Putting a federal capacities assessment to work: blueprint for a national program for the early detection of and rapid response to invasive species (EDRR)

This paper responds to national policy directives intended to improve the US government’s capacity to protect national security from the adverse impacts of invasive species. It is the final, synthesizing contribution to a Special Issue of Biological Invasions comprising 12 papers that collectively inform the development and implementation of a national program for the early detection of and rapid response to invasive species (EDRR). The blueprint sets forth policies, goals, and actions to be taken by relevant Executive Branch agencies and components of the Executive Office of the President to develop a national EDRR program, appropriations permitting. It is designed to function as guidance for advancing federal policy through Presidential, Secretarial, and/or Congressional directives. Those committed to protecting national security, the economy, and the well-being of American people are forewarned that our ability to establish a national EDRR program is undermined by the diminishment of the federal workforce; institutional structures, policies, and programs; and directly applicable leadership mechanisms, including the National Invasive Species Council, Invasive Species Advisory Committee, and their managerial Secretariat.


Introduction
A comprehensive approach to biosecurity encompasses a full range of risk management practices intended to defend against harmful and potentially harmful biological organisms, the vast majority of which are invasive species (Meyerson et al. 2009). The US government defines an invasive species to mean, ''with regard to a particular ecosystem, a non-native organism whose introduction causes, or is likely to cause, economic or environmental harm, or harm to human, animal, or plant health'' (Executive Office of the President 2016). Three presidential executive orders (EO) have explicitly recognized and focused on the threats posed to national security by harmful non-native species, tasking federal agencies to take a high-level, coordinated, and cost-efficient approach to invasive species prevention, eradication, and control (Executive Office of the President 1977President , 1999President , 2016. Many other presidential directives have complemented these executive orders, reinforcing national security concerns and establishing action plans for specific sectors. For example, the White House Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience's priority agenda (Climate and Natural Resources Working Group 2014) recognized the need to mitigate invasive species as an ecosystem stressor and called for a national approach to improving invasive species detection and response capacities (published as US Department of the Interior 2016). Although the linkages are not explicitly acknowledged, the National Biodefense Strategy (Executive Office of the President 2018) focuses on invasive pathogens and was informed by the US Invasive Species Advisory Committee (ISAC)'s briefing paper on invasive species impacts on wildlife health (ISAC 2018).
The 12 papers in this Special Issue of Biological Invasions deliver on a 2016-2018 National Invasive Species Council (NISC) Management Plan (National Invasive Species Council 2016) priority action calling for ''…scientific, technical, and institutional assessments in order to determine the capacities and resources necessary to establish a national early detection and rapid response program…'' (hereafter, ''federal capacity assessments''). They also advance two of the seven duties set forth for NISC implementation in EO 13751 (Executive Office of the President 2016): • advance national incident response, data collection, and rapid reporting capacities that build on existing frameworks and programs and strengthen early detection of and rapid response to invasive species, including those that are vectors, reservoirs, or causative agents of disease, and • support and encourage new technologies and practices, and promote the use of existing technologies and practices, to prevent, eradicate, and control invasive species… In the first overview paper of the series, Reaser et al. (2019a, this issue) define the early detection of and rapid response to invasive species (EDRR) as a guiding principle for minimizing the impact of invasive species in an expedited yet effective and cost-efficient manner, where ''detection'' is the process of observing and documenting an invasive species, and ''response'' is the process of reacting to the detection once the organism has been authoritatively identified and response options have been assessed (i.e., risk and feasibility screening completed). Recognizing that EDRR is a non-linear, iterative process, the authors present a conceptual framework that portrays EDRR as the tenet for an integrated system (Fig. 1) rather than a step-wise set of components addressed in a linear manner, as has been typical of other EDRR frameworks (see discussion in Reaser et al. 2019a, this issue). The paper concludes with a short list of cross-cutting, catalytic actions to establish the foundation of a national EDRR program. The ten following papers in the series address specific components of the framework.
Here, I synthesize the primary needs identified by the federal capacity assessments into a blueprint for developing a national EDRR program. Figure 1 is to be referenced as the organizational framework for the paper. The papers in the Special Issue that explicitly identify the need for and/or guide federal actions are referenced within the blueprint. In content and format, the blueprint is explicitly designed to function as guidance for advancing federal policy through Presidential, Secretarial, and/or Congressional directives.
The survey of federal agency EDRR programs and capacities on which the assessments are based was substantially lacking in response from some agencies and on certain topics (see discussion in Reaser et al. 2019a, this issue). Although the NISC Secretariat staff and contractors augmented this information as feasible, resource limitations necessarily resulted in assessment gaps. In particular, the assessment team was not able to evaluate fully the effectiveness of existing EDRR programs, capacities of federal institutional frameworks (see Burgos-Rodríguez and Burgiel 2019a, this issue), types of response measures used and their effectiveness across taxa and context, or the applicability of the wide range of federal and federally-funded biodiversity inventory and monitoring programs to EDRR. The assessment authors also recognized the need to develop a feasibility screening process and associated decision support tool(s) (Reaser et al. 2019a, this issue).
When implementing the blueprint, agencies must consider at least four, potentially inter-related, needs for technical and institutional flexibility: spatio-temporal scale, taxa, available resources (particularly personnel and budget), and socio-political receptivity. Although the papers in our series make this point from various perspectives, none of the papers explicitly focus on these parameters. In large part, this reflects the lack of complete and in-depth response from relevant agencies. It is also an artifact of the tendency of technical journals to focus on scientific research rather than management approaches and their outcomes. Action items to help fill aspects of these information gaps are included in the blueprint.

