@article{fdi:010087740,
  title = {{E}conomic costs of invasive rodents worldwide : the tip of the iceberg},
  author = {{D}iagne, {C}hristophe and {B}allesteros-{M}ejia, {L}. and {C}uthbert, {R}. {N}. and {B}odey, {T}. {W}. and {F}antle-{L}epczyk, {J}. and {A}ngulo, {E}. and {B}ang, {A}. and {D}obigny, {G}authier and {C}ourchamp, {F}.},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{B}ackground. {R}odents are among the most notorious invasive alien species worldwide. {T}hese invaders have substantially impacted native ecosystems, food production and storage, local infrastructures, human health and well-being. {H}owever, the lack of standardized and understandable estimation of their impacts is a serious barrier to raising societal awareness, and hampers effective management interventions at relevant scales. {M}ethods. {H}ere, we assessed the economic costs of invasive alien rodents globally in order to help overcome these obstacles. {F}or this purpose, we combined and analysed economic cost data from the {I}nva{C}ost database - the most up-to-date and comprehensive synthesis of reported invasion costs - and specific complementary searches within and beyond the published literature. {R}esults. {O}ur conservative analysis showed that reported costs of rodent invasions reached a conservative total of {US}$ 3.6 billion between 1930 and 2022 (annually {US}$ 87.5 million between 1980 and 2022), and were significantly increasing through time. {T}he highest cost reported was for muskrat {O}ndatra zibethicus ({US}$ 377.5 million), then unspecified {R}attus spp. ({US}$ 327.8 million), followed by {R}attus norvegicus specifically ({US}$ 156.6 million) and {C}astor canadensis ({US}$ 150.4 million). {O}f the total costs, 87% were damage-related, principally impacting agriculture and predominantly reported in {A}sia (60%), {E}urope (19%) and {N}orth {A}merica (9%). {O}ur study evidenced obvious cost underreporting with only 99 documents gathered globally, clear taxonomic gaps, reliability issues for cost assessment, and skewed breakdowns of costs among regions, sectors and contexts. {A}s a consequence, these reported costs represent only a very small fraction of the expected true cost of rodent invasions (e.g., using a less conservative analytic approach would have led to a global amount more than 80-times higher than estimated here). {C}onclusions. {T}hese findings strongly suggest that available information represents a substantial underestimation of the global costs incurred. {W}e offer recommendations for improving estimates of costs to fill these knowledge gaps including: systematic distinction between native and invasive rodents' impacts; monetizing indirect impacts on human health; and greater integrative and concerted research effort between scientists and stakeholders. {F}inally, we discuss why and how this approach will stimulate and provide support for proactive and sustainable management strategies in the context of alien rodent invasions, for which biosecurity measures should be amplified globally.},
  keywords = {{D}amage costs ; {I}nva{C}ost ; {M}anagement expenditures ; {M}onetary impact ; {R}odents ; {R}eporting bias ; {MONDE}},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{P}eer{J}},
  volume = {11},
  numero = {},
  pages = {e14935 [24 p.]},
  ISSN = {2167-8359},
  year = {2023},
  DOI = {10.7717/peerj.14935},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010087740},
}