A stated preference valuation of the non-market benefits of pollination services in the UK

Using a choice experiment survey this study examines the UK public's willingness to pay to conserve insect pollinators in relation to the levels of two pollination service benefits: maintaining local produce supplies and the aesthetic benefits of diverse wildflower assemblages. Willingness to pay was estimated using a Bayesian mixed logit with two contrasting controls for attribute non-attendance, exclusion and shrinkage. The results suggest that the UK public have an extremely strong preference to avoid a status quo scenario where pollinator populations and pollination services decline. Total willingness to pay was high and did not significantly vary between the two pollination service outputs, producing a conservative total of £379M over a sample of the tax-paying population of the UK, equivalent to £13.4 per UK taxpayer. Using a basic production function approach, the marginal value of pollination services to these attributes is also extrapolated. The study discusses the implications of these findings and directions for related future research into the non-market value of pollination and other ecosystem services

The Influence of Seed Mix and Management on the Performance and Persistence of Sown Forbs in Buffer Strips

A popular option under agri-environmental schemes throughout Europe has been the introduction of buffer strips adjacent to field boundaries. Buffer strips are usually established using grass-only seed mixes, or through natural regeneration. As a consequence, their function and biodiversity value might be limited due to a low presence of desirable forb species. Given the financial barrier of using forb-rich seed mixes, there is a need to identify species that establish reliably in parallel with management options that encourage their persistence. In a 5-year study across three different sites we investigated the responses of 32 different forb species sown in two different grass-based seed mixes tailored to soil type. Generally, there was an increase in sown forb cover with time, and this effect was greatest in plots sown with fine-grasses treated with an application of graminicide or an annual cut. We have identified a suite of ten forb species that are likely to establish and persist in buffer strip habitats

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

Safeguarding pollinators and their values to human well-being

Wild and managed pollinators provide a wide range of benefits to society in terms of contributions to food security, farmer and beekeeper livelihoods, social and cultural values, as well as the maintenance of wider biodiversity and ecosystem stability. Pollinators face numerous threats, including changes in land-use and management intensity, climate change, pesticides and genetically modified crops, pollinator management and pathogens, and invasive alien species. There are well-documented declines in some wild and managed pollinators in several regions of the world. However, many effective policy and management responses can be implemented to safeguard pollinators and sustain pollination services.Environmental Biolog

Meta-analysis reveals that pollinator functional diversity and abundance enhance crop pollination and yield

How insects promote crop pollination remains poorly understood in terms of the contribution of functional trait differences between species. We used meta-analyses to test for correlations between community abundance, species richness and functional trait metrics with oilseed rape yield, a globally important crop. While overall abundance is consistently important in predicting yield, functional divergence between species traits also showed a positive correlation. This result supports the complementarity hypothesis that pollination function is maintained by non-overlapping trait distributions. In artificially constructed communities (mesocosms), species richness is positively correlated with yield, although this effect is not seen under field conditions. As traits of the dominant species do not predict yield above that attributed to the effect of abundance alone, we find no evidence in support of the mass ratio hypothesis. Management practices increasing not just pollinator abundance, but also functional divergence, could benefit oilseed rape agriculture.This study was funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) under research programme NE/N018125/1 ASSIST–Achieving Sustainable Agricultural Systems www.assist.ceh.ac.uk. ASSIST is an initiative jointly supported by NERC and the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC). Additional funding for field studies was from the Wessex Biodiversity Ecosystem Services Sustainability (NE/J014680/1) project within the NERC BESS programme. Other data sets were generated from research funded by: (a) the Insect Pollinators Initiative programme funded by BBSRC, Defra, NERC, the Scottish Government and the Wellcome Trust, under the Living with Environmental Change Partnership; (b) Defra project BD5005: Provision of Ecosystem services in the ES scheme; and (c) Irish Government under the National Development Plan 2007–2013 administered by the Irish EPA

Correction: Agricultural policies exacerbate honeybee pollination service supply-demand mismatches across Europe

The following information was missing from the funding section: BBSRC, DEFRA, NERC, the Scottish Government and the Wellcome Trust, under the Insect Pollinators Initiative crops project. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript

Non-bee insects are important contributors to global crop pollination

Wild andmanaged bees arewell documented as effective pollinators of global crops of economic importance. However, the contributions by pollinators other than bees have been little explored despite their potential to contribute to crop production and stability in the face of environmental change. Non-bee pollinators include flies, beetles, moths, butterflies, wasps, ants, birds, and bats, among others. Here we focus on non-bee insects and synthesize 39 field studies from five continents that directly measured the crop pollination services provided by non-bees, honey bees, and other bees to compare the relative contributions of these taxa. Non-bees performed 25-50% of the total number of flower visits. Although non-bees were less effective pollinators than bees per flower visit, they made more visits; thus these two factors compensated for each other, resulting in pollination services rendered by non-bees that were similar to those provided by bees. In the subset of studies that measured fruit set, fruit set increased with non-bee insect visits independently of bee visitation rates, indicating that non-bee insects provide a unique benefit that is not provided by bees. We also show that non-bee insects are not as reliant as bees on the presence of remnant natural or seminatural habitat in the surrounding landscape. These results strongly suggest that non-bee insect pollinators play a significant role in global crop production and respond differently than bees to landscape structure, probably making their crop pollination services more robust to changes in land use. Non-bee insects provide a valuable service and provide potential insurance against bee population declines.Peer Reviewe