@prefix dcat: . @prefix dct: . @prefix foaf: . @prefix xsd: . a dcat:Dataset ; dct:description """#Tranche 1: Project 2.5#\r \r ##Mobile technologies are being developed to help New Zealanders report suspected biosecurity threats, with the first step being a bilingual app that helps identify myrtle rust infections.##\r \r As part of this BioHeritage Challenge project, Dr Stephen Pawson from the University of Canterbury (previously Scion) led a team that has developed the Myrtle Rust Reporter app for observing common host plants that may be susceptible to myrtle rust (*Austropuccinia psidii*).\r \r **Project Leader**\r \r - Stephen Pawson, University of Canterbury\r """ ; dct:identifier "c682fe1d-56eb-4a1a-b586-483a10722682" ; dct:issued "2024-07-08T02:55:49.070217"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-08-01T05:07:01.569951"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:publisher ; dct:title "Mobile Apps to Keep New Zealand Safe" ; dcat:distribution , , , , , , , ; dcat:keyword "Tranche 1" . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Expanding general surveillance of invasive species by integrating citizens as both observers and identifiers###\r \r **July 2020**\r \r **Pawson SM, Sullivan JJ, Grant A 2020. [Expanding general surveillance of invasive species by integrating citizens as both observers and identifiers](https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10340-020-01259-x.pdf). Journal of Pest Science 93(4): 1155-1166.**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r Expanding general surveillance can improve invasive species detection to support eradication. Traditionally, citizens report observations to government agencies and mobile-phone-based tools provide incremental submission and processing efficiencies. However, citizen-reported data have high false positive rates and diagnostics laboratories are not resourced to process large observation volumes. We demonstrate ‘Find-A-Pest’ a partnership model whereby citizens, including Māori groups, and industry representatives both contribute observations and undertake identifications. We combine a mobile-phone-based app, database, and content management system with data linked to iNaturalist NZ. We present data from a 3.5-month case study assessing the effectiveness at delivering improved general surveillance outcomes. Installed by 497 users, there were 471 observations of 176 taxa submitted by 74 individuals. In combination, citizen and industry identifiers processed 99% of observations with only 1% (5 submissions) forwarded to Biosecurity New Zealand. Citizens’ identifications were comprehensive and rapid: 79.4% of submitted observations were identified by citizens with 57.3% and 95.4% of these processed within an hour or day, respectively. Citizen identifications were correct 95.5% of the time. Many observations (56.1%) were of high-priority species profiled in app fact sheets. Find-A-Pest demonstrates that general surveillance partnerships can effectively distribute identification effort, thereby reducing false positive loads within government diagnostics laboratories. Find-A-pest was stable, robust, and endorsed as fit for purpose by users. Achieving biosecurity outcomes, such as early detection to facilitate eradication, will require a much larger-scale participation in Find-A-Pest. We suggest applying behaviour change theory to expand participation across diverse groups in future.\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r Biosecurity;\r Passive surveillance;\r Citizen engagement;\r Invasive species;\r Information systems;\r Phone applications;\r Crowdsourcing data\r \r \r """ ; dct:issued "2024-07-08T23:17:03.239521"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-07-08T23:17:03.239521"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Expanding general surveillance of invasive species " ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """March 2024\r \r How can we support early detection of new pests and increase our understanding of the distribution and density of existing pests? Through harnessing citizen science!""" ; dct:format "PDF" ; dct:issued "2024-07-08T21:16:00.528407"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-07-08T21:16:00.528407"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "BRIEF: Find a Pest" ; dcat:accessURL ; dcat:byteSize 12450466.0 ; dcat:mediaType "application/pdf" . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Emerging Stakeholder Relations in Participatory ICT Design: Renegotiating the Boundaries of Sociotechnical Innovation in Forest Biosecurity Surveillance###\r \r **September 2019**\r \r **Grant A, Pawson SM, Marzano M 2019. [Emerging Stakeholder Relations in Participatory ICT Design: Renegotiating the Boundaries of Sociotechnical Innovation in Forest Biosecurity Surveillance](https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/10/10/836/pdf?version=1569318822). Forests 10(10).