Risk to pollinators from anthropogenic electro-magnetic radiation (EMR): evidence and knowledge gaps

Worldwide urbanisation and use of mobile and wireless technologies (5G, Internet of Things) is leading to the proliferation of anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation (EMR) and campaigning voices continue to call for the risk to human health and wildlife to be recognised. Pollinators provide many benefits to nature and humankind, but face multiple anthropogenic threats. Here, we assess whether artificial light at night (ALAN) and anthropogenic radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (AREMR), such as used in wireless technologies (4G, 5G) or emitted from power lines, represent an additional and growing threat to pollinators. A lack of high quality scientific studies means that knowledge of the risk to pollinators from anthropogenic EMR is either inconclusive, unresolved, or only partly established. A handful of studies provide evidence that ALAN can alter pollinator communities, pollination and fruit set. Laboratory experiments provide some, albeit variable, evidence that the honey bee Apis mellifera and other invertebrates can detect EMR, potentially using it for orientation or navigation, but they do not provide evidence that AREMR affects insect behaviour in ecosystems. Scientifically robust evidence of AREMR impacts on abundance or diversity of pollinators (or other invertebrates) are limited to a single study reporting positive and negative effects depending on the pollinator group and geographical location. Therefore, whether anthropogenic EMR (ALAN or AREMR) poses a significant threat to insect pollinators and the benefits they provide to ecosystems and humanity remains to be established

Management and drivers of change of pollinating insects and pollination services. National Pollinator Strategy: for bees and other pollinators in England, Evidence statements and Summary of Evidence

These Evidence Statements provide up-to-date information on what is known (and not known) about the status, values, drivers of change, and responses to management of UK insect pollinators (as was September 2018). This document has been produced to inform the development of England pollinator policy, and provide insight into the evidence that underpins policy decision-making. This document sits alongside a more detailed Summary of Evidence (Annex I) document written by pollinator experts. For information on the development of the statements, and confidence ratings assigned to them, please see section ‘Generation of the statements’ below. Citations for these statements are contained in the Summary of Evidence document

The assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on pollinators, pollination and food production

The thematic assessment of pollinators, pollination and food production carried out under the auspices of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services aims to assess animal pollination as a regulating ecosystem service underpinning food production in the context of its contribution to nature’s gifts to people and supporting a good quality of life. To achieve this, it focuses on the role of native and managed pollinators, the status and trends of pollinators and pollinator-plant networks and pollination, drivers of change, impacts on human well-being, food production in response to pollination declines and deficits and the effectiveness of responses

A restatement of recent advances in the natural science evidence base concerning neonicotinoid insecticides and insect pollinators

A summary is provided of recent advances in the natural science evidence base concerning the effects of neonicotinoid insecticides on insect pollinators in a format (a ‘restatement’) intended to be accessible to informed but not expert policymakers and stakeholders. Important new studies have been published since our recent review of this field (Godfray et al. 2014 Proc. R. Soc. B 281,20140558. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.0558)) and the subject continues to be an area of very active research and high policy relevance

Summary for policymakers of the thematic assessment on pollinators, pollination and food production

The thematic assessment of pollinators, pollination and food production carried out under the auspices of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services aims to assess animal pollination as a regulating ecosystem service underpinning food production in the context of its contribution to nature’s gifts to people and supporting a good quality of life. To achieve this, it focuses on the role of native and managed pollinators, the status and trends of pollinators and pollinator-plant networks and pollination, drivers of change, impacts on human well-being, food production in response to pollination declines and deficits and the effectiveness of responses. The chapters and their executive summaries of this assessment are available as document IPBES/4/INF/1/Rev.2 (www.ipbes.net). The present document is a summary for policymakers of the information presented in these chapters

Editorial: summary for policymakers of the thematic assessment on pollinators, pollination and food production

Values of pollinators and pollination 1. Animal pollination plays a vital role as a regulating ecosystem service in nature. Globally, nearly 90 per cent of wild flowering plant species depend, at least in part, on the transfer of pollen by animals. These plants are critical for the continued functioning of ecosystems as they provide food, form habitats, and provide other resources for a wide range of other species. 2. More than three quarters of the leading types of global food crops rely to some extent on animal pollination for yield and/or quality. Pollinator-dependent crops contribute to 35 per cent of global crop production volume. 3. Given that pollinator-dependent crops rely on animal pollination to varying degrees, it is estimated that 5–8 per cent of current global crop production is directly attributed to animal pollination with an annual market value of $235 billion–$577 billion (in 2015, United States dollars1) worldwide

The costs of beekeeping for pollination services in the UK? An explorative study

Honey bees are a key managed pollination service resource in crop agriculture, providing flexible, highly generalist and resilient pollination service delivery to a broad range of UK crops. Despite their potential economic impacts, there is little information on the actual costs involved in providing pollination services experienced by UK beekeepers. Utilizing an online survey of UK beekeepers, this study examines the full economic costs of providing pollination services to crops in the UK, as well as examining the differences in costs experienced by different beekeepers. The findings indicate that <10% of respondent beekeepers, mainly professionals, actively provide pollination services to crops, and rarely receive payment for this in field crops. In apple orchards, where beekeepers most often receive payments, the benefits to the orchard are estimated at 86–149 times the payments received by beekeepers. Although exploratory, the findings highlight the need for wider collection of information on beekeeping costs and several key knowledge gaps that could influence future development of the UK bee farming industry

A global-scale expert assessment of drivers and risks associated with pollinator decline.

Pollinator decline has attracted global attention and substantial efforts are underway to respond through national pollinator strategies and action plans. These policy responses require clarity on what is driving pollinator decline and what risks it generates for society in different parts of the world. Using a formal expert elicitation process, we evaluated the relative regional and global importance of eight drivers of pollinator decline and ten consequent risks to human well-being. Our results indicate that global policy responses should focus on reducing pressure from changes in land cover and configuration, land management and pesticides, as these were considered very important drivers in most regions. We quantify how the importance of drivers and risks from pollinator decline, differ among regions. For example, losing access to managed pollinators was considered a serious risk only for people in North America, whereas yield instability in pollinator-dependent crops was classed as a serious or high risk in four regions but only a moderate risk in Europe and North America. Overall, perceived risks were substantially higher in the Global South. Despite extensive research on pollinator decline, our analysis reveals considerable scientific uncertainty about what this means for human society.University of Reading’s Building Outstanding Impact Support Programm

Costing conservation: an expert appraisal of the pollinator habitat benefits of England’s entry level stewardship

Pollination services provided by insects play a key role in English crop production and wider ecology. Despite growing evidence of the negative effects of habitat loss on pollinator populations, limited policy support is available to reverse this pressure. One measure that may provide beneficial habitat to pollinators is England’s entry level stewardship agri-environment scheme. This study uses a novel expert survey to develop weights for a range of models which adjust the balance of Entry Level Stewardship options within the current area of spending. The annual costs of establishing and maintaining these option compositions were estimated at £59.3–£12.4 M above current expenditure. Although this produced substantial reduction in private cost:benefit ratios, the benefits of the scheme to pollinator habitat rose by 7–140 %; significantly increasing the public cost:benefit ratio. This study demonstrates that the scheme has significant untapped potential to provide good quality habitat for pollinators across England, even within existing expenditure. The findings should open debate on the costs and benefits of specific entry level stewardship management options and how these can be enhanced to benefit both participants and biodiversity more equitably