Biological Invasions

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 235–249

Identifying Hazards in Complex Ecological Systems. Part 1: Fault-tree Analysis for Biological Invasions

  • Keith R. Hayes


Ecological risk assessment is a common environmental management tool. It is routinely used for physical and chemical stressors, and has recently been used for biological stressors such as invasive species and genetically modified organisms. Identifying hazards correctly is critical to any risk assessment. In many ecological examples, however, this stage of the analysis is very poor. This paper applies a hazard-analysis tool that is commonly used in complex engineering systems – fault-tree analysis – to an ecological system – ballast-water introductions. The analysis, which is rigorous and systematic, highlights the complexity of the ballast-water introduction cycle. The top event in the fault-tree is the successful infection of a port. The fault-tree identifies the parallel and sequential events leading up to the top event, including multiple vessel-infection scenarios, determined by the origin (hard substrate, soft substrate, water column and another organism) and behaviour of the target organism. The analysis also identifies the role of ballast-tank populations, ballast-water carry-over, crevice-seeking species and third-party risks. These phenomena add considerably to the complexity of the problem. Fault-trees will have a limited application to ecological systems because of the difficulty of estimating the probability of the basic or undeveloped events in the tree. As this paper demonstrates, however, fault-tree analysis has considerable heuristic potential when applied to ecological systems.

