IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i10p1720-d933581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Installing Flower Strips to Promote Pollinators in Simplified Agricultural Landscapes: Comprehensive Viability Assessment in Sunflower Fields

Author

Listed:
  • Jorge Ortega-Marcos

    (Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory, Department of Ecology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Darwin 2, 28049 Madrid, Spain
    Departamento de Investigación Aplicada y Extensión Agraria, Instituto Madrileño de Investigación y Desarrollo Rural, Agrario y Alimentario, El Encín, 28805 Alcalá de Henares, Spain)

  • Violeta Hevia

    (Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory, Department of Ecology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Darwin 2, 28049 Madrid, Spain
    Centro de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Cambio Global (CIBC-UAM), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28049 Madrid, Spain
    FRACTAL Collective, San Remigio 2, 28022 Madrid, Spain)

  • Ana P. García-Nieto

    (Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory, Department of Ecology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Darwin 2, 28049 Madrid, Spain)

  • José A. González

    (Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory, Department of Ecology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Darwin 2, 28049 Madrid, Spain
    Centro de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Cambio Global (CIBC-UAM), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28049 Madrid, Spain)

Abstract

The installation of flower strips in simplified agricultural landscapes has been promoted as a tool to improve pollination services. While the effectiveness of flower strips in increasing pollinator visitation and yield is well-established, the social and economic feasibility of this measure remains unclear. Here, we evaluated the economic efficiency and social feasibility of installing flower strips to promote pollination under different scenarios of subsidy. A 2-year experiment was implemented by comparing sunflower fields with and without installed flower strips in central Spain, along with local farmer opinions obtained via a focus group. Flower strips significantly increased wild bee visitation to sunflower heads in the second year after implementation, with seed set being 11% higher on average in fields that had flower strips. Cost–benefit analysis revealed that investment in flower strips would be recovered by 4–5 years after installation, depending on the subsidy used. In the most favorable subsidy scenario, farmers could increase their annual benefits by 8.7% (29 €/ha) after recovering the initial investment. However, most local farmers did not perceive a significant increase in yield associated with the flower strip installation. The use of flower strips was negatively identified by farmers as a source of invasive weeds in adjacent fields, along with a lack of technical advice and economic incentives. Farmers fully agreed that direct economic subsidies were required for flower strips to be accepted as feasible approaches in the long-term.

