Can we allow Planta non-grata to become Planta conviva? A reconciliation ecology approach to invasive species

As with everything, the plant realm is in a perpetual state of becoming. This is true across scales (species, ecosystems, etc.). This is, of course, evolution, the cosmos at work and play, no matter the specific driver. Anthropogenic effects or not, living systems are being continuously changed by their environment, and vice versa. So-called ‘invasive’ expressions are inherent – we might even say vital – to these processes. However, in recent decades especially, elements of human society have taken issue with ‘invasive’ species, notably those of the exotic kind (though natives can also be held to account); indeed, they have joined the growing list of subjects for our wars on . . . fill in the blank. The field of invasion biology has grown into a significant global enterprise on the premise that ‘invasive’ species create ecological, social and economic damage, whilst the International Union for Conservation of Nature rates them as one of the main threats to local biodiversity. I once believed this largely well-intentioned narrative without question. A clue to what has shifted for me lies in the fact that habitat degradation typically lies ahead of ‘invasives’ in the threat rankings, human disturbances being the primary cause of ‘invasive’ behaviour. As I elaborate, I will focus on plants as they are my passion, though I also sense differences between plants and animals in this regard. I now see that this othering of certain ‘bad’ plants has mirrored longstanding attitudes in other arenas, whether at the societal level or that of the human body. We are habituated to competitively identifying boundaries, and, often, enemies (as explained by countercultural intellectual Charles Eisenstein, e.g. in his Cobb Peace Lecture, 2019). A moment’s reflection on the interchangeable language used – weed, thug, alien, immigrant – reveals this. We currently live in a time of heightened polarization replete with vegetal varieties of fake news. What interests me most about this situation is that, just as there is a palpable shift in wider society to compassionately address division, there are growing calls to view ‘invasive’ plants and their effects in a different light. Numerous books and articles, though not always having the same starting point, are, nevertheless, approaching a more nuanced – dare I say it, empathic – understanding of such plants, life forms that might otherwise be known as pioneers, specialists or ecosystem regenerators. Biologist Ken Thompson’s Where Do Camels Belong? (2014) was, for me, an early caster of doubt. The book highlights, for instance, the conflicted nature of research in this field, as illustrated by the notorious Himalayan balsam, which despite its reputation has been shown by some studies to have neutral or even positive effects. As researcher Eric Toensmeier has pointed out, citing the work of biologist Mark Davis and ecologist Richard Hobbs, ‘science seems to be heading, albeit slowly, in the direction of appreciation of “invasive” plants and the novel ecosystems they help to form’ (The Carbon Farming Solution, 2016). Human psychology has helped us see beyond ‘bad’ people to the context of their ‘bad’ behaviour. Can we entertain a similar possibility within the vegetal realm? Enter the idea of reconciliation ecology, which I first came across courtesy of ecologist Ian Rotherham (Recombinant Ecology – A Hybrid Future?, 2017). My interpretation of this term imagines peacebuilding in our relationships with the living beings that are plants, especially so-called invasive species, novel ecosystems and the ecological processes that direct their movement (though it extends far more widely to address what plant neurobiologist Stefano Mancuso calls our general plant blindness). Enough has been written about the myth of