A perceived gap between invasive species research and stakeholder priorities

  • Bayliss H
  • Stewart G
  • Wilcox A
 et al. 
  • 54


    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • N/A


    Citations of this article.


Information from research has an important role to play in shaping policy and management responses to biological invasions but concern has been raised that research focuses more on furthering knowledge than on delivering practical solutions. We collated 449 priority areas for science and management from 160 stakeholders including practitioners, researchers and policy makers or advisors working with invasive species, and then compared them to the topics of 789 papers published in eight journals over the same time period (2009–2010). Whilst research papers addressed most of the priority areas identified by stake- holders, there was a difference in geographic and biological scales between the two, with individual studies addressing multiple priority areas but focusing on specific species and locations. We hypothesise that this difference in focal scales, combined with a lack of literature relating directly to management, contributes to the perception that invasive species research is not sufficiently geared towards delivering practical solu- tions. By emphasising the practical applications of applied research, and ensuring that pure research is translated or synthesised so that the implications are better understood, both the management of invasive species and the theoretical science of invasion biology can be enhanced

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document


  • Helen Bayliss

  • Gavin Stewart

  • Andrew Wilcox

  • Nicola Randall

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free