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

Brian Leung, Nuria Roura-Pascual, Sven Bacher, Jaakko Heikkilä, Lluis Brotons, Mark A. Burgman, Katharina Dehnen-Schmutz, Franz Essl, Philip E. Hulme, David M. Richardson, Daniel Sol, Montserrat Vilà

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1415-e6
JournalEcology Letters
Volume16
Issue number11
Early online date23 Aug 2013
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2013

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Colonisation
  • Exotic
  • Habitat suitability
  • Life history trait
  • Non-indigenous
  • Policy
  • Propagule pressure
  • Risk analysis
  • Species distribution
  • Uncertainty

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

Cite this

Leung, B., Roura-Pascual, N., Bacher, S., Heikkilä, J., Brotons, L., Burgman, M. A., ... Vilà, M. (2013). Addressing a critique of the TEASI framework for invasive species risk assessment. Ecology Letters, 16(11), 1415-e6. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12172