Invasive alien species (IAS) generate substantial economic impacts on agriculture, yet their assessment relies on heterogeneous methodological approaches. This systematic review examines how these impacts are estimated, comparing methods in terms of economic outcomes, data requirements, analytical scale, uncertainty, strengths, and limitations. A Scopus search identified 2,381 records, of which 57 studies were included in the final analysis. Six main methodological families emerged: InvaCost-based assessments, bioeconomic and cost–benefit approaches, farm- and market-level models, participatory and stakeholder-based approaches, economy-wide models, and methodological and risk-assessment frameworks. Results show that these approaches capture different dimensions of economic impact and therefore produce estimates that are not necessarily directly comparable. Method selection should consequently depend on the assessment objective, available data, spatial and temporal scale, and decision context. Future research should prioritize methodological transparency, explicit treatment of uncertainty, integration of biological and economic information, and improved evidence from underrepresented regions.
ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES IN AGRICULTURE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Dragone V.;Petrontino A.;Fucilli V.
2026-01-01
Abstract
Invasive alien species (IAS) generate substantial economic impacts on agriculture, yet their assessment relies on heterogeneous methodological approaches. This systematic review examines how these impacts are estimated, comparing methods in terms of economic outcomes, data requirements, analytical scale, uncertainty, strengths, and limitations. A Scopus search identified 2,381 records, of which 57 studies were included in the final analysis. Six main methodological families emerged: InvaCost-based assessments, bioeconomic and cost–benefit approaches, farm- and market-level models, participatory and stakeholder-based approaches, economy-wide models, and methodological and risk-assessment frameworks. Results show that these approaches capture different dimensions of economic impact and therefore produce estimates that are not necessarily directly comparable. Method selection should consequently depend on the assessment objective, available data, spatial and temporal scale, and decision context. Future research should prioritize methodological transparency, explicit treatment of uncertainty, integration of biological and economic information, and improved evidence from underrepresented regions.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
