Home About Indicator Development Partners Resources

Legislation for prevention and control of invasive alien species (IAS), encompassing “Trends in policy responses, legislation and management plans to control and prevent spread of invasive alien species” and “Proportion of countries adopting relevant national legislation and adequately resourcing the prevention or control of invasive alien species”

Key indicator facts

Indicator type

Response

Applicable for national use

Yes (find out more)

Indicator classification

Potential for future use at global and regional levels

Indicator type

Response

Applicable for national use

Yes (find out more)

Indicator classification

Potential for future use at global and regional levels

Last update

2017

Coverage

Global

Availability

Not freely available

Partners

Iucn ssc

IUCN Species Survival Commission

Issg logo

IUCN Invasive Species Specalist Group

Monash univeristy b w

Monash University

Iucn logo en

IUCN

Contact point

Indicator description

These indicators of “Policies for prevention and control of invasive alien species (IAS)” aim to quantify trends in the:

  1. National adoption of IAS-relevant international policy.
  2. Percentage of countries with (a) national legislation and policy relevant to IAS; (b) national strategies for preventing and controlling IAS, and (c) national commitment to IAS related themes
  3. Allocation of resources towards the prevention or control of IAS.

Related Aichi Targets

Primary target

9

Target 9:

By 2020, invasive alien species and pathways are identified and prioritized, priority species are controlled or eradicated, and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent their introduction and establishment.

Secondary targets

Target 5:

By 2020, the rate of loss of all natural habitats, including forests, is at least halved and where feasible brought close to zero, and degradation and fragmentation is significantly reduced.

Target 10:

By 2015, the multiple anthropogenic pressures on coral reefs, and other vulnerable ecosystems impacted by climate change or ocean acidification are minimized, so as to maintain their integrity and functioning.

Target 11:

By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water, and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes.

Target 12:

By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained.

Target 17:

By 2015 each Party has developed, adopted as a policy instrument, and has commenced implementing an effective, participatory and updated national biodiversity strategy and action plan.

Primary target

9

Target 9:

By 2020, invasive alien species and pathways are identified and prioritized, priority species are controlled or eradicated, and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent their introduction and establishment.

5
10
12
11
17
9

Related SDGs

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 15

GOAL 15 - Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.

Target 15.8| Relevant indicator

By 2020, introduce measures to prevent the introduction and significantly reduce the impact of invasive alien species on land and water ecosystems and control or eradicate the priority species.

Target 15.8| Official indicator

By 2020, introduce measures to prevent the introduction and significantly reduce the impact of invasive alien species on land and water ecosystems and control or eradicate the priority species.

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 15

GOAL 15 - Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 15

Other related MEAs and processes

Indicator icon

IPBES Global Assessment Chapters

Chapter 6| Relevant indicator

Opportunities and challenges for decision makers

Indicator icon

IPBES Regional Assessment Chapters

Chapter 6| Relevant indicator

Options for governance, institutional arrangements and private and public decision-making across scales and sectors

Indicator icon

IPBES Global Assessment Chapters

Indicator icon

IPBES Regional Assessment Chapters

Indicator icon
Indicator icon

Themes

Bip policy

Policy & conservation actions

View related indicators >
Bip policy
Bip species

Partners

Iucn ssc
Issg logo
Monash univeristy b w
Iucn logo en

Key indicator facts

Indicator type

Response

Applicable for national use

Yes (find out more)

Indicator classification

Potential for future use at global and regional levels

Indicator type

Response

Applicable for national use

Yes (find out more)

Indicator classification

Potential for future use at global and regional levels

Last update

2017

Coverage

Global

Availability

Not freely available

Indicator description

These indicators of “Policies for prevention and control of invasive alien species (IAS)” aim to quantify trends in the:

  1. National adoption of IAS-relevant international policy.
  2. Percentage of countries with (a) national legislation and policy relevant to IAS; (b) national strategies for preventing and controlling IAS, and (c) national commitment to IAS related themes
  3. Allocation of resources towards the prevention or control of IAS.

Contact point

Graphs / Diagrams

1. National adoption of IAS-relevant international policy

Commitment by countries to IAS-relevant multinational agreements is an instrumental response indicator.

Figure 1: The percentage of signatories (n= 196 countries) in 2017 to ten multinational agreements relevant to the prevention and control of IAS.

  • On average 82% of countries have signed up to the IAS-relevant international agreements, demonstrating that there is widespread international support for such agreements that support some degree of prevention and control of IAS.
  • Fewer than 30% (53) of countries have to date signed up to the most recent multinational agreement, the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ship's Ballast Water and Sediments (BWM), which was adopted in 2004 and entered into force in September 2017.
2a. National legislation and policy relevant to IAS

National strategies for preventing and controlling IAS, underpinned by legislation, are essential for the effective management of biological invasions.

National legislation and policy relevant to IAS

Figure 2: Trends in national legislation relevant to the prevention or control of Invasive alien species (IAS). Adoption of national legislation relevant to the prevention or control of IAS for 196 countries reporting to the Convention on Biological Diversity (1967-2016).

