Factors affecting the cost of weed biocontrol programs in New Zealand

• Published in: Biological control 2015-01, Vol.80, p.119-127
• Main Authors: Paynter, Quentin, Fowler, Simon V., Hayes, Lynley, Hill, Richard L.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Cost; Prioritization; Target selection; Weed biological control
• ISSN: 1049-9644; 1090-2112
• DOI: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2014.10.008

[Display omitted] •We studied factors influencing the cost of weed biocontrol in New Zealand.•Two factors explained virtually all the variance in program cost.•Repeat programs were cheaper than pioneering programs.•Cost increased with the number of agents released.•More efficient agent selection should reduce the cost of future programs. Many national schemes for setting priorities for invasive weed management have emphasized the current or future impacts of the weed more than the cost or feasibility of control, perhaps because the latter may be difficult to estimate. As part of a project to improve prioritization of weed biocontrol targets in New Zealand, we investigated factors that were hypothesized to influence the cost of conducting weed biological control, using data from New Zealand programs. Taxonomic isolation of the target weed, relative to commercially important plants and native flora was not a significant influence on program cost, although we present evidence that disease, which to date has only affected agents released against taxonomically isolated weed targets, has masked the importance of taxonomic isolation in New Zealand. Opposition to biocontrol has caused delays, but has not had a major influence on the cost of biocontrol in New Zealand, probably because weed species with the greatest potential for opposition were identified during feasibility studies and avoided, or because conflicts were resolved by conducting cost-benefit analyses that were minor components of the total program costs. Only two factors explained virtually all the variance in program cost: program type (repeat programs were cheaper than novel/pioneering programs); and the number of agent species released. The predicted cost of future weed biocontrol programs can now be incorporated into decision-making tools ranking New Zealand weed biocontrol targets. Efficiencies in future programs are most likely to be gained by better agent selection so that fewer agents are released. For repeat programs this could be achieved by waiting until monitoring has been conducted overseas, so that the best agents or combination of agents can be selected for any particular weed. This reiterates the need for better post-release evaluation of weed biocontrol agent effectiveness worldwide.