POLLINATORS POLLINATION AND FOOD PRODUCTION

THE ASSESSMENT REPORT ON POLLINATORS, POLLINATION AND FOOD PRODUCTION
end, which guides action (de Vries and Petersen, 2009);
this action can be individual or collective (Díaz et al., 2015).
To date the emphasis among the literature has focused
overwhelmingly on the economic value of pollinators, which
may neglect the impact of changing pollinator populations
other value dimensions.
Economic valuation of the conservation and sustainable use
of pollination services can be highly informative for farmers
and policy makers. Most early pollination valuation studies
centered on managed western honey bees and farm gate
prices of the crops they help produce. Valuation studies
focused on pollination services typically used one of three
major approaches (although more are detailed in Chapter
4, Section 4.4): Estimation of change to social welfare
(Gallai et al., 2009); calculation of total market price of
crop production that can be directly attributed to animalmediated
pollination (Gallai et al., 2009; Lautenbach et al.,
2012); and replacement cost based on purchased inputs
that substitute for natural pollination services (Allsopp et al.,
2008; Winfree et al., 2011b). Most assessments have only
examined the market price of additional crop productivity
from crop pollination and have largely focused on national
or regional analysis in the developed world (Chapter 4,
Section 4.9).
1.10 POLLINATORS,
TRADITIONAL
KNOWLEDGE AND A
GOOD QUALITY OF LIFE
Ecological sciences and ethics together promote an
opportunity to understand better the ways we can perceive
and co-inhabit the world (Rozzi, 2013). Anthropocentrism
with a utilitarian ethic is the dominant view in western
societies, promoting globalization and neoliberal conditions
for a dominant global development, with consequences for
the environment and people (Cáceres, 2015). In this strategy
the ethical position conceives the subject (human habits)
separate from the environment (human actions disregarding
the habitat). Here the economic growth, development
and modernization that govern globalization neglect most
people, biodiversity, ecosystems and humans with different
cultures, which are disappearing from their native habitats
and being excluded from the main discourses and laws that
govern neoliberal global society. This dominant discourse
determines a biotic, linguistic and cultural homogenization
(biocultural homogenization, sensu Rozzi, 2013), which
can be a ubiquitous driver for environmental change,
biodiversity loss, and disruption of indigenous and traditional
knowledge, promoting a small number of plant and animal
species for nourishment.
Divergence from mainstream dominant utilitarian
anthropocentrism (the other farthest view) is a biocultural
ethical approach, defined as ethically connecting “human
life with the diversity of beings, considered as co-inhabitants
with whom humans co-constitute their identities and attain
well-being” (Rozzi, 2013). It is not an extension of utilitarian
ethics through the inclusion of animals, plants, etc. (intrinsic
value assigned to pollinators), but includes interspecific
relationships and how humans co-inhabit in the world. A
biocultural perspective highlights planetary ecological and
cultural heterogeneity, requiring an inter-cultural dialogue
to solve environmental problems judiciously because it
incorporates the views of marginalized people that should
be respected and eventually adapted through intercultural
exchanges (Rozzi, 2013). Biocultural ethics problematizes
relationships among human conduct, habitats, and
communities of co-inhabitants (Rozzi, 2013), embracing
interrelatedness between different human groups and the
environment. It includes different hierarchies of human
values in decision making.
The consequences of decisions on biological and cultural
diversity under different ethical approaches sharply differ
because value and policy-making diverge. There are
different environmental worldviews involving diverse ethics
and hierarchical values that relate to ecological practices
affecting pollination and pollinators. It is necessary to
incorporate the diversity of worldviews, from indigenous
and traditional knowledge on pollination and pollinators to
sustainable ecological practices, into policy and education
(see Chapter 5).
1.11 LEGALITIES AND
GOVERNANCE OF
POLLINATORS AND
POLLINATION
Considering the importance of pollination for agricultural
commodities, it is not surprising that there are a number
of laws, directives, and decrees regulating various aspects
related to pollination and the protection of pollinators. While
many of these have been implemented for agricultural
production, some policy instruments target the protection
of natural or semi-natural ecosystems, due to their link
with the provision of pollination. Much of the legislation is
essentially designed to ensure the protection of pollinators
against deleterious influences (e.g. pathogens, diseases,
agrochemicals, habitat destruction, and in the case of
managed pollinators, from inappropriate management
practices; see Chapters 1.3, 2.3).
15
1. BACKGROUND TO POLLINATORS,
POLLINATION AND FOOD PRODUCTION