Main goal

PESTS aims to examine the ethical implications of invasive species narratives, the role of interest groups in shaping narratives, and the wider political implications of these narratives. Ultimately, this work seeks to advance interest group theory and strategic communication theory, enhance policy effectiveness, address ethical considerations, and contribute to broader discussions on environmental governance and human-animal relations.

Hypothesis on Stakeholder Influence

We hypothesise that the current narrative serves the interests of certain stakeholders (e.g., hunters, invasive biology proponents, ecologists, and others) rather than being genuinely necessary or justified for effectively addressing the problem. This misalignment may contribute to the lack of substantial progress or the inadequacy of current solutions.

Specific Objectives

Specific objective 1. Invasion biology narrative (science)

We will explore the militaristic and fear-based nature of invasion science discourses with a an unprecedented broad scope, examining their connections to themes such as colonialism, nationalism, androcentrism, anthropocentrism, and biotechnological determinism.

Specific objective 2. Invasion biology proponents (interests)

We will investigate the interest groups promoting this narrative, both their public affairs strategies and narratives. This will include not only the scientific community within invasion biology, as explored in SO1, but also other relevant stakeholders such as conservationists, ecologists, farmers, and hunters, as well as the scientific and corporate interests driving the biotechnology promise.

Specific objective 2. Invasive species policy (governance)

We will examine policy narrative, actions, and outputs, focusing on the extent of co-optation and the lack of plurality in the perspectives adopted. Specifically, we will address two public governance challenges:

  • Policy Accountability: Examining whether the public policy narrative, including its promises and predictions, aligns with policy outcomes to assess the effectiveness and consistency of these policies with their stated goals.
  • Policy Capture: Investigating whether decision-making and resource allocation are disproportionately influenced by specific interest groups. Disproportionately here refers to an excessive emphasis or influence placed on one factor, perspective, or priority, to the exclusion or detriment of others.

Theoretical approach

PESTS’ approach integrates public affairs (interest groups and stakeholders influencing policies), governance (management policies), and cultural studies (narratives and discourse analysis), applied to the fields of biology and environmental science (pests).

The intersection of influence, policy and narrative are examined in PESTS through the lenses of critical interest group theory, animal ethics, critical animal studies, discourse studies and critical feminism.