ballast-water ecological risk assessment fault-tree analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andersen AB, Behrens HL, Bakke SM, Gravir G, Haugom GP and Moen TL (2000) BWTA – Integration Phase EMBLA, Report No 2000–3011, Det Norske Veritas, Hovedkontor, Norway, 113 ppGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson DM, Lively JJ, Reardon EM and Price CA (1985) Sinking characteristics of dinoflagellates cysts. Limnology and Oceanography 30(5): 1000–1009Google Scholar
  3. Baltz DM (1991) Introduced fishes in marine systems and inland seas. Biological Conservation 56: 151–177Google Scholar
  4. Barnthouse LW, Suter GW, Bartell SM, Beauchamp JJ, Gardner RH, Linder E, O'Neill RV and Rosen AE (1986) Users Manual for Ecological Risk Assessment. NTIS DE86–010063, ORNL-6251, National Technical Information Service, Springfield Virginia, 207 ppGoogle Scholar
  5. Byrne M, Morrice MG and Wolf B (1997) Introduction of the northern Pacific asteroid Asterias amurensis to Tasmania – reproduction and current distribution. Marine Biology 127: 673–685Google Scholar
  6. Carlton JT (1985) Transoceanic and interoceanic dispersal of coastal marine organisms: the biology of ballast-water. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 23: 313–371Google Scholar
  7. Carlton JT (1996) Pattern, process and prediction in marine invasion ecology. Biological Conservation 78: 97–106Google Scholar
  8. Carlton JT, Reid DM and van Leeuwen H (1995) The Role of Shipping in the Introduction Of Nonindigenous Aquatic Organisms to the Coastal Waters of the United States (other than the Great Lakes) and an Analysis of Control Options. Report No CG-D–11–95, NationalTechnical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia, 349 ppGoogle Scholar
  9. Denny M, Brown V, Carrington E, Kraemer G and Miller A (1989) Fracture mechanics and the survival ofwave-swept macroalgae. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 127: 211–228Google Scholar
  10. Dickman M and Zhang F (1999) Mid-ocean exchange of container vessel ballast-water. 2: effects of vessel type in the transport of diatoms and dinoflagellates from Manzanillo Mexico to Hong Kong, China. Marine Ecology Progress Series 176: 253–262Google Scholar
  11. Ebbesmeyer CC, Francisco MD, Boatman CD, Norton D and Michelsen T (1995) Currents generated by vessel traffic along Seattle'swaterfront. In: Oceans 95 MTS/IEEE: Proceedings of the Conference, October 9–12, 1995, San Diego, California, Vol 1, pp 26–41. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Fairplay (1998) Fairplay Ports Guide. Fairplay Publications Ltd, Coulsdon, Surrey, UKGoogle Scholar
  13. Fiksel JR and Covello VT (1985) The suitability and applicability of risk assessment methods for environmental application of biotechnology. In: Fiksel JR and Covello VT (eds) Biotechnology Risk Assessment: Issues and Methods for Environmental Introductions, pp 355–367. Pergamon Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Francis RICC (1992) Use of risk analysis to assess fishery management strategies: a case study using Orange Roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus) on the Chatham rise, New Zealand. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 49: 922–930Google Scholar
  15. Fuehrer M and Romisch K (1977) Effects of modern ship traffic on inland and ocean waterways and their structures. In: Proceedings of the PIANC 24th International Navigation Congress, Lenningrad, 1977, Paper S-I3, pp 1–15. General Secretariat of PIANC, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  16. Fuehrer M, Pohl H and Romisch K (1987) Propeller jet erosion and stability criteria for bottom protections of various constructions. Bulletin of the Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses 58: 45–56Google Scholar
  17. Gollasch S, Dammer M, Lenz J and Andres HG (1998) Nonindigenous organisms introduced via ships into German waters. In: Carlton JT (ed) ICES Cooperative Research Report 224 – Ballast-Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  18. Groves RH, Panetta FD and Virtue JG (2001) Weed Risk Assessment. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Australia, 244 ppGoogle Scholar
  19. Haimes YY (1998) Risk Modeling, Assessment and Management. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 726 ppGoogle Scholar
  20. Hamill GA and Johnston HT (1993) The decay of maximum velocity within the initial stages of a propeller wash. Journal of Hydraulic Research 31(5): 605–613Google Scholar
  21. Hayes KR (1998) Bayesian Statistical Inference in Ecological Risk Assessment. CRIMP Technical Report 17, CSIRO Division of Marine Research, Hobart, Australia, 94 ppGoogle Scholar
  22. Hayes KR (2003) Biosecurity and the role of risk-assessment. In: Ruiz GM and Carlton JT (eds) Bioinvasions: Pathways, Vectors, and Management Strategies. Island Press, Washington, DC (in press)Google Scholar
  23. Hayes KR and Hewitt CL (1998) Risk Assessment Framework for Ballast-Water Introductions. CRIMP Technical Report 14, CSIRO Division of Marine Research, Hobart, Australia, 75 ppGoogle Scholar
  24. Hayes KR and Hewitt CL (2000) Risk Assessment Framework for Ballast-Water Introductions – Volume II. CRIMP Technical Report 21, CSIRO Division of Marine Research, Hobart, Australia, 190 ppGoogle Scholar
  25. Hewitt C and Martin RB (1996) Port Surveys for Introduced Marine Pests, CRIMP Technical Report 4, CSIRO Marine Laboratories, Hobart, Australia, 40 ppGoogle Scholar