**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r *Research Highlights:*\r \r This research advanced understanding of stakeholder relations within the context of innovation using citizen science in a biosecurity sociotechnical system (STS) in Aotearoa, New Zealand. \r \r *Background and Objectives:*\r \r It draws on recent experiences in the United Kingdom, where analysis of stakeholder engagement in the development of biosecurity surveillance technologies and citizen science initiatives have occurred to support understanding and development of forest and tree health biosecurity. Early detection technologies are essential as biosecurity risks to the primary sectors increase with the expansion of global trade and shifting pest dynamics that accompany a changing climate. Stakeholder engagement in technology development improves the chances of adoption but can also challenge the mental models of users in an existing STS. Materials and \r \r *Methods:*\r \r Two conceptual models that embed stakeholder relations in new information and communications technology (ICT) design and development were applied: (i) a future realist view of the general surveillance system incorporating citizen experts as species identifiers; (ii) a social construction of the ICT platform to surface mental models of the system in use creating the groundwork for evolution of stakeholder relations within STS innovation. A case study demonstrating how we addressed some of the practical limitations of a proposed systems change by applying sociotechnical innovation systems (STIS) theory to the development and adoption of new technologies for surveillance in the existing biosecurity system was presented. \r \r *Results:*\r \r Opportunities to enhance the capacity for early detection were considered, where the needs of diverse factors within a central government biosecurity authority and the wider citizenry are supported by the development of a general surveillance network (GSN).\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r New Zealand; biosecurity; surveillance; invasive species; early detection; sociotechnical innovation; systems change; methodological pluralism""" ; dct:issued "2024-07-08T21:24:26.419848"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-07-08T21:24:26.419848"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Stakeholder Relations in Participatory ICT Design" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Invasion disharmony in the global biogeography of native and non-native beetle species###\r \r **July 2021**\r \r **Liebhold AM, Turner RM, Blake RE, Bertelsmeier C, Brockerhoff EG, Nahrung HF, Pureswaran DS, Roques A, Seebens H, Yamanaka T 2021. [Invasion disharmony in the global biogeography of native and non-native beetle species](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ddi.13381). Diversity and Distributions 27(11): 2050-2062.**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r *Aim*\r \r The concept of “island disharmony” has been widely applied to describe the systematic over- and under-representation of taxa on islands compared to mainland regions. Here, we explore an extension of that concept to biological invasions. We compare biogeographical patterns in native and non-native beetle (Coleoptera) assemblages from around the world to test whether beetle invasions represent a random sample of species or whether some families are more prone to invade than others.\r \r *Methods*\r \r Numbers of non-native beetle species established in ten regions worldwide were compared with the land area of each region. The distribution of species among families was compared with the distribution among families for all species native to the same region and with the distribution among families for the global pool of all known beetle species. Ordination analysis was used to characterize differences among native and non-native assemblages based upon the distribution of species among families.\r \r *Results*\r \r We report a total of 1,967 non-native beetle species across all ten regions, and a classic log–log relationship between numbers of species per region and land area though relationships are generally stronger for native assemblages. Some families (e.g., Dermestidae and Bostrichidae) are over-represented and others (e.g., Carabidae, Scarabaeidae and Buprestidae) are under-represented in non-native assemblages. The distribution of species among families is generally similar among native assemblages with greatest similarities among nearby regions. In contrast, non-native species assemblages are more similar to each other than to native species assemblages.\r \r *Main conclusions*\r \r Certain families are over-represented, and others are under-represented in non-native beetle assemblages compared to native assemblages, indicating “invasion disharmony” in the global representation of beetle families. Similarities in composition among non-native assemblages may reflect unobserved associations with invasion pathways and life-history traits that shape invasion success of different insect groups.\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r Coleoptera; composition; disharmony; invasion; native; non-native\r """ ; dct:issued "2024-07-08T23:26:40.785275"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-07-08T23:26:40.785275"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Invasion disharmony in beetle global biogeography " ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Considering unseen arrivals in predictions of establishment risk based on border biosecurity interceptions###\r \r **September 2020**\r \r **Turner RM, Plank MJ, Brockerhoff EG, Pawson S, Liebhold A, James A 2020. [Considering unseen arrivals in predictions of establishment risk based on border biosecurity interceptions](https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eap.2194). Ecol Appl 30(8): e02194.