The annual trade in exotic vertebrates as pets is a multi‐billion‐dollar global business. Thousands of species, and tens of millions of individual animals, are shipped both internationally and within countries to satisfy this demand. Most research on the exotic pet trade has focused on its contribution to native biodiversity loss and disease spread. Here, we synthesize information across taxa and research disciplines to document the exotic pet trade's contribution to vertebrate biological invasions. We show recent and substantial worldwide growth in the number of non‐native animal populations introduced via this invasion pathway, which demonstrates a strong potential to increase the number of invasive animals in the future. Key to addressing the invasion threat of exotic pets is learning more about the socioeconomic forces that drive the massive growth in the exotic pet market and the socioecological factors that underlie pet release by owners. These factors likely vary according to cultural pet‐keeping traditions across regions and whether purchases were legal or illegal. These gaps in our understanding of the exotic pet trade must be addressed in order to implement effective policy solutions.

Invasive alien species are a major driver of global change, impacting biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human livelihoods. To document these impacts, we present the Global Impacts Dataset of Invasive Alien Species (GIDIAS), a dataset on the positive, negative and neutral impacts of invasive alien species on nature, nature’s contributions to people, and good quality of life. This dataset arises from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services’ (IPBES) thematic assessment report of this topic. Data were compiled from published sources, including grey literature, reporting a direct observation of an invasive alien species’ impact. All impact records contain up to 52 fields of contextual information and attempt to link impacts to the global standard “environmental impact classification for alien taxa” (EICAT) and “socio-economic impact classification for alien taxa” (SEICAT). GIDIAS includes more than 22000 records of impacts caused by 3353 invasive alien species (plants, vertebrates, invertebrates, microorganisms) from all continents and realms (terrestrial, freshwater, marine), extracted from over 6700 sources. We intend GIDIAS to be a global resource for investigating and managing the variety of impacts of invasive alien species across taxa and regions.

Mitigating human–wildlife conflicts by altering human behaviors is critical to urban wildlife conservation. We investigated what actions urban residents are willing to take to mitigate human–wildlife conflicts in metropolitan Atlanta, one of the fastest growing metropolises in the United States (~6.1 million people, 21,690 km ² ). In 2022, we administered online surveys to 1006 residents of metropolitan Atlanta to determine which measures they had adopted to mitigate conflicts with urban wildlife, elicit their stated willingness to adopt additional conflict mitigation measures, and identify determinants of current or potential implementation of mitigation measures. Respondents most frequently reported watching urban wildlife (63.0% of respondents). The most frequently reported conflicts were wildlife raiding trash cans (14.8%) and damaging landscaping (20.8%). In total, 342 respondents (34.0%) had not taken any action to mitigate conflicts with wildlife. Respondents who had taken action to prevent conflicts most often secured their trash by keeping cans indoors or locking the lid of the can (28.7%), kept pets (20.5%) and pet food (20.3%) indoors, and took trash out on the morning of collection (19.6%). Respondents who had not adopted conflict mitigation measures stated that they were likely to secure their trash or keep pets and pet food indoors if they considered these measures to be necessary. Prior conflicts with wildlife influenced both respondents' current efforts to mitigate conflicts with wildlife, and their stated willingness to adopt additional measures to mitigate human–wildlife conflicts. Risk sensitivity to zoonotic pathogen transmission increased both actual and intended adoption of conflict mitigation measures. Respondents' self‐efficacy, beliefs about wildlife, and age also influenced their willingness to adopt conflict mitigation measures. Our results suggest that education and outreach about the need for conflict mitigation measures should highlight the importance and effectiveness of these measures in conserving wildlife, while also securing the well‐being of humans and pets.

The expanding global trade in herpetofauna has contributed to new infectious disease dynamics and pathways that allow for the rapid spread of pathogens geographically. Improved biosecurity is needed to mitigate adverse biodiversity, economic and human health impacts associated with pathogen transmission through the herpetological trade. However, general lack of knowledge of the pathogen transmission risks associated with the global trade in herpetofauna and public opposition to biosecurity measures are critical obstacles to successfully preventing pathogen transmission. In 2019 we administered a survey to 2,007 members of the public in the United States of America to ascertain their support for interventions to prevent the spread of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd), Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans (Bsal), ranaviruses, and Salmonella through the herpetological trade. We presented survey respondents with different potential hazards associated with pathogen transmission through this trade, namely ecological, economic, and human health impacts. We used structural equation models to determine how these different hazards and respondents’ characteristics influenced respondents’ support for quarantine and veterinary observation of herpetofauna imported into the United States, mandatory tests for diseases of concern, and best practices to reduce stress and improve the care of live herpetofauna during transport to the United States. Respondents’ values and their perceived susceptibility and sensitivity to different hazards associated with pathogen transmission were key determinants of their support for biosecurity. Respondents with strong biospheric and altruistic values demonstrated sensitivity to ecological and human health impacts associated with pathogen transmission, whereas respondents with strong egoistic values demonstrated sensitivity to economic impacts. Respondents had limited knowledge of Bd, Bsal or ranaviruses, the size of the herpetological trade, or how this trade may contribute to pathogen transmission. Improved outreach and education on pathogen transmission through the herpetological trade is required, but it is important that messages are tailored to people with different values to elicit their support for biosecurity.