The percentage of countries with relevant national legislation increased from 54% in 2010 to 73% of countries in 2016 (Figure 2)- an increase of 19% since the last reporting period (2010).


2b. National Strategies for preventing and controlling IAS

This indicator measures the number of countries that include targets related to IAS management and if they are aligned to Aichi Biodiversity Target 9. NBSAPs submitted after 2010 were examined for IAS related targets and their alignment to Target 9.

  • 75% (146/196) of countries have targets related to IAS management in their NBSAPs.
  • 67% (132 countries) have aligned their IAS targets to Aichi Biodiversity Target 9.


2c. National commitment to key IAS related themse

Each of the thematic measures are shown as a series of bar graphs that show % of countries whose institutions have a clear legal madate and/or legal authority to manage the IAS threat.


Figure 3: Percentage of countries whose institutions have a clear mandate and/or legal authority to manage IAS are indicated. A positive result is given by a Yes. Negative result is for No, N/A or Unsure.

As seen in Figure 3, on average, institutions in 72% of countries have a clear mandate and/or legal authority for a suite of IAS management related themes. The percentage of countries with established and strategic approaches to the development of plans and policies, management of intentional introductions and increasing public awareness and outreach if relatively high (70%). A strategic approach to management of risks of introduction of alien species and the critital area of monitoring and detection are the weakest of all the listed thematic areas.


3. Resourcing of IAS-related management action

Adequate resourcingg is vital to ensure implementation and effectie delivery of targets set.

Figure 4: Quantifying the allocation of resources (both national and through global financial mechanisms) towards the prevention or control of IAS are shown as a bar graph with % of countries per category on the bars.

As seen in Figure 4:

  • Close to 20% of countries had specific national budget allocation for IAS related management action.
  • Largest allocations were noted in South Africa and New Zealand.
  • Just over 17% of countries that had no allocated national budget for IAS management had accessed funding from global financial mechanisms for IAS related management action.
  • Cumulatively, 68% of countries had an allocated national budget and/or had accessed funding from a global financial mechanism for IAS related activities.
  • 33% of countries had no allocated budgets, nor had they accessed any funding from a global financial mechanism for IAS related activities.

Current storyline

The first measurement of this indicator was completed in 2010, where aims (1), (2) (a) and (b) were addressed as per the relevant target at that time.

This second measure includes (2) (c) national commitment (mandate and legal authority) to key IAS related themes, and (3) resourcing by national governments for the prevention and control of IAS, as identified by the Sustainable Development Goals indicator 15.8.1 (“Proportion of countries adopting relevant national legislation and adequately resourcing the prevention or control of invasive alien species”).

  • The larger the number of IAS-relevant international policies, and the greater the level of national commitment to these, the greater the global commitment to controlling IAS. This calculation updates the 2010 measure of the change through time in the number of IAS-relevant multinational agreements and their adoption by countries.
  • The more countries adopt IAS related legislation, develop national strategies including IAS concerns, and establish institutions that have a clear legal mandate and/or legal authority to address key IAS concerns, the greater the national commitment to controlling the threat to biodiversity from IAS.
  • Adequate resourcing is vital to ensure implementation and effective delivery of targets set. Allocations in the national budget for IAS related activities and/or accessed funding from global financial mechanisms for IAS management action shows national commitment in managing this threat.

Data and methodology

Methodology

This indicator is calculated from data derived from four datasets that were updated/developed for the measurement of this indicator

  • a. Update of countries commitments to global conventions/ international agreements relevant to invasive alien species
  • b. Update and expansion of dataset on National Legislation considered relevant to the prevention of introduction of invasive alien species and control
  • c. National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) targets alignment to Aichi Biodiversity target 9 set out in the Strategic Plan of Biodiversity Conservation 2011-2020
  • d. Results of online survey on Policy responses, mandate, legal authority and resourcing to manage the threat of invasive alien species

Indicators were calculated as follows:

Commitment by countries to relevant multinational agreements.
This calculation updates the 2010 measure of the change through time in the number of IAS-relevant multinational agreements and their adoption by countries. All 196 countries that are party to the CBD are considered in these indicators.

Nine Global Conventions /Multilateral Environmental Agreements were selected to measure this commitment by countries to relevant multinational agreements [1]. The

  • Cartagena Protocol (Cartagena)
  • International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC)
  • Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement) of the World Trade Organisation (WTO)
  • The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE)
  • Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)
  • Ramsar Wetlands Convention (Ramsar)
  • Convention on the Conservation of Migratory species of Wild Animals (CMS)
  • World Heritage Convention (WHC)
  • (BWM)

The year of Accession/Ratification was recorded.

National policy and legislation related to IAS concerns

The development of policy and legislation relevant to the prevention of introduction and the management of IAS at a national level, underpins the effective management of this threat.

