Biological invasions are intertwined with social practices since they stem from human activities and behaviours. Hence, social, political and historical contexts are critical to inform effective actions for the management of invasive alien species (IAS). We argue that an IAS risk analysis which considers and includes the social dimensions can foster the application of measures and research across scales. Thus, this systematic literature review examines the trends of social dimension in IAS studies and investigates their potential to inform the risk analysis components. We analysed 378 publications on IAS incorporating social dimensions (197 peer-reviewed and 181 media articles) to understand their potential to inform three key risk analysis components, i.e., risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication. The review reveals a growing trend in the inclusion of the social dimensions in IAS research, as well as uneven geographical distribution of the study areas and research institutes. However, more studies integrating social dimensions across the three components of risk analysis are needed. Especially in the risk assessment stage, social or community-level interactions lack solid establishment. This has led to a limited number of scientifically documented papers that combine risk analysis and primary interactions at the social community level. Social actors’ involvement in IAS risk analysis varies, with managers, scientists, citizens, and professional nature users being the most frequent participants. Furthermore, the methods used and the data collected differ across the components. The study shows the challenges and the potential of the existing body of literature to contribute to the IAS risk assessment. In particular, the increase of public awareness and the involvement of different social groups, including often underrepresented groups such as women, indigenous communities, and low-income people, in risk analysis and management deliberation can lead to better outcomes. This inclusion is crucial for addressing differing concerns and fostering trust between stakeholders and managers.
Magliozzi et al. (Wed,) studied this question.