Focusing on Prosopis, the second most widespread invasive tree genus in
South Africa, Shackleton et al. (2015) highlight greater knowledge and understanding by citizens than the previous two studies. The research did take place in areas of
high infestation and where native tree biodiversity is very low, which might explain
these results. However, differences in knowledge between social settings and actors
was evident. Rural commercial farmers and communal land dwellers who had the
greatest exposure to Prosopis and whose livelihoods were more closely linked to
nature had a much greater knowledge than urban residents. Furthermore, unlike
previous studies, Shackleton et al. (2015) revealed greater knowledge of the species
amongst poor, urban dwellers (some of whom were reliant on the tree for fuelwood)
as compared to affluent urban citizens. Another study in rural villages in the
Northern Cape highlighted that knowledge and awareness of invasive species is
highly species-dependent (Shackleton and Shackleton 2018). The majority of
respondents knew that Prosopis, Eucalyptus and J. mimosifolia were non-native,
but very few respondents knew other common invasive alien plants like Schinus
molle (Pepper Tree), Tecoma stans (Yellow Bells), Melia azedarach (Seringa),
Morus alba (White Mulberry) and O. ficus-indica, despite them being in the same
landscape for similar durations. Differing levels of knowledge across species are
likely influenced by factors like species traits, residence time, reasons for introduction, rates of spread and densities of invasions, impacts on people as well as
management and outreach efforts.
For this proposition, we suggest knowledge of invasions can be contextdependent, and knowledge is generally low except for a few flagship taxa. Similarly,
certain sectors of society are more knowledgeable regarding invasions, such as
elites, and those living in rural areas who are likely to be more in contact with
invasions and their impacts.
24.3.3 Proposition 2c: Personal Values are the Primary
Factor Affecting Perceptions of Invasive Alien Species
and Their Control
Various emotionally-related factors can influence people’s attitudes and perceptions
of invasive species (Urgenson et al. 2013; Shackleton et al. 2019b). For example, the
global literature shows that people often “fall in love” with beautiful, cute or
charismatic species due to their emotional appeal, while others might be detested
based on their ugliness or threat, such as fire ants, wasps or rats (Shackleton et al.
2019b).
Only a few studies have addressed this question in South Africa. Novoa et al.
(2017) illustrated that, in South Africa, there was not much difference in the support
for management between different taxa, whereas in the UK, the control of a
charismatic animal species was less supported than that of an ornamental plant.
This might be linked to differences in attitudes by those living in more rural areas
(South Africa), but also to the presence and diversity of native flora and fauna.
24 The Social Dimensions of Biological Invasions in South Africa
711
South Africa, Shackleton et al. (2015) highlight greater knowledge and understanding by citizens than the previous two studies. The research did take place in areas of
high infestation and where native tree biodiversity is very low, which might explain
these results. However, differences in knowledge between social settings and actors
was evident. Rural commercial farmers and communal land dwellers who had the
greatest exposure to Prosopis and whose livelihoods were more closely linked to
nature had a much greater knowledge than urban residents. Furthermore, unlike
previous studies, Shackleton et al. (2015) revealed greater knowledge of the species
amongst poor, urban dwellers (some of whom were reliant on the tree for fuelwood)
as compared to affluent urban citizens. Another study in rural villages in the
Northern Cape highlighted that knowledge and awareness of invasive species is
highly species-dependent (Shackleton and Shackleton 2018). The majority of
respondents knew that Prosopis, Eucalyptus and J. mimosifolia were non-native,
but very few respondents knew other common invasive alien plants like Schinus
molle (Pepper Tree), Tecoma stans (Yellow Bells), Melia azedarach (Seringa),
Morus alba (White Mulberry) and O. ficus-indica, despite them being in the same
landscape for similar durations. Differing levels of knowledge across species are
likely influenced by factors like species traits, residence time, reasons for introduction, rates of spread and densities of invasions, impacts on people as well as
management and outreach efforts.
For this proposition, we suggest knowledge of invasions can be contextdependent, and knowledge is generally low except for a few flagship taxa. Similarly,
certain sectors of society are more knowledgeable regarding invasions, such as
elites, and those living in rural areas who are likely to be more in contact with
invasions and their impacts.
24.3.3 Proposition 2c: Personal Values are the Primary
Factor Affecting Perceptions of Invasive Alien Species
and Their Control
Various emotionally-related factors can influence people’s attitudes and perceptions
of invasive species (Urgenson et al. 2013; Shackleton et al. 2019b). For example, the
global literature shows that people often “fall in love” with beautiful, cute or
charismatic species due to their emotional appeal, while others might be detested
based on their ugliness or threat, such as fire ants, wasps or rats (Shackleton et al.
2019b).
Only a few studies have addressed this question in South Africa. Novoa et al.
(2017) illustrated that, in South Africa, there was not much difference in the support
for management between different taxa, whereas in the UK, the control of a
charismatic animal species was less supported than that of an ornamental plant.
This might be linked to differences in attitudes by those living in more rural areas
(South Africa), but also to the presence and diversity of native flora and fauna.
24 The Social Dimensions of Biological Invasions in South Africa
711