IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i6p2302-d332933.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Total Brood Removal and Other Biotechniques for the Sustainable Control of Varroa Mites in Honey Bee Colonies: Economic Impact in Beekeeping Farm Case Studies in Northwestern Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Teresina Mancuso

    (Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin, Largo P. Braccini 2, 10095 Grugliasco, Turin, Italy)

  • Luca Croce

    (Independent Researcher, Borgata Baratta 27, 10040 Villardora, Turin, Italy)

  • Monica Vercelli

    (Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin, Largo P. Braccini 2, 10095 Grugliasco, Turin, Italy)

Abstract

Honey bee colonies are affected by many threats, and the Varroa mite represents one of the most important causes of honey bee disease. The control of the Varroa population is managed by different methods, and in recent years, biotechnical practices are considered preferable to chemical approaches in order to safeguard honey bee health and avoid residues in bee products as well as the appearance of acaricide resistance. However, little is known about the economic performance of beekeeping exploitations in relation to the methods used for tackling Varroa. This study aims to investigate the economic impact of total brood removal (TBR) as a biotechnique to keep Varroa mites under control, and compare this to other common biotechniques and chemical Varroa control in numerous Italian beekeeping case studies. A pool of economic and technical indexes was proposed. The proposed index pool can be included in the development of an expert system (such as a decision support system) able to address the optimal management of this very complex activity, which requires natural resources, land protection, capital and high technical skills. The result showed that the adoption of the TBR biotechnique vs. other biotechniques led to an increase in terms of total revenue (increase values ranging from 11% to 28%) even though more labor is needed (increase values ranging from 43 to 83 min/hive) and a loss of honey production could be recorded in some cases. Additionally, the total expenses, represented mainly by supplemental nutrition and treatments with oxalic acid, affected the economic results of the biotechnical practices. The use of biotechniques vs. chemical control resulted in decreased treatment costs and increased feeding costs. The advantages resulting from not using synthetic acaricides (which are dangerous for honey bee and human health as well as the environment) as well as the advantages linked to the production of new nuclei (which are involved in the maintenance of bee stock and counteract the decline in honey bee population) and pollination ecosystem services could make beekeeping farms more resilient over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Teresina Mancuso & Luca Croce & Monica Vercelli, 2020. "Total Brood Removal and Other Biotechniques for the Sustainable Control of Varroa Mites in Honey Bee Colonies: Economic Impact in Beekeeping Farm Case Studies in Northwestern Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-16, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:6:p:2302-:d:332933
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/6/2302/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/6/2302/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kristina Brščić & Tina Šugar & Danijela Poljuha, 2017. "An empirical examination of consumer preferences for honey in Croatia," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(58), pages 5877-5889, December.
    2. Shang Wu & Jacob R. Fooks & Kent D. Messer & Deborah Delaney, 2015. "Consumer demand for local honey," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(41), pages 4377-4394, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Luciano Pilati & Mario Prestamburgo, 2016. "Sequential Relationship between Profitability and Sustainability: The Case of Migratory Beekeeping," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, January.
    5. Fanny Mondet & Joachim R de Miranda & Andre Kretzschmar & Yves Le Conte & Alison R Mercer, 2014. "On the Front Line: Quantitative Virus Dynamics in Honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) Colonies along a New Expansion Front of the Parasite Varroa destructor," PLOS Pathogens, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, August.
    6. Cosmina, Marta & Gallenti, Gianluigi & Marangon, Francesco & Troiano, Stefania, 2015. "Attitudes towards honey among Italian consumers: a choice experiment approach," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202733, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Kathrin Stenchly & Marc Victor Hansen & Katharina Stein & Andreas Buerkert & Wilhelm Loewenstein, 2018. "Income Vulnerability of West African Farming Households to Losses in Pollination Services: A Case Study from Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Despina Popovska Stojanov & Lazo Dimitrov & Jiří Danihlík & Aleksandar Uzunov & Miroljub Golubovski & Sreten Andonov & Robert Brodschneider, 2021. "Direct Economic Impact Assessment of Winter Honeybee Colony Losses in Three European Countries," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-11, April.
    2. Rimui Gloria Warucu & Moses Lufuke, 2024. "The Impact of Cooperative membership on Adoption of Modern Technology by Bee farmers in Kenya," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 8(3), pages 270-284, March.
    3. Liam Pippinato & Simone Blanc & Teresina Mancuso & Filippo Brun, 2020. "A Sustainable Niche Market: How Does Honey Behave?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-14, December.
    4. Piotr Semkiw & Piotr Skubida, 2021. "Bee Bread Production—A New Source of Income for Beekeeping Farms?," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-13, May.
    5. Monica Vercelli & Luca Croce & Teresina Mancuso, 2020. "An Economic Approach to Assess the Annual Stock in Beekeeping Farms: The Honey Bee Colony Inventory Tool," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-14, November.

