Conclusions
It is clear that the considerable constraints in the USA and Hawaii (and to a lesser extent, in Canada and Australia) over the last two decades have shed a pessimistic light on the entire practice of weed biocontrol worldwide. Our impression, however, is that a nadir has been reached and that the precedents of the highly successful programs in New Zealand and South Africa, and early signs of rejuvenation of the discipline in Australia, lead to optimism. This confi- dence is given considerable added weight by the recent, intentional implementation of weed biocontrol in England and Portugal (Shaw et al. 2018)—an involvement which took a decade to gain approval from the European Union authorities, but it is undoubtedly a major step forward. It is also most encouraging that Argentina and Brazil, that have long been crucially-important source nations for weed biocontrol agents, have now become the first countries in South America to commit to the implementation of weed biological control in their homelands (e.g. McKay et al. 2018).
In spite of the multifaceted challenges and constraints facing biological control, generally and globally (Barratt et al. 2018; Messing and Brodeur 2018), absolute necessity and pragmatism in the face of increasing threats from alien invasive plants will ensure the eventual renaissance of weed biocontrol as a practice. If the proceedings at the ICE2016 Symposium, and the publications in this Special Issue of BioControl serve to offer a balanced and optimistic prognosis and provide an added impetus for weed biocontrol, then all these initiatives will have been worthwhile.