Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Incorporating uncertainty and social values in managing invasive alien species: a deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biological Invasions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The management of Invasive Alien Species (IAS) is stymied by complex social values and severe levels of uncertainty. However, these two challenges are often hidden in the conventional model of management by “value-free” analyses and probability-based estimates of risk. As a result, diverse social values and wide margins of error in risk assessment carry zero weights in the decision-making process, leaving IAS risk decisions to be made in the wake of political pressure and the crisis atmosphere of incursion. We propose to use a Deliberative Multi-Criteria Evaluation (DMCE) to incorporate multiple social values and profound uncertainty into decision-making processes. The DMCE process combines the advantages of conventional multi-criteria decision analysis methods with the benefits of stakeholder participation to provide an analytical structure to assess complex multi-dimensional objectives. It, therefore, offers an opportunity for diverse views to enter the decision-making process, and for the negotiation of consensus positions. The DMCE process can also function as a platform for risk communication in which scientists, stakeholders, and decision-makers can interact and discuss the uncertainty associated with biological invasions. We examine two case studies that demonstrate how DMCE provides scientific rigor and transparency in the decision-making process of invasion risk management. The first case regards pre-border priority ranking for potential invasive species and the second relates to selecting the most desirable policy option for managing a post-border invader.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The phenomenon might be explained by ongoing propagule pressure, which aids an established IAS to spread by introducing genetic variation adaptive for new habitats (Simberloff 2009).

  2. Quantative approaches for NIS risk assessment do exist (e.g. Kolar and Lodge 2002), but they are exceptions rather than a norm.

References

  • Ajzen I, Brown TC, Rosenthal LH (1996) Information bias in contingent valuation: effects of personal relevance, quality of information, and motivational orientation. J Environ Econ Manag 30(1):43–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen MC, Adams H, Hope B, Powell M (2004) Risk assessment for invasive species. Risk Anal 24(4):787–793

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Australian Department of Agriculture FaF (2005) Field guide to exotic pests and diseases: European house borer

  • Bammer G, Smithson M (eds) (2008) Uncertainty and risk. Risk in society earthscan, London

  • Beierle TC (2002) The quality of stakeholder-based decisions. Risk Anal 22(4):739–749

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Benke KK, Steel JL, Weiss JE (2011) Risk assessment models for invasive species: uncertainty in rankings from multi-criteria analysis. Biol Invasions 13(1):239–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biosecurity Australia (2006) Final import risk analysis report for apples from New Zealand. Part A. Biosecurity Australia, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Bojorquez-Tapia LA, Sanchez-Colon S, Martinez AF (2005) Building consensus in environmental impact assessment through multicriteria modeling and sensitivity analysis. Environ Manag 36(3):469–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Born W, Rauschmayer F, Brauer I (2005) Economic evaluation of biological invasions—a survey. Ecol Econ 55(3):321–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bossenbroek JM, McNulty J, Keller RP (2005) Can ecologists heat up the discussion on invasive species risk? Risk Anal 25(6):1595–1597. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6925.2005.00697.x|ISSN1462-6063

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw GA, Borchers JG (2000) Uncertainty as information: narrowing the sciencepolicy gap. Conserv Ecol 4(1)

  • Brouwer R, De Blois C (2008) Integrated modelling of risk and uncertainty underlying the cost and effectiveness of water quality measures. Environ Modell Softw 23(7):922–937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgman MA, Keith DA, Walshe TV (1999) Uncertainty in comparative risk analysis for threatened Australian plant species. Risk Anal 19(4):585–598

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey JM, Burgman MA (2008) Linguistic uncertainty in qualitative risk analysis and how to minimize it. Ann NY Acad Sci 1128:13–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson F (2010) Design of stated preference surveys: is there more to learn from behavioral economics? Environ Resour Econ 46(2):167–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colautti RI, Bailey SA, van Overdijk CDA, Amundsen K, MacIsaac HJ (2006) Characterised and projected costs of nonindigenous species in Canada. Biol Invasions 8(1):45–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook DC, Proctor WL (2007) Assessing the threat of exotic plant pests. Ecol Econ 63(2–3):594–604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook DC, Thomas MB, Cunningham SA, Anderson DL, De Barro PJ (2007) Predicting the economic impact of an invasive species on an ecosystem service. Ecol Appl 17(6):1832–1840

