Addressing a critique of the TEASI framework for invasive species risk assessment

We address criticism that the Transport, Establishment, Abundance, Spread, Impact (TEASI) framework does not facilitate objective mapping of risk assessment methods nor defines best practice. We explain why TEASI is appropriate for mapping, despite inherent challenges, and how TEASI offers considera...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Ecology letters 2013-11, Vol.16 (11), p.1415-e6
Main Authors: Leung, Brian, Roura‐Pascual, Nuria, Bacher, Sven, Heikkilä, Jaakko, Brotons, Lluis, Burgman, Mark A, Dehnen‐Schmutz, Katharina, Essl, Franz, Hulme, Philip E, Richardson, David M, Sol, Daniel, Vil , Montserrat, Rejmanek, Marcel
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Animals
Best practice
Colonisation
Conservation biology
exotic
habitat suitability
habitats
Introduced Species - statistics & numerical data
invasive species
life history trait
Models, Biological
non-indigenous
Nonnative species
policy
propagule pressure
risk analysis
risk assessment
species distribution
species diversity
uncertainty
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We address criticism that the Transport, Establishment, Abundance, Spread, Impact (TEASI) framework does not facilitate objective mapping of risk assessment methods nor defines best practice. We explain why TEASI is appropriate for mapping, despite inherent challenges, and how TEASI offers considerations for best practices, rather than suggesting one best practice.
ISSN:1461-023X
1461-0248
DOI:10.1111/ele.12172