem consequences of biological invasions. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:59–80. doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144650 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Epanchin-Niell RS, Hastings A (2010) Controlling established invaders: integrating economics and spread dynamics to determine optimal management. Ecol Lett 13:528–541CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Filippi O, Aronson J (2010) Plantes invasives en région méditerranéenne : quelles restrictions d’utilisation préconiser pour les jardins et les espaces verts ? Ecologia Mediterranea 36(2):31–54Google Scholar
  27. García-Llorente M, Martín-López B, González JA et al (2008) Social perceptions of the impacts and benefits of invasive alien species: implications for management. Biol Conserv 141:2969–2983. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2008.09.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Genovesi P (2011) Are we turning the tide? Eradications in times of crisis: how the global community is responding to biological invasions. In: Veitch, CR, Clout MN, Towns DR (eds) Island invasives: eradication and management, proceedings of the international conference on island invasives. IUCN, pp 5–8Google Scholar
  29. Genovesi P, Shine C (2004) European strategy on invasive alien species: convention on the conservation of European wildlife and habitats (Bern convention). Council of EuropeGoogle Scholar
  30. Gerber E, Krebs C, Murrell C et al (2008) Exotic invasive knotweeds (Fallopia spp.) negatively affect native plant and invertebrate assemblages in European riparian habitats. Biol Conserv 141:646–654. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2007.12.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gobster PH (2005) Invasive species as ecological threat. Ecol Restor 23(4):261–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gobster PH (2011) Factors affecting people’s responses to invasive species management. In: Rotherham ID, Lambert RA (eds) Invasive and introduced plants and animals: human perceptions. Routledge, Attitudes Approach Manag, pp 249–264Google Scholar
  33. Herpigny B, Dassonville N, Ghysels P, Mahy G, Meerts P (2012) Variation of growth and functional traits of invasive knotweeds (Fallopia spp.) in Belgium. Plant Ecol 213:419–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Heywood V, Brunel S (2011) Code of conduct on horticulture and invasive alien plants. Council of Europe Publishing, pp 24–27Google Scholar
  35. Horan RD, Perrings C, Lupi F, Bulte EH (2002) Biological pollution prevention strategies under ignorance: the case of invasive species. Am J Agric Econ 84:1303–1310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hulme PE (2006) Beyond control: wider implications for the management of biological invasions. J Appl Ecol 43:835–847. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01227.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jurin RR, Roush DE, Danter KJ (2010) Environmental communication: skills and principles for natural resource managers, scientists and engineers. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  38. Lambdon PW, Pyšek P, Basnou C et al (2008) Alien flora of Europe: species diversity, temporal trends, geographical patterns and research needs. Preslia 80:101–149Google Scholar
  39. Larson BM (2005) The war of the roses: demilitarizing invasion biology. Front Ecol Environ 3:495–500. doi: 10.1890/1540-9295(2005)003[0495:TWOTRD]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Larson BM (2010) Embodied realism and invasive species. In: de Laplante K, Brown B, Peacock K (eds) Handbook of the philosophy of science, vol 11. Elsevier, London, pp 133–150Google Scholar
  41. Lebart L, Salem A, Berry L (1998) Exploring textual data. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lévêque C, Tabacchi É, Menozzi M-J (2012) Les espèces exotiques envahissantes, pour une remise en cause des paradigmes écologiques. Sci Eaux Territ 6:2–9Google Scholar
  43. Levine JM, Vilà M, Antonio CMD et al (2003) Mechanisms underlying the impacts of exotic plant invasions. Proc R Soc B 270:775–781. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2327 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Liu S, Sheppard A, Kriticos D, Cook D (2011) Incorporating uncertainty and social values in managing invasive alien species: a deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach. Biol Invasions 13:2323–2337. doi: 10.1007/s10530-011-0045-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Loewenstein G, Lerner JS (2003) The role of affect in decision making. In: Davidson RJ, Scherer KR, Goldsmith HH (eds) Handbook of affective sciences. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 619–642Google Scholar
  46. Mack RN (2001) Motivations and consequences of the human dispersal of plants. In: McNeely JA (ed) The great reshuffling: human dimensions of invasive alien species. IUCN, Gland, pp 23–34Google Scholar
  47. Marchand P, Ratinaud P (2012) L’analyse de similitude appliquée aux corpus textuels: les primaires socialistes pour l’élection présidentielle française (septembre-octobre 2011). Actes des 11ème Journées Internationales d’Analyse Statistique des Données Textuelles. JADT 2012:687–699Google Scholar
  48. Marshall NA, Friedel M, van Klinken RD, Grice AC (2011) Considering the social dimension of invasive species: the case of buffel grass. Environ Sci Policy 14:327–338. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2010.10.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McHugh JM (2006) A review of literature and field practices focused on the management and control of invasive knotweed. The Nature Conservancy, West HavenGoogle Scholar
  50. McNeely JA (2001) The great reshuffling: human dimensions of invasive alien species. IUCN, GlandGoogle Scholar
  51. McNeely JA (2011) Xenophobia or conservation: some human dimensions. In: Rotherham ID, Lambert RA (eds) Invasive and introduced plants and animals: human perceptions, attitudes and approaches to management. Routledge, London, pp 19–36Google Scholar