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cook DC, Liu S, Murphy B, Lonsdale WM (2010) Adaptive approaches to biosecurity governance. Risk Anal 30(9):1303–1314. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01439.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Crowl TA, Crist TO, Parmenter RR, Belovsky G, Lugo AE (2008) The spread of invasive species and infectious disease as drivers of ecosystem change. Front Ecol Environ 6(5):238–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis AS, Cousens RD, Hill J, Mack RN, Simberloff D, Raghu S (2010) Screening bioenergy feedstock crops to mitigate invasion risk. Front Ecol Environ 8(10):533–539. doi:10.1890/090030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Wit MP, Crookes DJ, van Wilgen BW (2001) Conflicts of interest in environmental management: estimating the costs and benefits of a tree invasion. Biol Invasions 3(2):167–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Doak DF, Estes JA, Halpern BS, Jacob U, Lindberg DR, Lovvorn J, Monson DH, Tinker MT, Williams TM, Wootton JT, Carroll I, Emmerson M, Micheli F, Novak M (2008) Understanding and predicting ecological dynamics: are major surprises inevitable? Ecology 89(4):952–961

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek J (2000) Deliberative democracy and beyond: liberals, critics and contestations. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  • Ehrenfeld JG (2010) Ecosystem consequences of biological invasions. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41(1):59–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Failing L, Gregory R, Harstone M (2007) Integrating science and local knowledge in environmental risk management: a decision-focused approach. Ecol Econ 64(1):47–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff B (1995) Risk perception and communication unplugged—20 years of process. Risk Anal 15(2):137–145

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff B, Litchtenstein S, Slovic P, Derby SL, Keeney RL (1981) Acceptable risk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin J, Sisson SA, Burgman MA, Martin JK (2008) Evaluating extreme risks in invasion ecology: learning from banking compliance. Divers Distrib 14(4):581–591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funtowicz SO, Ravetz JR (1993) Science for the post-normal age. Futures 25(7):739–755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldston D (2008) Hazy reasoning behind clean air. Nature 452(7187):519. doi:10.1038/452519a

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon DR, Onderdonk DA, Fox AM, Stocker RK (2008) Consistent accuracy of the Australian weed risk assessment system across varied geographies. Divers Distrib 14(2):234–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory R, Failing L (2002) Using decision analysis to encourage sound deliberation: water use planning in British Columbia, Canada. J Policy Anal Manage 21(3):492–499

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory R, Long G (2009) Using structured decision making to help implement a precautionary approach to endangered species management. Risk Anal 29(4):518–532

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory R, Failing L, Ohlson D, McDaniels TL (2006) Some pitfalls of an overemphasis on science in environmental risk management decisions. J Risk Res 9(7):717–735. doi:10.1080/13669870600799895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gren IM (2008) Economics of alien invasive species management—choices of targets and policies. Boreal Environ Res 13:17–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves RH (2006) Are some weeds sleeping? Some concepts and reasons. Euphytica 148(1–2):111–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haimes YY (2009) On the complex definition of risk: a systems-based approach. Risk Anal 29(12):1647–1654

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hajkowicz S, Collins K (2007) A review of multiple criteria analysis for water resource planning and management. Water Res Manag 21(9):1553–1566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horan RD, Perrings C, Lupi F, Bulte EH (2002) Biological pollution prevention strategies under ignorance: the case of invasive species. Am J Agr Econ 84(5):1303–1310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hummel S, Donovan GH, Spies TA, Hemstrom MA (2009) Conserving biodiversity using risk management: hoax or hope. Front Ecol Environ 7(2):103–109. doi:10.1890/070111%U. http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/070111

