To Educate or Tax? That is the Question

So after 4 days of suspense for you, and 4 days of reading for me, I can finally put my fingers to the keyboard and pass on the 2 most common ways to combat the ballooning problem that is invasive species and its exacerbation through increasing global trade and travel.

1.)    Education and information sharing

As Simpson (2004) suggested, if the world is linked for trade why can’t it be linked for information? In 2004 the Global Invasive Species Information Network (GISIN) was established and has since provided the organisational backbone for “sharing invasive species information at a global level, via the Internet and other digital means.” Through the dissemination of invasive species data in a standardised way, the GISIN hopes to educate and inform not just local, but global systems in order to reduce problems associated with the introduction of foreign species.

While this might be the case, however, there are only 21 data providers to the network and just because the data is available to view it does not mean that the targets will take any notice of it.

At the same time, the task of educating the public on invasive species does not lie solely at the feet of the GISIN. Smaller more focussed groups such as the Aquatic Invaders Project (AIP) are more abundant, and while they may not have the global reach, many regions are well covered by the experts they employ (Patterson et. al, 2010). With their “free learning courses” where experts not only educate the public, but also learn about new problems and issues from them, the AIP can be seen to be considerably more grounded, and with their bottom-up approach, it is perhaps possible to suggest they are more likely to get to the root of the problems.

2.)    Taxes and charges

If the companies and governments aren’t learning, why not just hike up tax in a bid to encourage socially respectable behaviour eh? To reduce the cost and number of accidental introductions, Costello and McAusland (2003) have argued an invasion risk-related tariff should be employed: the greater the risk the cargo or the travel path has of bringing in invasive species to the import nation, the higher the tariff. The same researchers have also suggested that companies pay for regular port inspections and take insurance out against the risk of bringing invasive species into a country. The need for clear regulation and standards has also been championed in many studies, with Knowler and Barbier (2005) going on to introduce the idea of administrative changes and invasive species related subsidies.

Despite the ambitions of these projects, schemes and strategies there are still barriers in place preventing them from achieving their aims, such as limited funding or a lack of public motivation to evoke change for. Until these barriers are broken down it seems to me that all that is achieved will be practically superficial, as if you don’t have active public support it is going to be difficult to maintain any alterations, and ultimatly meet their lofty goals.

For a slightly more light hearted end to this post, I have posted a link below to a BBC page all about the invasion of mammals across Europe. While very accessible, it provides little more than a short summary to the species that are not native across the continent. It is noticeable, however, how a number of the species have been introduced in the last 30 years, so in my opinion well worth a read. 

'Alien mammal' invasion of Europe