title: Addressing a critique of the TEASI framework for invasive species risk assessment.
abstract: We address criticism that the Transport, Establishment, Abundance, Spread, Impact (TEASI) framework does not facilitate objective mapping of risk assessment methods nor defines best practice. We explain why TEASI is appropriate for mapping, despite inherent challenges, and how TEASI offers considerations for best practices, rather than suggesting one best practice.
authors.affiliation: Department of Biology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 1B1, Canada; School of Environment, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 2A7, Canada.
authors.forename: Brian
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Leung
authors.forename: Nuria
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Roura-Pascual
authors.forename: Sven
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Bacher
authors.forename: Jaakko
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Heikkilä
authors.forename: Lluis
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Brotons
authors.forename: Mark A
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Burgman
authors.forename: Katharina
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Dehnen-Schmutz
authors.forename: Franz
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Essl
authors.forename: Philip E
authors.initials: PE
authors.lastname: Hulme
authors.forename: David M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Richardson
authors.forename: Daniel
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Sol
authors.forename: Montserrat
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Vilà
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D058865:Introduced Species / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D008954:Models, Biological
keywords: Colonisation; exotic; habitat suitability; life history trait; non-indigenous; policy; propagule pressure; risk analysis; species distribution; uncertainty