Dedicated government department or national agency responsible for IAS policy implementation

(1 = YES; 0 = NO)

Due to the widespread and crosscutting nature of IAS, the diversity of its pathways (whether intentional or not), and its many environmental economic, health and social impacts, it is preferable to designate a dedicated government department or national agency responsible for IAS policy (García-Díaz et al. 2021).

This disaggregation points out the countries that have established a dedicated government department or national agency responsible for IAS policy implementation, with the objective of avoiding duplication and inconsistencies of interventions and limiting costly trade-offs between ministerial departments (García-Díaz et al. 2021).

This disaggregation is in line with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework(GBF), Target 6:Reduce the Introduction of Invasive Alien Species by 50% and Minimize Their Impact.

The government department in charge of IAS policy should be equipped with a clear national mandate. This should include the power to enforce relevant legal provisions on the control of IAS and to streamline the various institutions with identified IAS responsibilities (i.e. through the establishment of inter-departmental coordination mechanisms). as well as to ensure the consistency of the various operational interventions related to IAS management. It should also facilitate cooperation between concerned stakeholders and participatory processes and supervise monitoring and surveillance programmes aimed at preventing the introduction of IAS (Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services [IPBES] 2023).

Unified and integrated national IAS legislation and strategic framework (1 = YES; 0 = NO):

National specific IAS legislative framework/

National specific IAS Strategic Action Plan

The existence of a specific and unified IAS national legislative/strategic framework provides a more integrated and focused approach to IAS control. This can guarantee greater coherence and convergence between the interventions of relevant institutions and sectors. The range of instruments to be put in place include strengthening border controls, developing risk analyses, setting up early warning and rapid response mechanisms, public awareness raising, and management plan implementations (CBD 2022).

This disaggregation is in line with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework(GBF), Target 6:Reduce the Introduction of Invasive Alien Species by 50% and Minimize Their Impact.

As a core direction of this unified legislative/strategic framework, priority should be given to IAS prevention, as opposed to IAS eradication, since prevention turns out to be more cost-effective and helps to save resources (IUCN n.d.).

National/global funding allocated to the prevention of introduction and management of IAS (%):

Resources from national budget

Resources from global financial mechanisms

This disaggregation tracks amounts allocated to the fight against IAS, from both national budgets and global financial mechanisms. It helps national governments to identify the resource mobilization potential from both sources, to meet financial requirements for IAS policy and programmes and to achieve their commitments. Adequate funding and sustained investment are needed to implement the effective management of biological invasions through prevention, preparedness or eradication of species (when invasion could not be prevented) and build up the necessary enabling environment (i.e. the relevant regulatory framework and enforcement capacity as well as monitoring and inspection).

This disaggregation is in line with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework(GBF), Target 19: Mobilize $200 Billion Per Year for Biodiversity From all Sources, Including $30 Billion Through International Finance (CBD 2022).

The GBF calls for an increase in biodiversity finance to US$200 billion per year, of which US$30 billion should come from international finance (CBD 2022).Part of the funds eventually raised will have to be channeled to counteract the threats and adverse impacts of IAS (i.e. biodiversity loss and homogenization at the global level, effects on the economy and human health – such as the reduction in food security, changes in water properties, competing indigenous species for resources and livelihoods, disease transmission, or indirect health impacts due to the use of pesticides). In addition, populations who rely the most on natural resources (e.g. fishing communities), including women, are disproportionately impacted by IAS.