Download Social and Cultural Dynamics related to Non

Social and Cultural Dynamics related to Non-native Invasive Species. John Schelhas.
Non-native invasive species present both existing and potential threats to ecosystems and the products,
services, and other benefits that people receive from them. Public awareness of invasive species and
their impacts is uneven, and public perceptions often differ markedly from the perspectives of
concerned scientists. There are no easy formulas for changing people’s perceptions and behaviors, and
most interdisciplinary engagements and collaborative management approaches will require new
patterns of socio-ecological thinking and embracing conceptualizations of social and cultural change that
go beyond simple education or marketing. But a broad view of social science research can help us
understand the social and cultural landscape and identify promising approaches to generate wider
concern and action.
Social and cultural research on the way people think about ecosystems often breaks down or blurs the
boundaries between “natural” and “human.” In fact, ecological thinking is, and has been, often strongly
influenced by ideologies and issues that arise out of social and cultural spheres. Non-native invasive
species not only follow this trend but provide some of its most extreme and interesting examples. At the
most general level, there has been widespread discussion in the social sciences around “non-native,”
with some authors associating the undesirability of non-native species with xenophobia and finding
parallels with anti-immigrant sentiments regarding the human population.. On the other hand, an op-ed
by a well-known anthropologist, titled “Mother Nature’s Melting Pot,” appeared in the New York Times
in 2011, suggesting that non-native species, like diverse human immigrants, keep the United States
dynamic and strong. While some elements of this comparison of non-native species to human
immigrants are easy to dispute, these perspectives must be engaged and not ignored because they are
influential in both popular and professional public cultures that both create and reinforce the cultural
potency of this ideological link. In addition to social science research that explores these cultural
valuations of both human and non-human populations, the ecological literature itself contains papers
that encourage ecologists and others to think about the inevitability and even benefits of “novel” and
“emergent” ecosystems that include non-native species.
Many non-native species are highly valued by human communities for their economic and cultural
importance. A number of complexities to “non-native species are bad” narratives have been identified in
the literature. Many of our food and fiber needs are met by non-native species, and introduced
earthworms and pollinators are widely seen as beneficial. When talking about “invasive” species,
concern often shifts easily to native invasive species, for example, weedy natives or native plants now
invading new territory due to climate change or human disturbance. The line between “beneficial” and
“invasive” non-natives can be blurry and dependent on one’s perspective. Humans can also form strong
cultural attachments to non-native species. Many non-native street trees, for example the gingko or
Japanese flowering cherry, are highly prized. An interesting, highly specific example is found in living
memorial projects that encourage communities to use trees to commemorate victims of terrorism,
perhaps best exemplified by a Callery pear (sometimes considered an undesirable, non-native species)
that survived the attacks on the World Trade Center and was repatriated to the 9/11 memorial and
whose vegetative offspring have been included in other memorials. In the South, kudzu, a scorned
noxious weed in the view of many, has also become a symbol of Southern regional identity as opposed
to exotic invader.
While general issues related to concepts of “non-native” and “invasive,” as well as other cultural views,
clearly enter into and influence public discussion of non-native invasive species, many particularly
problematic non-natives do attract focused attention and concern. For any particular species, there may
be great or little variation in perception across stakeholder groups. But while human uses and cultural
values can develop around even the most unlikely of non-native invasive species, those that threaten
important economic values, such as forestry or wildlife, or cultural values, such as aesthetics or scenery,
often penetrate public awareness and lead to control efforts. There is a growing literature on specific
non-native invasive species and more general management issues that we can learn from. Examples
include an analysis of economic and ecological synergies and tradeoffs across several case studies in the
U.S. and elsewhere, a broad survey of public awareness and attitudes toward invasive plant species in
Colorado, several surveys of invasive species awareness in New York state, studies of invasive species in
urban “wildscapes” near Chicago, non-industrial private forest owner perceptions and management of
invasive species in Oregon’s ponderosa pine zone and in Indiana, a comparison of professional and
public reasoning about the management of non-native species, social and policy research on invasive
grasses in Utah, and weed management in Western Montana and Kentucky. There is also literature on
the impacts of invasive species on tourism, ecosystems, and ecosystem services.
Once species are widely viewed negatively and targeted for control, there are multiple ways to promote
or incentivize control and restoration actions. There is a small but growing body of social science
research on some of these mechanisms, including incentive programs, community-based approaches,
and citizen science. Notably, these mechanisms can be evaluated from several perspectives, ranging
from the social organizational components that are internal to the efforts to the wider changes in public
perception and behavior that they encourage. There are several papers on incentive programs for
landowners and communities to control invasive species and the development of effective outreach and
extension programs to address invasive species of concern. Adaptive collaborative restoration
approaches to address invasive species issues have received some attention, and a number of papers
have addressed issues related to generating shared visions and stimulating collective action for
ecological restoration and control of invasive species. Research has also focused on the potential for
citizen science to transform attitudes and change behavior.
The social science literature highlights the importance of a broad perspective on non-native invasive
species and people that encompasses public values, awareness and attitudes, specific cases and
relationships, and management and policy approaches that catalyze action. Social and cultural research
on non-native invasive species is not well-developed, and more research in all areas is needed. At the
same time, it is important to synthesize the literature and develop integrated, long term approaches as
well as key immediate actions to address non-native invasive species. Research will likely be more
effective if in is interdisciplinary and socio-ecological. There are opportunities for coordination with
action by a diverse range of actors in the natural resource professions and across society.