Suggested Citation

  • Jorge Ortega-Marcos & Violeta Hevia & Ana P. García-Nieto & José A. González, 2022. "Installing Flower Strips to Promote Pollinators in Simplified Agricultural Landscapes: Comprehensive Viability Assessment in Sunflower Fields," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-13, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:10:p:1720-:d:933581
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/10/1720/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/10/1720/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    2. Simon G. Potts & Vera Imperatriz-Fonseca & Hien Ngo & Jacobus C. Biesmeijer & Tom Breeze & Lynn Dicks & Luigi Garibaldi & Josef Settele & A.J. Vanbergen & Marcelo A. Aizen & Saul A. Cunningham & Conna, 2016. "Summary for policymakers of the assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) on pollinators, pollination and food production," Post-Print hal-01946814, HAL.
    3. Cong, Rong-Gang & Smith, Henrik G. & Olsson, Ola & Brady, Mark, 2014. "Managing ecosystem services for agriculture: Will landscape-scale management pay?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 53-62.
    4. Nilsson, Lovisa & Clough, Yann & Smith, Henrik G. & Alkan Olsson, Johanna & Brady, Mark V. & Hristov, Jordan & Olsson, Peter & Skantze, Karin & Ståhlberg, David & Dänhardt, Juliana, 2019. "A suboptimal array of options erodes the value of CAP ecological focus areas," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 407-418.
    5. Berentsen, Paul B.M. & Hendriksen, Astrid & Heijman, Wim J.M. & van Vlokhoven, Haske A., 2007. "Costs and benefits of on-farm nature conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 571-579, May.
    6. Gallai, Nicola & Salles, Jean-Michel & Settele, Josef & Vaissière, Bernard E., 2009. "Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 810-821, January.
    7. Mills, Jane & Gaskell, Peter & Ingram, Julie & Chaplin, Stephen, 2018. "Understanding farmers’ motivations for providing unsubsidised environmental benefits," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 697-707.
    8. Durant, Jennie L. & Otto, Clint R.V., 2019. "Feeling the sting? Addressing land-use changes can mitigate bee declines," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    9. Simon G. Potts & Vera Imperatriz-Fonseca & Hien T. Ngo & Marcelo A. Aizen & Jacobus C. Biesmeijer & Thomas D. Breeze & Lynn V. Dicks & Lucas A. Garibaldi & Rosemary Hill & Josef Settele & Adam J. Vanb, 2016. "Safeguarding pollinators and their values to human well-being," Nature, Nature, vol. 540(7632), pages 220-229, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rafaella Guimarães Porto & Rita Fernandes Almeida & Oswaldo Cruz-Neto & Marcelo Tabarelli & Blandina Felipe Viana & Carlos A. Peres & Ariadna Valentina Lopes, 2020. "Pollination ecosystem services: A comprehensive review of economic values, research funding and policy actions," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(6), pages 1425-1442, December.
    2. Kuhfuss, Laure & Préget, Raphaële & Thoyer, Sophie & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2022. "Enhancing spatial coordination in payment for ecosystem services schemes with non-pecuniary preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    3. Bezerra, Antonio Diego M. & Pacheco Filho, Alípio J.S. & Bomfim, Isac G.A. & Smagghe, Guy & Freitas, Breno M., 2019. "Agricultural area losses and pollinator mismatch due to climate changes endanger passion fruit production in the Neotropics," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 49-57.
    4. David Urbán-Duarte & José Fernando De La Torre-Sánchez & Yooichi Kainoh & Kazuo Watanabe, 2021. "Biodiversity and Stage of the Art of Three Pollinators Taxa in Mexico: An Overview," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Tremlett, Constance J. & Peh, Kelvin S.-H. & Zamora-Gutierrez, Veronica & Schaafsma, Marije, 2021. "Value and benefit distribution of pollination services provided by bats in the production of cactus fruits in central Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    6. Fatih Sari, 2024. "Predicting future opportunities and threats of land-use changes on beekeeping activities in Turkey," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(9), pages 22389-22420, September.
    7. Bareille, Francois & Boussard, Hugues & Thenail, Claudine, 2020. "Productive ecosystem services and collective management: Lessons from a realistic landscape model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    8. Francois Bareille & Matteo Zavalloni & Meri Raggi & Davide Viaggi, 2021. "Cooperative Management of Ecosystem Services: Coalition Formation, Landscape Structure and Policies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(2), pages 323-356, June.
    9. Teklewold, Hailemariam & Kassie, Menale & Abro, Zewdu & Mulungu, Kelvin & Sevgan, Subramanian, 2021. "The Role of Pollination Services and Disrupting Cropping Patterns in Closing Nutrition Gap in Sub-Saharan Africa," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315241, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Perennes, Marie & Diekötter, Tim & Groß, Jens & Burkhard, Benjamin, 2021. "A hierarchical framework for mapping pollination ecosystem service potential at the local scale," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 444(C).
    11. Baba, S.H. & Wani, S.A., 2018. "Ecosystem Management Approach for Agricultural Growth in Mountains: Farmers Perception of Ecosystem Services and Dis-Services in Kashmir-India," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277556, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. José Luis Molina-Pardo & Emilio Rodríguez-Caballero & Miguel Cueto & Pablo Barranco & Manuel Sánchez-Robles & Azucena Laguía-Allué & Esther Giménez-Luque, 2021. "Effects of Agricultural Use on Endangered Plant Taxa in Spain," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-25, November.
    13. Elena Gazzea & Péter Batáry & Lorenzo Marini, 2023. "Global meta-analysis shows reduced quality of food crops under inadequate animal pollination," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
    14. Thomas Sawe & Anders Nielsen & Katrine Eldegard, 2020. "Crop Pollination in Small-Scale Agriculture in Tanzania: Household Dependence, Awareness and Conservation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-13, March.
    15. Maderson, Siobhan, 2023. "Co-producing agricultural policy with beekeepers: Obstacles and opportunities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    16. Silvia Novelli & Monica Vercelli & Chiara Ferracini, 2021. "An Easy Mixed-Method Analysis Tool to Support Rural Development Strategy Decision-Making for Beekeeping," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, June.
    17. Bethwell, Claudia & Sattler, Claudia & Stachow, Ulrich, 2022. "An analytical framework to link governance, agricultural production practices, and the provision of ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    18. Panchalingam, Thadchaigeni & Jones Ritten, Chian & Shogren, Jason F. & Ehmke, Mariah D. & Bastian, Christopher T. & Parkhurst, Gregory M., 2019. "Adding realism to the Agglomeration Bonus: How endogenous land returns affect habitat fragmentation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    19. Semeraro, Teodoro & Pomes, Alessandro & Del Giudice, Cecilia & Negro, Danilo & Aretano, Roberta, 2018. "Planning ground based utility scale solar energy as green infrastructure to enhance ecosystem services," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 218-227.
    20. Balzan, Mario V & Caruana, Julio & Zammit, Annrica, 2018. "Assessing the capacity and flow of ecosystem services in multifunctional landscapes: Evidence of a rural-urban gradient in a Mediterranean small island state," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 711-725.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:10:p:1720-:d:933581. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.