    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. Monica Vercelli & Luca Croce & Teresina Mancuso, 2020. "An Economic Approach to Assess the Annual Stock in Beekeeping Farms: The Honey Bee Colony Inventory Tool," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Riccardo Testa & Antonio Asciuto & Giorgio Schifani & Emanuele Schimmenti & Giuseppina Migliore, 2019. "Quality Determinants and Effect of Therapeutic Properties in Honey Consumption. An Exploratory Study on Italian Consumers," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-12, August.
    3. Jerrod Penn & Wuyang Hu & Hannah J. Penn, 2019. "Support for Solitary Bee Conservation among the Public versus Beekeepers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 101(5), pages 1386-1400, October.
    4. Juma, Charity Nabwire & Otieno, David Jakinda & Oluouch-Kosura, Willis & Gyau, Amos & Oduol, Judith Auma, 2016. "A survey of consumer perceptions and preferences for geographical indication and quality attributes of honey in Kenya," 2016 Fifth International Conference, September 23-26, 2016, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 246915, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    5. Kelemen-ErdÅ‘s Anikó & Kokthi, Elena & Ledia Thoma Boshnjaku, 2019. "Analyzing Consumer Preferences for Honey: Empirical Evidence from Albania," Proceedings- 11th International Conference on Mangement, Enterprise and Benchmarking (MEB 2019),, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    6. Petjon Ballco & Fatma Jaafer & Tiziana de Magistris, 2022. "Investigating the price effects of honey quality attributes in a European country: Evidence from a hedonic price approach," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(4), pages 885-904, October.
    7. Jelena Vapa-Tankosić & Svetlana Ignjatijević & Jelena Kiurski & Jovana Milenković & Irena Milojević, 2020. "Analysis of Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Organic and Local Honey in Serbia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-23, June.
    8. Herrmann, R. & Bissinger, K. & Krandick, L., 2018. "Implicit Prices of Sustainability Characteristics in Foods: the Case of the German Online Market for Honey," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277079, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Herrmann, Roland & Bissinger, Katharina & Krandick, Lisa, 2018. "Price Premia for Sustainability Characteristics in Foods: Measurement Matters!," 2018 International European Forum (163rd EAAE Seminar), February 5-9, 2018, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 276855, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    10. 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.
    11. Despina Popovska Stojanov & Lazo Dimitrov & Jiří Danihlík & Aleksandar Uzunov & Miroljub Golubovski & Sreten Andonov & Robert Brodschneider, 2021. "Direct Economic Impact Assessment of Winter Honeybee Colony Losses in Three European Countries," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-11, April.
    12. Mi Zeng & Wei Yu Yan & Zhi Jiang Zeng, 2023. "Analysis of Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Honey in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-10, January.
    13. Aliz Feketéné Ferenczi & István Szűcs & Andrea Bauerné Gáthy, 2024. "“What’s Good for the Bees Will Be Good for Us!”—A Qualitative Study of the Factors Influencing Beekeeping Activity," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-20, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    16. Kathrin Stenchly & Marc Victor Hansen & Katharina Stein & Andreas Buerkert & Wilhelm Loewenstein, 2018. "Income Vulnerability of West African Farming Households to Losses in Pollination Services: A Case Study from Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.
    17. Grazia Zulian & Joachim Maes & Maria Luisa Paracchini, 2013. "Linking Land Cover Data and Crop Yields for Mapping and Assessment of Pollination Services in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-21, September.
    18. Lippert, Christian & Feuerbacher, Arndt & Narjes, Manuel, 2021. "Revisiting the economic valuation of agricultural losses due to large-scale changes in pollinator populations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    19. Luciano Pilati & Vasco Boatto, 2014. "Jointness in Sites: The Case of Migratory Beekeeping," DEM Discussion Papers 2014/10, Department of Economics and Management.
    20. Nicholas W Calderone, 2012. "Insect Pollinated Crops, Insect Pollinators and US Agriculture: Trend Analysis of Aggregate Data for the Period 1992–2009," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-27, May.

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:6:p:2302-:d:332933. 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.