In invasion biology, terminological frameworks contribute to the improvement of
effective communication among scientists, stakeholders, and policy-makers. This is
important not only for informing policy decisions but also for engaging the broader
public in understanding the risks associated with biological invasions. Meanwhile,
the role of non-English languages in advancing knowledge in invasion biology has
gained momentum in recent years. Building on the seminal contributions in this
scientific discipline by Professor Gordon H. Copp, this paper examines the provision
of three key terms defining species invasiveness in 28 non-English languages. We
first define the three non-redundant terms “non-native species”, “established species”,
and “invasive species”. Through a comparative analysis of the equivalent of these
terms in the 28 non-English languages, as contributed by our panel of invasion
biologists and native speakers, with those in a reference review paper, and following
the diffusion-of-English versus ecology-of-language paradigms, we identify
discrepancies and nuances reflecting the dynamic nature of terminology in invasion
biology. While some languages showed consensus in terminology, others differed
due to either the avoidance of a culturally or politically laden term for “non-native” or
the achievement of greater precision in meaning. Our findings highlight the
requirement for clear and precise terminology in invasion biology and suggest the
adoption of multidisciplinary approaches to reach consensus and facilitate
communication amongst scientists, policy-makers, and the general public in a
globally interconnected and rapidly changing world. This will enhance international
collaboration and accelerate knowledge exchange, leading to more effective
management of biological invasions.