**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r Assessing species establishment risk is an important task used for informing biosecurity activities aimed at preventing biological invasions. Propagule pressure is a major contributor to the probability of invading species establishment; however, direct assessment of numbers of individuals arriving is virtually never possible. Inspections conducted at borders by biosecurity officials record counts of species (or higher-level taxa) intercepted during inspections, which can be used as proxies for arrival rates. Such data may therefore be useful for predicting species establishments, though some species may establish despite never being intercepted. We present a stochastic process-based model of the arrival–interception–establishment process to predict species establishment risk from interception count data. The model can be used to estimate the probability of establishment, both for species that were intercepted and species that had no interceptions during a given observation period. We fit the stochastic model to data on two insect families, Cerambycidae and Aphididae, that were intercepted and/or established in the United States or New Zealand. We also explore the effects of variation in model parameters and the inclusion of an Allee effect in the establishment probability. Although interception data sets contain much noise due to variation in inspection policy, interception effort and among-species differences in detectability, our study shows that it is possible to use such data for predicting establishments and distinguishing differences in establishment risk profile between taxonomic groups. Our model provides a method for predicting the number of species that have breached border biosecurity, including both species detected during inspections but also “unseen arrivals” that have never been intercepted, but have not yet established a viable population. These estimates could inform prioritization of different taxonomic groups, pathways or identification effort in biosecurity programs.\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r Aphididae; biosecurity; Cerambycidae; interception; species establishment; stochastic process""" ; dct:issued "2024-07-08T23:11:06.012034"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-07-08T23:11:06.012034"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Predicting establishment risk from border interceptions" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Moths and butterflies on alien shores: Global biogeography of non-native Lepidoptera###\r \r **May 2022**\r \r **Mally R, Turner RM, Blake RE, Fenn-Moltu G, Bertelsmeier C, Brockerhoff EG, Hoare RJB, Nahrung HF, Roques A, Pureswaran DS, Tamanaka t, Liebhold AM. 2022. [Moths and butterflies on alien shores: Global biogeography of non-native Lepidoptera](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jbi.14393). Journal of Biogeography 49(8): 1455-1468.**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r *Aim*\r \r Lepidoptera is a highly diverse, predominantly herbivorous insect order, with species transported to outside their native range largely facilitated by the global trade of plants and plant‐based goods. Analogous to island disharmony, we examine invasion disharmony, where species filtering during invasions increases systematic compositional differences between native and non‐native species assemblages, and test whether some families are more successful at establishing in non‐native regions than others.\r \r *Location*\r \r Hawaii, North America, Galapagos, Europe, South Africa, South Korea, Japan, Nansei Islands, Ogasawara Islands, Australia, New Zealand. \r \r *Taxon* \r \r Lepidoptera\r \r *Methods*\r \r We compared numbers of non‐native, unintentionally introduced Lepidoptera species with the land area of 11 regions worldwide. Differences among native and non‐native assemblages in the distribution of species among families were investigated using ordination analysis. We tested whether invasion disharmony is explained by propagule pressure (proxied by species richness in border \r interceptions) and if families were associated with specific trade commodities.\r \r *Results*\r \r In total, 741 non‐native Lepidoptera species, accounting for 0.47% of the global diversity of lepidopterans, are established in at least one of the 11 regions. Crambidae, Pyralidae, Tineidae and Gracillariidae were particularly successful invaders, whereas the two most species‐rich families, Erebidae and Geometridae, were under‐represented among non‐native Lepidoptera. Much of the variation in species numbers in the native, and less so in the non‐native assemblages could be attributed to land area. Although native assemblages were similar among nearby regions, non‐native assemblages were not, suggesting geography had little effect on invasion disharmony. Comparison of established with intercepted species revealed that macromoth families were generally under‐represented in establishments, whereas several micromoth families were under‐represented in interceptions. This discrepancy may relate to greater detectability of larger species or high propagule pressure via associations with specific invasion pathways.