  • Hurley MV, Lowell KE, Cook DC, Liu SA, Siddique AB, Diggle A (2010) Prioritizing biosecurity risks using a participatory decision-making tool. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 16(6):1379–1394

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Janis I (1982) Groupthink. Houghton Mifflin, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D, Knetsch J (1992) Valuing public goods: the purchase of moral satisfaction. J Environ Econ Manag 22(1):57–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahraman C (ed) (2008) Multi-criteria decision making methods and fuzzy sets. In: Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making: theory and applications with recent developments. Springer, New York, pp 1–18

  • Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1993) Decisions with multiple objectives-preferences and value tradeoffs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney RL, Duke HR, Meyer RF (1993) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr NL, Tindale RS (2004) Group performance and decision making. Annual Rev Psychol 55:623–655

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Knight FH (1921) Risk, uncertainty and profit. Houghton Miffllin, Boston and New York

  • Kolar CS, Lodge DM (2001) Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. Trends Ecol Evol 16(4):199–204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kolar CS, Lodge DM (2002) Ecological predictions and risk assessment for alien fishes in North America. Science 298(5596):1233–1236

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lahdelma R, Salminen P, Hokkanen J (2000) Using multicriteria methods in environmental planning and management. Environ Manage 26(6):595–605

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson BMH (2007) An alien approach to invasive species: objectivity and society in invasion biology. Biol Invasions 9(8):947–956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson DL, Phillips-Mao L, Quiram G, Sharpe L, Stark R, Sugita S, Weiler A (2011) A framework for sustainable invasive species management environmental, social, and economic objectives. J Environ Manage 92(1):14–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liu S, Cook D, Diggle A, Siddique A-B, Hurley M, Lowell K (2009) Using dynamic ecological-economic modeling to facilitate deliberative multicriteria evaluation (DMCE) in quantifying and communicating bio-invasion uncertainty In: Anderssen RS, Braddock RD, Newham LTH (eds) 18th World IMACS congress and MODSIM09 international congress on modelling and simulation. Cairns, Australia, 2009. Modelling and simulation society of Australia and New Zealand and international association for mathematics and computers in simulation, pp 4333–4338

  • Liu S, Hurley M, Lowell K, Siddique AB, Diggle A, Cook D (in press) An integrated decision-support approach in prioritizing risks of non-indigenous species in the face of high uncertainty. Ecol Econ. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.05.021. URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800911002278

  • Liu S, Proctor W, Cook D (2010) Using an integrated fuzzy set and deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach to facilitate decision-making in invasive species management. Ecol Econ 69(12):2374–2382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodge DM, Williams S, MacIsaac HJ, Hayes KR, Leung B, Reichard S, Mack RN, Moyle PB, Smith M, Andow DA, Carlton JT, McMichael A (2006) Biological invasions: recommendations for US policy and management. Ecol Appl 16(6):2035–2054

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mack RN, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Evans H, Clout M, Bazzaz FA (2000) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol Appl 10(3):689–710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie BF, Larson BMH (2010) Participation under time constraints: landowner perceptions of rapid response to the emerald ash borer. Soc Nat Res 23(10):1013–1022. doi:10.1080/08941920903339707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maguire LA (2004) What can decision analysis do for invasive species management? Risk Anal 24(4):859–868

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marinoni O, Higgins A, Hajkowicz S, Collins K (2009) The multiple criteria analysis tool (MCAT): A new software tool to support environmental investment decision making. Environ Model Softw 24(2):153–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Alier J, Munda G, O’Neill J (1998) Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics. Ecol Econ 26(3):277–286

    Google Scholar 

  • Melbourne BA, Hastings A (2009) Highly variable spread rates in replicated biological invasions: fundamental limits to predictability. Science 325(5947):1536–1539

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson LA (2008) Biosecurity, biofuels, and biodiversity. Front Ecol Environ 6(6):291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well being: biodiversity synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Millner A, Dietz S, Heal G (2010) Ambiguity and climate policy. NBER working paper no. w16050

