wildlife pest or disease and it is not intended that IPAC duplicate the priorities and activities of Wildlife Health Australia. 4. Socioeconomic drivers of adopting best practice 4,5,6,8 4.1 Ecological This includes targeted research and improved modelling of pest and and weed impacts on ecosystem services and the evaluation of management alternatives to guide decisions on the level of research and investment needed for both newly arrived and widespread species. modelling for Testing alternative valuation methods is identified as a priority to better decision provide defensible estimates of impacts of invasive species on the making economy, environment and community, and of the costs and benefits of competing investment options for their management. The consequences of invasive species outbreaks and sustained infestations on human psychological and wellbeing impacts are also a critically under recognised impacts, particularly for indigenous and rural communities. 2,4,5,6,8 4.2 Coordinated In addition to national, state and regional facilitators/coordinators, community this includes extending and further tailoring existing toolkits (such engagement for as PestSmart Connect) or developing toolkit of strategies, systems better invasive and tools to increase community engagement in and coordination species of invasive species management programs at an appropriate scale outcomes that optimises community ownership with effective outcomes. Priorities include: increased engagement and motivation of the urban and peri-urban community in understanding the impacts of pests and weeds, promotion of cross tenure community-led collective action, and developing better community of practice and community led and coordinated effective pest animal and weed management. Transdisciplinary approaches where stakeholders are included in project delivery from the get go maximises the likelihood that research outcomes will be end-user ready and quickly adopted. 2,4,5,6,8 4.3 Governance This includes investigating alternative funding streams (e.g. offsets) and and incentivising investment in best practice invasive species institutional management, investigating risk based approaches to investment research to decisions, and options and policy instruments for overcoming support better regulatory and administrative hurdles. outcomes 2,4,8,6 4.4 Adoption of This includes investigating the barriers to and drivers for adoption improved of best practice invasive species management at the local, regional, standards & jurisdictional and national levels, and demonstrating methods to strategies increase adoption. Understanding high risk behaviours, social psychology approaches and evidence of behavioural change leading to improved management outcomes are high priorities for future investment.
wildlife pest or disease and it is not intended that IPAC duplicate the priorities and activities of Wildlife Health Australia. 4. Socioeconomic drivers of adopting best practice 4,5,6,8 4.1 Ecological and research and modelling for better decision making This includes targeted research and improved modelling of pest and weed impacts on ecosystem services and the evaluation of management alternatives to guide decisions on the level of investment needed for both newly arrived and widespread species. Testing alternative valuation methods is identified as a priority to provide defensible estimates of impacts of invasive species on the economy, environment and community, and of the costs and benefits of competing investment options for their management. The consequences of invasive species outbreaks and sustained infestations on human psychological and wellbeing impacts are also a critically under recognised impacts, particularly for indigenous and rural communities. 2,4,5,6,8 4.2 Coordinated community engagement for better invasive species outcomes In addition to national, state and regional facilitators/coordinators, this includes extending and further tailoring existing toolkits (such as PestSmart Connect) or developing toolkit of strategies, systems and tools to increase community engagement in and coordination of invasive species management programs at an appropriate scale that optimises community ownership with effective outcomes. Priorities include: increased engagement and motivation of the urban and peri-urban community in understanding the impacts of pests and weeds, promotion of cross tenure community-led collective action, and developing better community of practice and community led and coordinated effective pest animal and weed management. Transdisciplinary approaches where stakeholders are included in project delivery from the get go maximises the likelihood that research outcomes will be end-user ready and quickly adopted. 2,4,5,6,8 4.3 Governance and institutional research to support better outcomes This includes investigating alternative funding streams (e.g. offsets) and incentivising investment in best practice invasive species management, investigating risk based approaches to investment decisions, and options and policy instruments for overcoming regulatory and administrative hurdles. 2,4,8,6 4.4 Adoption of improved standards & strategies This includes investigating the barriers to and drivers for adoption of best practice invasive species management at the local, regional, jurisdictional and national levels, and demonstrating methods to increase adoption. Understanding high risk behaviours, social psychology approaches and evidence of behavioural change leading to improved management outcomes are high priorities for future investment.
national-rde-priorities-invasive-plants-animals.docx