A systematic review of non-market ecosystem service values for biosecurity protection

•Non-market environmental values of biosecurity programmes are often ignored in practical decision-making.•Using an ecosystem services lens, we reviewed 75 non-market valuation studies on biosecurity programmes.•25 % of the studies combined non-market valuation techniques with other methods to provide holistic values.•75 % of the studies focused on biodiversity conservation, recreation, or combinations of ecosystem services.•96 % of the studies designed valuation scenarios based on policy contexts to ensure incentive compatibility. While quantified environmental benefits from biosecurity protection programmes are available, they remain scarce, patchy, and context-specific. This contributes to the oversight of non-market economic values such as recreation and conservation in practical decision-making. To better understand this situation, we conducted a systematic review focused on studies that estimated non-market values. Our systematic literature review identified and described the body of knowledge on non-market values of current and future biosecurity protection initiatives worldwide. We identified 75 studies completed between 2000 and 2020 that examined biosecurity protection values across different ecosystems, including forests, freshwater, and marine environments. The results indicated that the three main quantified ecosystem service values were biodiversity conservation and enhancement, recreation, and bundled forest ecosystem services. Among the economic valuation methods, the survey-based stated preference method called choice experiment was the most widely used. This method provides a detailed approach to estimating multiple environmental values derived from biosecurity protection. We identified some significant advancements within the subfield of biosecurity protection, particularly in the valuation methods employed. These advancements include the integration of multiple approaches, such as combining economic valuation with spatial and psychological methods. We envision that our findings will inform the design of future NMV research. This, in turn, will better equip decision-makers to develop more effective, collaborative, and inclusive policies addressing biosecurity issues. These policies will account for the multiple values associated with biosecurity programmes.