  • Morgan MG, Fischhoff B, Bostrom A, Lave L, Atman CJ (1992) Communicating risk to the public. Environ Sci Technol 26(11):2048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munda G, Nijkamp P, Rietveld P (1995) Qualitative multicriteria methods for fuzzy-evaluation problems - an illustration of economic-ecological evaluation. Eur J Oper Res 82(1):79–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton BG (1998) Improving ecological communication: the role of ecologists in environmental policy formation. Ecol Appl 8(2):350–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker IM, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Goodell K, Wonham M, Kareiva PM, Williamson MH, Von Holle B, Moyle PB, Byers JE, Goldwasser L (1999) Impact: toward a framework for understanding the ecological effects of invaders. Biol Invasions 1(1):3–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penning-Rowsell E, Johnson C, Tunstall S (2006) ‘Signals’ from pre-crisis discourse: lessons from UK flooding for global environmental policy change? Global Environ Change-Hum Policy Dimens 16(4):323–339

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson GD, Carpenter SR, Brock WA (2003) Uncertainty and the management of multistate ecosystems: an apparently rational route to collapse. Ecology 84(6):1403–1411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pheloung PC, Williams PA, Halloy SR (1999) A weed risk assessment model for use as a biosecurity tool evaluating plant introductions. J Environ Manage 57(4):239–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pielke RA Jr (2007) The honest broker: making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel D, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2005) Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecol Econ 52(3):273–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Proctor W, Drechsler M (2006) Deliberative multicriteria evaluation. Environ Plan C-Gov Policy 24(2):169–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyšek P, Richardson DM (2010) Invasive species, environmental change and management, and health. Ann Rev Environ Res 35(1):25–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pysek P, Richardson DM, Pergil J, Jarosik V, Sixtova Z, Weber E (2008) Geographical and taxonomic biases in invasion ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 23(5):237–244

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rauschmayer F, Wittmer H (2006) Evaluating deliberative and analytical methods for the resolution of environmental conflicts. Land Use Pol 23(1):108–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redpath SA, Arroyo BE, Leckie EM, Bacon P, Bayfield N, Gutierrez RJ, Thirgood SJ (2004) Using decision modeling with stakeholders to reduce human-wildlife conflict: a raptor-grouse case study. Conserv Biol 18(2):350–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regan HM, Colyvan M, Burgman MA (2002) A taxonomy and treatment of uncertainty for ecology and conservation biology. Ecol Appl 12(2):618–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regan HM, Ben-Haim Y, Langford B, Wilson WG, Lundberg P, Andelman SJ, Burgman MA (2005) Robust decision-making under severe uncertainty for conservation management. Ecol Appl 15(4):1471–1477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renn O (1999) A model for an analytic-deliberative process in risk management. Environ Sci Technol 33(18):3049–3055

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Renn O (2003) The challenge of integrating deliveration and expertise. In: McDaniels T, Small MJ (eds) Risk analysis and society: an interdisciplinary characterization of the field. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 289–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson DP, Hull RB (2003) Public ecology: an environmental science and policy for global society. Environ Sci Policy 6(5):399–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez-Labajos B, Binimelis R, Monterroso I (2009) Multi-level driving forces of biological invasions. Ecol Econ 69(1):63–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarewitz D (2004) How science makes environmental controversies worse. Environ Sci Policy 7(5):385–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shea K, Possingham HP, Murdoch WW, Roush R (2002) Active adaptive management in insect pest and weed control: Intervention with a plan for learning. Ecol Appl 12(3):927–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (2005) The politics of assessing risk for biological invasions: the USA as a case study. Trends Ecol Evol 20(5):216–222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (2006) Risk assessments, blacklists, and white lists for introduced species: are predictions good enough to be useful? Agric Res Econ Rev 35(1):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (2009) The role of propagule pressure in biological invasions. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40:81–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D, Alexander M (1998) Assessing risks to ecological systems from biological introductions. In: Calow P (ed) Handbook of environmental risk assessment and management. Blackwell Science, Oxford, pp 147–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D, Gibbons L (2004) Now you see them, now you don’t—population crashes of established introduced species. Biol Invasions 6(2):161–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D, Parker IM, Windle PN (2005) Introduced species policy, management, and future research needs. Front Ecol Environ 3(1):12–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic P (1999) Trust, emotion, sex, politics, science: surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. Risk Anal 19(4):689–701 (Reprinted from Environment, ethics, and behavior, pg 277–313, 1997)