  26. Hewitt CL, Campbell ML, Thresher RE and Martin RB (1999) Marine Biological Invasions of Port Phillip Bay, Victoria. CRIMP Technical Report 20, CSIRO Division of Marine Research, Hobart, Australia, 344 ppGoogle Scholar
  27. Hope S, Bjordal EN, Diack HM,Eddershaw BW, Joanny L, Ortone G, Payne FG, Searson AH, Sedlacek KW and Strien W (1982) Methodologies for Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment in the Petroleum Refining and Storage Industry. CONCAWE Report 10/82, CONCAWE, The Hague, The Netherlands, 96 ppGoogle Scholar
  28. Hunter JR (1997) Simple Modelling of the Withdrawal of Ballast-Water by Ships, CMR Report 94/111, CSIRO Division of Marine Research, Hobart, Australia, 16 ppGoogle Scholar
  29. Johnstone IM (1986) Plant invasions windows: a time based classi-fication of invasion potential. Biological Review 61: 369–394Google Scholar
  30. Jones MM (1991) Marine Organisms Transported in Ballast-Water: A Review of the Australian Scientific Position. Bureau of Rural Resources, Bulletin No 11, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, Australia, 48 ppGoogle Scholar
  31. Kellar JA (1993) The application of risk analysis to international trade in animal and animal products. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office International des Epizooties 12(4): 1023–1044Google Scholar
  32. Kelleher G, Bleakley C and Wells S (1995) A Global Representative System of Marine Protected Areas, Vols 1–4. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  33. Kiorboe T, Hansen JLS, Alldredge AL, Jackson GA, Passow U, Dam HG, Drapeau DT, Waite A and Garcia CM (1996) Sedimentation of phytoplankton during a diatom bloom: rates and mechanisms. Journal of Marine Research 54: 1123–1148Google Scholar
  34. Kletz TA(1986) HAZOP & HAZAN: Notes on the Identification and Assessment of Hazards. The Institution of Chemical Engineers, Warwickshire, UK, 94 ppGoogle Scholar
  35. MacIsaac HJ, Robbins TC and Lewis MA (2002) Modeling ships' ballast water as invasion threats to the Great Lakes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 59: 1245–1256Google Scholar
  36. Martin R and Sutton C (2000) Survival of Target Taxa in Ballast Tanks. Final Report for the Strategic Ballast-water Research and Development Program, Project No 8/98, CSIRO Division of Marine Research, Hobart, Australia, 28 ppGoogle Scholar
  37. Morley RS (1993) A model for the assessment of the animal disease risks associated with the importation of animals and animal products. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office International des Epizooties 12(4): 1055–1092Google Scholar
  38. Moyle PB and Light T (1996) Biological invasions of fresh water: empirical rules and assembly theory. Biological Conservation 78: 149–161Google Scholar
  39. Murphy KR (1997) The Survival and Sampling of Zooplankton in Ballast-water. Thesis, Department of Zoology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia, 90 ppGoogle Scholar
  40. National Research Council (1983) Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  41. Pate-Cornell ME (1984) Fault-trees vs event trees in reliability analysis. Risk Analysis 4(3): 177–186Google Scholar
  42. Pearson WD, Killgore JK, Payne BS and Miller AC (1989) Environmental Effects of Navigation Traffic: Studies on Fish Eggs and Larvae. US Army Engineers Technical Report EL–89–15, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Massachusetts, 35 ppGoogle Scholar
  43. Prosser MJ (1986) Propeller Induced Scour. Report reference 2570, BHRA, The Fluid Engineering Centre, Cranfield, Bedford, UK, 39 ppGoogle Scholar
  44. Punt AE and Hilborn R (1997) Fisheries Stock Assessment and Decision Analysis: The Bayesian Approach. CSIRO Division of Marine Research, Hobart, Australia, 36 ppGoogle Scholar
  45. SarjeantWAS, Lacalli T and Gaines G (1987) The cysts and skeletal elements of dinoflagellates: Speculations on the ecological causes for their morphology and development. Micropaleontology 33(1): 1–36Google Scholar
  46. Schobben HPM and Scholten MCTh (1993) Probabilistic methods for marine ecological risk assessment. ICES Journal of Marine Science 50: 349–358Google Scholar
  47. Smayda TJ (1970) The suspension and sinking of phytoplankton in the sea. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 8: 353–414Google Scholar
  48. Thomas WH and Gibson CH (1990) Effects of small scale turbulence on microalgae. Journal of Applied Phycology 2: 71–77Google Scholar
  49. Verhey HJ (1983) The Stability of Bottom and Banks Subjected to the Velocities in the Propeller Jet Behind Ships. Delft Hydraulics Laboratory Publication No 303, Delft Hydraulics Laboratory, Delft, The Netherlands, 11 ppGoogle Scholar
  50. Williams RJ, Griffiths FB, Van derWall EJ and Kelly J (1988) Cargo vessel ballast-water as a vector for the transport of non-indigenous marine species. Estuarine, Coastal and helf Science 26: 409–420Google Scholar
  51. Wonham MJ, Carlton JT, Ruiz GM and Smith LD (2000) Fish and ships: Relating dispersal frequency to success in biological invasions. Marine Biology 136: 1111–1121Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Keith R. Hayes
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Research on Introduced Marine PestsCSIRO Division of Marine ResearchTasmaniaAustralia

Personalised recommendations