\r \r *Main conclusions*\r \r Invasion disharmony in Lepidoptera appears to be driven by processes unrelated to the success of native assemblages. While native assemblages developed through long‐term evolutionary radiation, the composition of non‐native assemblages is driven by differential invasion pathways and traits affecting the establishment of founder populations that vary among families.\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r biological invasions; border interceptions; commodities; establishment; international trade; invasion; disharmony; non-native region; propagule pressure""" ; dct:issued "2024-07-08T23:58:06.582106"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-07-08T23:58:06.582106"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Global biogeography of non-native Lepidoptera" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###The role of the social sciences and economics in understanding and informing tree biosecurity policy and planning: a global summary and synthesis###\r \r **July 2017**\r \r **Marzano M, Allen W, Haight RG, Holmes TP, Keskitalo ECH, Langer ERL, Shadbolt M, Urquhart J, Dandy N 2017. [The role of the social sciences and economics in understanding and informing tree biosecurity policy and planning: a global summary and synthesis](https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10530-017-1503-4.pdf). Biological Invasions 19(11): 3317-3332.**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r We present available evidence on six key dimensions: (1) the role of different stakeholders and the broader public within tree health; (2) levels of knowledge and awareness of tree pests and diseases amongst the variety of end-user ‘stakeholder’ groups, and influences on their attitudes and practices; (3) social acceptability of management approaches; (4) the impact of formal and informal governance arrangements; (5) risk communication; (6) economic analyses on the impact of tree pests.\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r Social science;\r Tree pests;\r Awareness;\r Acceptability;\r Governance;\r Risk communication;""" ; dct:issued "2024-07-08T03:00:32.770851"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-07-08T03:00:32.770851"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Social science and economics role in biosecurity policy" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Worldwide border interceptions provide a window into human-mediated global insect movement###\r \r **July 2021**\r \r **Turner RM, Brockerhoff EG, Bertelsmeier C, Blake RE, Caton B, James A, MacLeod A, Nahrung HF, Pawson SM, Plank MJ, Pureswaran DS, Seebens H, Yamanaka T, Liebhold AM. 2021. [Worldwide border interceptions provide a window into human-mediated global insect movement](https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eap.2412). Ecological Applications: e02412.**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r As part of national biosecurity programs, cargo imports, passenger baggage, and international mail are inspected at ports of entry to verify compliance with phytosanitary regulations and to intercept potentially damaging nonnative species to prevent their introduction. Detection of organisms during inspections may also provide crucial information about the species composition and relative arrival rates in invasion pathways that can inform the implementation of other biosecurity practices such as quarantines and surveillance. In most regions, insects are the main taxonomic group encountered during inspections. We gathered insect interception data from nine world regions collected from 1995 to 2019 to compare the composition of species arriving at ports in these regions. Collectively, 8,716 insect species were intercepted in these regions over the last 25 yr, with the combined international data set comprising 1,899,573 interception events, of which 863,972 were identified to species level. Rarefaction analysis indicated that interceptions comprise only a small fraction of species present in invasion pathways. Despite differences in inspection methodologies, as well as differences in the composition of import source regions and imported commodities, we found strong positive correlations in species interception frequencies between regions, particularly within the Hemiptera and Thysanoptera. There were also significant differences in species frequencies among insects intercepted in different regions. Nevertheless, integrating interception data among multiple regions would be valuable for estimating invasion risks for insect species with high likelihoods of introduction as well as for identifying rare but potentially damaging species.\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r biological invasions; biosecurity; border inspection; invasive species; species composition; species pools""" ; dct:issued "2024-07-08T23:40:48.588597"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-07-08T23:40:48.588597"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Border interceptions reveal global insect movement" ; dcat:accessURL . a foaf:Organization ; foaf:name "Challenge Inventory" .