Сибирский федеральный университет

Тип публикации: статья из журнала

Год издания: 2021

Идентификатор DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.67.58529

Ключевые слова: direct and indirect losses, insects, invacost, invasive species, pathogens, russian federation, weeds

Аннотация: Terrestrial ecosystems, owing to the presence of key socio-economic sectors such as agriculture and forestry, may be particularly economically affected by biological invasions. The present study uses a subset of the recently developed database of global economic costs of biological invasions (InvaCost) to quantify the monetary costs of biological invasions in Russia, the largest country in the world that spans two continents. From 2007 up to 2019, invasions costed the Russian economy at least US$ 51.52 billion (RUB 1.38 trillion, n = 94 cost entries), with the vast majority of these costs based on predictions or extrapolations (US$ 50.86 billion; n = 87) and, therefore, not empirically observed. Most cost entries exhibited low geographic resolution, being split between European and Asian parts of Russia (US$ 44.17 billion; n = 72). Just US$ 7.35 billion (n = 22) was attributed to the European part solely and none to the Asian part. Invasion costs were documented for 72 species and particularly insects (37 species). The empirically-observed costs, summing up to US$ 660 million (n = 7), were reported only for four species: two insects Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire and Cydalima perspectalis (Walker) and two plants Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. and Heracleum sosnowskyi Manden. The vast majority of economic costs were related to resource damages and economic losses, with very little reported expenditures on managing invasions in terrestrial ecosystems. In turn, agriculture (US$ 37.42 billion; n = 68) and forestry (US$ 14.0 billion; n = 20) were the most impacted sectors. Overall, we report burgeoning economic costs of invasions in Russia and identify major knowledge gaps, for example, concerning specific habitat types (i.e. aquatic) and management expenditures, as well as for numerous known invasive taxa with no reported economic costs (i.e. vertebrates). Given this massive, largely underestimated economic burden of invasions in Russia, our work is a call for improved reporting of costs nationally and internationally.

Журнал: NEOBIOTA

Выпуск журнала: Vol. 67

Номера страниц: 103-130

ISSN журнала: 16190033

Место издания: SOFIA

Издатель: PENSOFT PUBLISHERS

• Kirichenko Natalia (Russian Acad Sci, Sukachev Inst Forest, Siberian Branch, Fed Res Ctr,Krasnoyarsk Sci Ctr SB RAS, Krasnoyarsk, Russia; Siberian Fed Univ, Krasnoyarsk, Russia; Reshetnev Siberian State Univ Sci & Technol, Krasnoyarsk, Russia)
• Haubrock Phillip J. (Senckenberg Res Inst, Gelnhausen, Germany; Nat Hist Museum Frankfurt, Dept River Ecol & Conservat, Gelnhausen, Germany; Univ South Bohemia Ceske Budejovice, Fac Fisheries & Protect Waters, South Bohemian Res Ctr Aquaculture & Biodivers Hy, Vodnany, Czech Republic)
• Cuthbert Ross N. (GEOMAR Helmholtz Zentrum Ozeanforsch Kiel, Kiel, Germany; Queens Univ Belfast, Sch Biol Sci, Belfast, Antrim, North Ireland)
• Akulov Evgeny (All Russian Plant Quarantine Ctr, Krasnoyarsk Branch, Krasnoyarsk, Russia)
• Karimova Elena (All Russian Plant Quarantine Ctr, Ramenskoye, Moscow Oblast, Russia)
• Shneider Yuri (All Russian Plant Quarantine Ctr, Ramenskoye, Moscow Oblast, Russia)
• Liu Chunlong (Free Univ Berlin, Inst Biol, Berlin, Germany; Leibniz Inst Freshwater Ecol & Inland Fisheries I, Berlin, Germany; Berlin Brandenburg Inst Adv Biodivers Res BBIB, Berlin, Germany; Univ Paris Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecol Systemat Evolut, Orsay, France)
• Angulo Elena (Univ Paris Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecol Systemat Evolut, Orsay, France)
• Diagne Christophe (Univ Paris Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecol Systemat Evolut, Orsay, France)
• Courchamp Franck (Univ Paris Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecol Systemat Evolut, Orsay, France)

• Web of Science Core Collection
• Ядро РИНЦ (eLIBRARY.RU)