Purpose
The United States must sustain and expand efforts to protect national security, the economy, and the American people from the adverse impacts of invasive species across all sectors of society. Ideally, invasive species are detected and responded to along invasion pathways into the country or at our national borders, prior to entering the country. The federal government bears primary leadership responsibility for these actions. When these pathway management and border control efforts fail to intercept harmful or potentially harmful non-native species, the costs of action increase dramatically and the burden of defense falls upon land management and transportation agencies across all levels of government, the private sector, and the public. A high-level, whole-of-government approach is thus needed to facilitate the collaboration, communication, cost-efficiencies, and innovation necessary for effective EDRR.

Policy
The federal government must coordinate and use applicable federal frameworks, investments, assets, and expertise to detect and respond to invasive species incursions in an effective and cost-efficient manner. Fundamentally, this requires agencies to support and facilitate access to the information, planning, technologies, and training that enable EDRR. In order to secure national assets and the well-being of Americans, federal agency actions must take into consideration and complement preparedness, planning, and implementation efforts of other countries; state, territorial, tribal, and local governments; non-governmental organizations; the private sector; and the general public.

Goals
Consistent with Executive Orders 13112 and 13751 and other relevant national directives, the heads of federal agencies and relevant components of the Executive Office of the President (collectively, Agencies) shall, to the maximum extent permitted by law and other logistical feasibilities, carry out aforementioned policy by enabling and enacting actions to achieve the following EDRR capacity goals: Fig. 1 EDRR: a comprehensive system. In this model, the blue circles represent the primary actions (components) that need to be enacted in a step-wise manner for the effective detection of and response to a biological invasion. A legend clarifies the meaning of the letters in the circles. The associated commentary reflects the primary questions, observations, and directives that guide the process from one component to the next. At the core of the process, represented by the person and work station, are the informational and technical inputs necessary for the system to function. Arrows point in both directions in an effective system because the information and other outputs generated by one component are strategically used by other components. As is true of all models, this is a simplified depiction of reality; implementation of EDRR is a complex, iterative process that requires context-specific adaptation (a) Coordination, integration, and communication Agencies shall improve the coordination, integration, and communication of EDRR-related activities to enhance the collective benefits of federal programs and investments, as well as to strategically complement and integrate activities across Agencies and with state, territorial, tribal, and local officials. A key aspect of EDRR communication is the timely and accurate reporting of invasive species observations and interceptions, as well as anticipating and communicating the scale of potential spread and impact. (b) Legal and institutional capacity building Agencies shall complement, harmonize, and expand the legal and institutional frameworks necessary to enable the rapid detection of and response to invasive species incursions prior to, upon, and after entry into the United States. a. Establish a government-wide invasive species data management policy for designated data custodial roles and management responsibilities from agency to programmatic levels, address relevant legal and policy issues (including privacy and security), and institutionalize invasive species information management guidelines. The policy should be authoritative and specific enough for agencies to discern their obligations, address sensitive datasharing concerns, and direct the mobilization of federal data into publicly available information systems, yet sufficiently flexible to account for unanticipated needs and emerging opportunities (Reaser et al. 2019b, this issue;Wallace et al. 2019, this issue). b. Identify, improve, and sustain federal information systems that are vital to the operation of a national EDDR program, assess their relationships (e.g., for duplicative or integrative functions), and develop and implement a plan for improving, sustaining, and making these systems more cost-effective over the long-term. This should including building the capacity to join datasets to improve biological, geo-spatial, and socio-economic analyses (Reaser et al. 2019b, this issue (f) Response measures (i) In removing barriers to response capacity by implementing the relevant actions identified in (a)-(e), Agencies should also: (A) Recognize, assess, and report on the dynamic socio-economic and cultural factors that influence response capacity (Reaser et al. 2019a, this issue). (B) Incorporate the aforementioned factors into feasibility screening decision support tools (Reaser et al. 2019a, this issue). (C) Develop science-based social marketing campaigns that address socio-economic and cultural barriers to response measure implementation (Reaser et al. 2019a, this issue).

Conclusion and cautionary notes
Despite numerous calls for a comprehensive approach to US biosecurity Reaser 2002a, b, 2003), protecting the nation from the adverse impacts of invasive species remains an urgent and largely unaddressed policy need (Meyerson et al. 2019). If effectively harnessed, the growing interest in EDRR by government agencies and the public, particularly citizen scientists, could lead to developing a national EDRR program that vastly improves biosecurity. The Executive and Legislative branches have available the necessary reasoning, authorities, and mechanisms to transition the blueprint herein from concept to operational reality. However, there is a long history of federal government failure to clarify and prioritize EDRR-relevant programmatic needs, or to support the requisite frameworks and initiatives once these are identified (Reaser et al. 2019a, b, this issue;Simberloff et al. 2005). Furthermore, our ability to establish a national EDRR program is currently being undermined by the diminishment of the federal workforce; institutional structures, policies, and programs; and directly applicable leadership mechanisms, including the National Invasive Species Council (NISC), Invasive Species Advisory Committee (ISAC), and their managerial Secretariat (Meyerson et al. 2019;pers. obs.). We must either adequately invest in our nation's future or prepare for the extraordinary costs of the consequences, including major economic damage and lives lost.