  52. O’Brien W (2006) Exotic invasion, nativism and ecological restoration: on the persistence of a contentious debate. Ethics Place Environ 9:63–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Olivier J-M, Carrel G, Lamouroux N et al (2009) The Rhône River Basin. In: Tockner K, Uehlinger U, Robinson C (eds) Rivers of Europe. Elsevier, San Diego, pp 247–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pahl-Wostl C (2006) The importance of social learning in restoring the multifunctionality of rivers and floodplains. Ecol Soc 11(1):10Google Scholar
  55. Parepa M, Fischer M, Krebs C, Bossdorf O (2014) Hybridization increases invasive knotweed success. Evol Appl 7:413–420PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Parr WV, Mouret M, Blackmore S et al (2011) Representation of complexity in wine: influence of expertise. Food Qual Prefer 22:647–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Patt A, Zeckhauser R (2000) Action bias and environmental decisions. J Risk Uncertain 21:45–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Perrings C, Williamson MH, Dalmazzone S (eds) (2000) The economics of biological invasions. Edward Elgar Publishing, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  59. Pimentel D, Lach L, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2000) Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous species in the United States. Bioscience 50:53–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  61. Ratinaud P, Déjean S (2009) IRaMuTeQ: Implémentation de la Méthode ALCESTE d’Analyse de Texte dans un Logiciel LibreGoogle Scholar
  62. Reinert A (1983) Une méthode de classification descendante hiérarchique : application à l’analyse lexicale par contexte. Cahiers de l’Analyse des Données 8:187–198Google Scholar
  63. Reinert M (1990) Une méthode de classification des énoncés d’un corpus présentée à l’aide d’une application. Cahiers de l’Analyse des Données 15:21–36Google Scholar
  64. Richardson DM, Pyšek P, Rejmánek M et al (2000) Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: concepts and definitions. Divers Distrib 6:93–107. doi: 10.1046/j.1472-4642.2000.00083.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rouifed S (2011) Bases Scientifiques pour un Contrôle des Renouées Asiatiques: Performances du Complexe Hybride Fallopia en Réponse aux Contraintes Environnementales. PhD, Lyon 1 UniversityGoogle Scholar
  66. Rouré H, Reinert M (1993) Analyse d’un entretien à l’aide d’une méthode d’analyse lexicale. Actes du Colloque des Secondes Journées Internationales d’Analyse de Données Textuelles 418–428Google Scholar
  67. Selge S, Fischer A, van der Wal R (2011) Public and professional views on invasive non-native species—a qualitative social scientific investigation. Biol Conserv 144:3089–3097. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2011.09.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Shapiro AM (2002) The Californian urban butterfly fauna is dependent on alien plants. Divers Distrib 8:31–40. doi: 10.1046/j.1366-9516.2001.00120.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Shaw RH, Seiger LA (2002) Japanese knotweed. In: Driesche RV, Blossey B, Hoddle M et al (eds) Biological control of invasive plants in the eastern United States. USDA Forest Service, pp 159–166Google Scholar
  70. Simberloff D (2006) Invasional meltdown six years later—important phenomenon, unfortunate metaphor, or both?”. Ecol Lett 9:912–919CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Simberloff D (2012) Nature, natives, nativism and management: worldviews underlying controversies in invasion biology. Environ Ethics 34:5–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Simberloff D (2014) The “balance of nature”—evolution of a panchreston. PLoS Biol 12(10):e1001963. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001963 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Simberloff D, Parker IM, Windle PN (2005) Introduced species policy, management, and future research needs. Front Ecol Environ 3:12–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sims C, Finnoff D (2013) When is a “wait and see” approach to invasive species justified? Resour Energy Econ 35:235–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Starfinger U, Kowarik I, Rode M, Schepker H (2003) From desirable ornamental plant to pest to accepted addition to the flora?—the perception of an alien tree species through the centuries. Biol Invasions 5:323–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Stromberg JC, Chew MK, Nagler PL, Glenn EP (2009) Changing perceptions of change: the role of scientists in Tamarix and river management. Restor Ecol 17:177–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Subramaniam B (2001) The aliens have landed! Reflections on the rhetoric of biological invasions. Meridians 2(1):26–40Google Scholar
  78. Sunstein CR, Zeckhauser R (2011) Overreaction to fearsome risks. Environ Resource Econ 48:435–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Tiebre M-S, Bizoux J-P, Hardy OJ, Bailey JP, Mahy G (2007) Hybridization and morphogenetic variation in the invasive alien Fallopia (Polygonaceae) complex in Belgium. Am J Bot 94:1900–1910CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Vanderhoeven S, Dassonville N, Meerts P (2005) Increased topsoil mineral nutrient concentrations under exotic invasive plants in Belgium. Plant Soil 275:169–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Vanderhoeven S, Piqueray J, Halford M et al (2011) Perception and understanding of invasive alien species issues by Nature conservation and horticulture professionals in Belgium. Environ Manag 47:425–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Vitousek PM, D’Antonio CM, Loope LL et al (1997) Introduced species: a significant component of human-caused global change. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 21(1):1–16Google Scholar
  83. Williamson M (1999) Invasions. Ecography 22:5–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marylise Cottet
    • 1
    Email author
  • Florence Piola
    • 2
  • Yves-François Le Lay
    • 1
  • Soraya Rouifed
    • 2
  • Anne Rivière-Honegger
    • 1
  1. 1.UMR 5600 “Environnement, Ville, Société”, CNRS, Université de LyonENS de LyonLyon Cedex 07France
  2. 2.UMR 5023 LEHNA, CNRS, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1ENTPEVilleurbanne CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations