POLLINATORS POLLINATION AND FOOD PRODUCTION

THE ASSESSMENT REPORT ON POLLINATORS, POLLINATION AND FOOD PRODUCTION
TABLE 6.5.2
Estimated pollination service supply and demand for Europe. WARNING: this map, and others like it, use proxy
measures of the potential for landscapes to generate pollination services. Such measures are unvalidated, and may not
reflect real pollination service supply. Source: Schulp et al. (2014).
Purpose Use for pollinators Strengths Weaknesses
Case study/
best practice
approach
To exchange knowledge
and guide practice
Many organisations share
case studies online. Best
pollinator management
practices identified for
some crops.
Relatively quick.
Relatively cheap.
Easily understood.
Can be locally relevant.
Performance metrics for
identifying best practice
not quantified.
Evidence
synthesis
To inform decisions
with the best available
evidence
Systematic reviews and
synopses of evidence
have informed decisionmaking
on wild bees and
agricultural interventions.
Systematic, explicit review
and meta-analysis methods
are well established.
High confidence in
conclusions.
Demonstrates knowledge
gaps.
Relatively expensive
(Dicks et al. 2014).
Interpretation in decisions
requires judgement.
Evidence may not be
relevant locally.
Risk assessment
To identify and prioritise
risks of a product or
activity
Established in several
continents for pesticide
regulation. Has led to
restrictions of chemicals
identified as a risk to
the environment. Some
evidence that it reduces
overall environmental
toxicity of pesticide use in
agriculture over time.
Well established in many
countries.
Relatively quick and
cheap if relevant data are
available.
Can be done at a range
of scales.
Established methods only
consider direct toxicity to
honeybees and/or aquatic
invertebrates. Rigorous
methods specific to
non-Apis pollinators, and
sublethal effects, still
under development.
Relevant data are not
always available.
427
Multi-criteria
analysis
Cost-benefit
analysis
Environmental
impact
assessment
Vulnerability
assessment
To evaluate multiple
objectives against multiple
attributes or performance
criteria
To compare the costs
and benefits of different
responses, and provide
a single indicator of net
benefit
To evaluate impacts of a
project or activity
To identify areas, sectors
or groups vulnerable
to adverse effects of
environmental change
Very little used for
decisions about
pollinators. Could be used
to address trade-offs
between pollination and
other services.
A few simple examples
have compared actions to
benefit pollinators.
None found.
None found. Could be
used to identify areas with
pollination deficit.
Effective at addressing
trade-offs.
A range of methods well
developed.
Involves stakeholders.
Can be locally relevant.
Compares costs and
benefits.
Can account for non-use
values.
Relatively quick and
cheap if relevant data are
available.
Methods well established.
Always locally relevant.
Can be done at regional,
national and global scales.
Takes economic and
ecological information into
account.
Can be time-consuming.
Standard methods to
calculate costs and
benefits not established
for pollinators.
Data on costs of
alternative responses
usually not available.
Discount rates used to
actualize future cost and
benefit flows are a source
of controversy.
Only applies to specific
projects.
Varied methods, not well
developed and often
mis-used.
6. RESPONSES TO RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES ASSOCIATED
WITH POLLINATORS AND POLLINATION
Environmental
accounting
To monitor stocks and
flows of environmental
goods and services
Pollination not included
in ‘environmental
footprint’ calculations, but
included in international
Environmental-Accounting
Guidance. No experience
of use yet.
Potential for high
impact, by incorporating
pollination into national
accounts.
Recommended
accounting method
depends on a static
production function
uniform across crop
varieties, extrapolated
from empirical evidence.
Requires a lot of data.
Mapping
pollination
services
To visualise pollination
service supply and/or
demand for a specific
area, or set of conditions
Many maps of pollination
service drawn around the
world. A range of methods
used. None incorporated
directly into policy or
practice decisions yet.
Estimates of wild bee
abundance underlying
one method (the Lonsdorf
model, used in InVEST)
have been validated
empirically.
Most useful on a regional
scale (several farms or a
landscape)
No validated measures of
actual pollination service.
Validated measures are
data intensive and timeconsuming.