Across the 196 countries, IAS-related provisions are found in legislations, regulations and acts related to the Environment, Forestry, Plant health, Animal health, Fisheries, Water, Species including Wild Fauna and Flora and Genetically Modified Organism (GMO). Most countries adopt a sectoral approach to IAS management. A few have adopted a more focused approach- one example is the 2014 Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species.

This indicator updates the 2010 measure of countries that have developed national legislation relevant to the management of IAS. Any national legislation that was not focused solely on the protection of agriculture (plant and animal health), but included IAS related provisions was identified and noted for each of the parties to the CBD.

196 countries in all were considered, (data for 7 countries that were not considered in 2010 was added retrospectively). 106 countries were recorded to have developed IAS relevant national legislation in 2010, and, 143 countries in 2017.

National strategies for preventing and controlling IAS

National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans (NBSAPS) are a key policy instrument that reflect, how national biodiversity strategies intend to fulfil the obligations of the CBD, and, how the related action plans outline the steps to be taken to meet these goals. All parties to the CBD are obligated to revise their NBSAPS to reflect compliance with the revised Strategic Plan and Aichi Targets.

This indicator measures the number of countries that include targets related to IAS management and if they are aligned to Aichi Biodiversity Target 9. NBSAPS submitted after 2010 were examined for IAS related targets and their alignment to Target 9.

National commitment (mandate and legal authority) to key IAS related themes and, resourcing of IAS related management action.

These two indicators were measured using data and information derived from an online survey submitted to 196 countries; 81 countries completed the survey.

National commitment (mandate and legal authority) to key IAS related themes

Absence of a clear mandate and/or legal authority to execute key IAS related themes, such as prevention of introduction, eradication, risk analyses are a weakness in the strategic approach of the management of IAS. Respondents were asked if institutions within their countries had a clear mandate and/or legal authority to execute a range of IAS related themes. Key IAS themes identified in this measurement include [2]:

  1. Development of national plans and policies in relation to invasive alien species (Plans and Policies)
  2. Risk analyses of potentially invasive species (Risk Analyses)
  3. Prevention of the intentional introduction of species assessed as potentially invasive (including importation for the purposes of agriculture, aquaculture, the nursery trade, farming and animal breeding, the pet trade etc.) (Intentional Introduction)
  4. Minimising the unintentional introduction of alien species (Unintentional introduction)
  5. Promotion of public awareness of IAS issues (Public awareness)
  6. Monitoring and surveillance programmes to detect founder populations of IAS at an early stage (Monitor and Detect)
  7. Containment and eradication of populations of IAS within the country (Eradicate and Contain)
  8. Recording and management of information on IAS (Information management)
  9. Enforcement of relevant legal provisions regarding the control of IAS (Enforce legal)

Resourcing of IAS-related management action

Adequate resourcing is vital to ensure implementation and effective delivery of targets set. Allocation of resources to facilitate the implementation of IAS management action is difficult to measure, particularly in a way that is comparable across countries.

Respondents were asked if their countries had a) a national budget allocation for IAS activity- targeted in the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP), and if developed- the National Invasive Alien Species Strategy and Action Plan (NISSAP), and b) if the country had accessed funding from any global financial mechanisms such as the Global Environment Fund (GEF) for implementing projects related to IAS management.



[1] NOTE: Three global Conventions- the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (PEPAT) and ICAO’s (International Civil Aviation Organization) Convention on International Civil Aviation (CICA) were not considered in this update. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and the World Heritage Convention were included. The International Convention for the Control and Management of Ship's Ballast Water and Sediments (BWM) replaced the Guidelines for the control and management of ships’ ballast water and sediments (International Maritime Organisation agreements (IMO)).

[2] Adapted from Shine, C., 2008, A toolkit for developing legal and institutional frameworks for invasive alien species. Global Invasive Species Programme, Nairobi)

National use of indicator

Use at the national level: Both Indicator A “Trends in policy responses, legislation and management plans to control and prevent spread of invasive alien species” (specifically 1 “National adoption of IAS-relevant international policy” across ten international policies) and Indicator B “Proportion of countries adopting relevant national legislation and adequately resourcing the prevention or control of invasive alien species” (specifically 2(b) “national legislation and policy relevant to IAS” across nine IAS management related themes) can be applied at national levels.

1(a) “national strategies for preventing and controlling IAS” (inclusion of IAS in legislation, NBSAP, and Aichi Target 9 alignment) and 3 “National allocation of resources towards the prevention or control of IAS” (financing source) can also be applied at the national level, but as simple yes/no checkboxes rather than full national indicators.

Contact person for supporting national use: s.pagad@auckland.ac.nz

Further resources

Key indicator facts

Indicator type

Response

Applicable for national use

Yes (find out more)

Indicator classification

Potential for future use at global and regional levels

Indicator type

Response

Applicable for national use

Yes (find out more)

Indicator classification

Potential for future use at global and regional levels

Last update

2017

Coverage

Global

Availability

Not freely available

Partners

Iucn ssc

IUCN Species Survival Commission

Issg logo

IUCN Invasive Species Specalist Group

Monash univeristy b w

Monash University

Iucn logo en

IUCN

Contact point