Invasive alien species (IAS) contribute to biodiversity loss, yet animals deemed invasive are both part of biodiversity and individuals themselves. This poses a challenge for global environmental politics, as governance system goals for biodiversity conservation and animal protection can conflict. Using an integrative governance (IG) framework, we map global and European Union IAS and animal governance instruments and systems, and relationships between them. Relationships are explained by actors’ unequal power dynamics, prioritization of human and environmental health, hegemonic anthropocentric discourses, and trade globalization. These factors encourage valuing certain animals—native and domestic—above others. Relationships between the governance systems have been limited. However, integration is deepening because of the transnational and interlinked nature of biodiversity loss and other issues, such as climate change and biosecurity. Nevertheless, as engagement with nonhuman entities brings new challenges, practicing greater IG could go further than this, as acknowledgment of animals’ interests is lacking in IAS governance.

This article examines the contributions that partnerships make to interaction management. Our conceptualization of interaction management builds on earlier contributions to the literature on regimes and governance. The article focuses on the interactions among the biodiversity and climate change governance systems, since these systems interact intensively on the issues of biofuels and forests (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation—REDD+). The article shows that seven partnerships actively manage the interactions by fulfilling several critical interaction management functions. Their main contributions include creating markets for sustainable biofuels through the development of certification standards and creating markets for “multiple benefit” REDD+. Although the partnerships improve interactions on case-by-case bases, they fail to fundamentally improve existing interactions between the biodiversity and climate change governance systems. Improved meta-governance and public-private interplay are necessary for more effective interaction management and, more generally, the effective governance of sustainable development.