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smith CS, Lonsdale WM, Fortune J (1999) When to ignore advice: invasion predictions and decision theory. Biol Invasions 1(1):89–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stirling A (2006) Analysis, participation and power: justification and closure in participatory multi-criteria analysis. Land Use Pol 23(1):95–107. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strayer DL (2009) Twenty years of zebra mussels: lessons from the mollusk that made headlines. Front Ecol Environ 7(3):135–141. doi:10.1890/080020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strayer DL, Eviner VT, Jeschke JM, Pace ML (2006) Understanding the long-term effects of species invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 21(11):645–651

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein CR, Zeckhauser R (2008) Overreaction to fearsome risks. Harvard Law School Program on risk regulation research paper no. 08–17, HKS Working Paper No. RWP08-079, U of Chicago, Public Law working paper no. 446, U of Chicago Law & Economics, Olin working paper no. 253

  • The Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention (2007) International standards for phytosanitary measures, ISPM No 5, glossary of phytosanitary terms. FAO

  • US National Research Council (1996) Understanding risk: informating decisions in a democratic society. National Academy Press, Washington

  • Valle D, Staudhammer CL, Cropper WP, van Gardingen PR (2009) The importance of multimodel projections to assess uncertainty in projections from simulation models. Ecol Appl 19(7):1680–1692

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vila M, Basnou C, Pysek P, Josefsson M, Genovesi P, Gollasch S, Nentwig W, Olenin S, Roques A, Roy D, Hulme PE (2010) How well do we understand the impacts of alien species on ecosystem services? A pan-European, cross-taxa assessment. Front Ecol Environ 8(3):135–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waage JK, Mumford JD (2008) Agricultural biosecurity. Philos Trans R Soc B-Biol Sci 363(1492):863–876

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walker B, Carpenter S, Anderies J, Abel N, Cumming G, Janssen M, Lebel L, Norberg J, Peterson GD, Pritchard R (2002) Resilience management in social-ecological systems: a working hypothesis for a participatory approach. Conserv Ecol 6(1)

  • Webb TJ, Raffaelli D (2008) Conversations in conservation: revealing and dealing with language differences in environmental conflicts. J Appl Ecol 45(4):1198–1204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson M (1999) Invasions. Ecography 22(1):5–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson RS (2008) Balancing emotion and cognition: a case for decision aiding in conservation efforts. Conserv Biol 22(6):1452–1460

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wynne B (1992) Uncertainty and environmental learning—reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm. Glob Environ Change-Human Policy Dimens 2(2):111–127

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Australian Cooperative Research Centre for National Plant Biosecurity, established and supported under the Australian Government’s Cooperative Research Centres Program. We thank Paul De Barro, Terry Walshe, David Stern and two anonymous referees for their helpful comments on the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, Canberra GPO Box 1700, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia

    Shuang Liu, Andy Sheppard, Darren Kriticos & David Cook

  2. Cooperative Research Centre for National Plant Biosecurity, Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Shuang Liu, Darren Kriticos & David Cook

  3. Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Acton, ACT, Australia

    David Cook

Authors
  1. Shuang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andy Sheppard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Darren Kriticos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David Cook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuang Liu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, S., Sheppard, A., Kriticos, D. et al. Incorporating uncertainty and social values in managing invasive alien species: a deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach. Biol Invasions 13, 2323–2337 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-011-0045-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-011-0045-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation