POLLINATORS POLLINATION AND FOOD PRODUCTION

THE ASSESSMENT REPORT ON POLLINATORS, POLLINATION AND FOOD PRODUCTION
conducted in the Brazilian states of Minas Gerais (Vieira
et al., 2007) and Bahia (Viana et al., 2014), show that the
cost to producers of paying workers to conduct manual
pollination is equivalent to around 20% of their annual
net profit.
6.4.1.1.12 Adapt farming methods to climate
change
Possible adaptation strategies at the farm level include
managing for a diverse pollinator community, changes in
crop diversity, sowing rate, and crops/cultivars to ensure
pollination in areas where pollinator populations and
pollinators diversity are reduced (Reidsma and Ewert,
2008). There is evidence that biodiversity can stabilize
pollination against environmental change (Rader et al.,
2013). High biodiversity levels can ensure plant–pollinator
phenological synchrony and thus pollination function
(Bartomeus et al., 2013; Brittain et al., 2013). Greater
crop diversity also can decrease crop vulnerability to
climate variability, as different crops respond differently to a
changing climate. But the effectiveness of adaptation efforts
is likely to vary significantly between and within regions,
depending on geographic location, vulnerability to current
climate extremes, level of economic diversification and
wealth, and institutional capacity (Burton and Lim, 2005).
See section 6.4.4.1.5 for a discussion of boosting pollination
by translocating native pollinators.
6.4.1.2 Legal responses
The degree to which pollination contributes to sustainable
crop yields has not been addressed in agricultural policies
in most countries, although China has officially recognized
pollination as an agricultural input, along with other
conventional inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides (FAO,
2008).
At large scale, agricultural policies in Europe, (European
Common Agricultural Policy (http://www.ecpa.eu/
information-page/agriculture-today/common-agriculturalpolicy-cap)
and the USA (US Farm Bill: http://www.
xerces.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/using-farmbillprograms-for-pollinator-conservation.pdf)
provide important
frameworks within which specific actions to benefit
pollinators have been incentivised (see section 6.4.1.3).
Most policies to increase heterogeneity in agricultural
landscapes reduce intensity of land use, adopt
agroecological farming practices, and prevent abandonment
of agricultural land are relevant to pollinators and pollination
(Smith et al., 2013). The initiative in Bhutan to eradicate
chemical fertilizers and pesticides as part of its Gross
National Happiness programme may have a positive impact
on pollination (http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-
business/bhutan-organic-nation-gross-national-happiness-
programme). Likewise, in Brazil the National Plan for Agro-
Ecology and Organic Production, launched in 2013, with the
aim to coordinate policies and actions for environmentallyfriendly
agriculture and organic food production may
contribute to enhance pollinators and pollination (OECD,
2015). Even though the effectiveness of the regulations
above is still untested, there is evidence of the positive
impact of these agroecological practices on pollinators
and pollination (see section 6.4.1.1). Legal responses that
relate to the use of pesticides and other agrichemicals in
agriculture are covered in section 6.4.2.2.
6.4.1.3 Economic responses
Financial support is often necessary to allow the farmer to
switch farming practices and bear the loss in production
that may result. In Europe, the USA and Australia agrienvironment
schemes (AES) offer farmers short-term
payments for performing prescribed environmental
management behaviour. Use of AES to support pollinators
in Europe was reviewed by Rundlöf and Bommarco
(2011), who identified three main measures that may
specifically promote pollinators: creation and restoration
of semi-natural habitats, establishment of flower strips,
and reduction of pesticide inputs by conversion to organic
farming or introduction of unsprayed field margins. Another,
management of hedgerows to enhance flowering, is
supported in some countries.
Effects of AES on pollinator numbers are well documented
(Pywell et al., 2006; Batáry et al., 2011; http://www.
conservationevidence.com/actions/700) but effects on
pollinator populations are still unknown. Payment for
ecosystem services (PES) is another action (e.g. Daily et al.,
2009) that could promote practices to conserve pollinators
on farms (see section 6.4.3.3).
More recently in the USA farmers receive financial support
to diversify crops (Rose et al., 2015). The United States
Department of Agriculture introduced the Whole-Farm
Revenue Protection Program (http://www.rma.usda.gov/
policies/wfrp.html), which offers farmers an opportunity to
insure all crops on their farms simultaneously, as opposed
to insuring them crop-by-crop. The lack of specific
insurance programmes for fruit and vegetables in the past
has been a disincentive for growers to diversify beyond
commodity crops. The new way of insuring crops offers
farmers enhanced flexibility and provides a greater incentive
to diversify cropping systems within farming regions
(USDA, 2014).
Certification schemes led by consumer or industry bodies
with a price premium are a market-based instrument
that can be used to encourage pollinator-friendly farm
379
6. RESPONSES TO RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES ASSOCIATED
WITH POLLINATORS AND POLLINATION