HomePublications

A critical analysis of the potential for EU Common Agricultural Policy measures to support wild pollinators on farmland

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Open Access permissions

Open

Documents

DOI

Authors

  • Lorna J. Cole
  • David Kleijn
  • Jane C. Stout
  • Simon G. Potts
  • Matthias Albrecht
  • Mario V. Balzan
  • Ignasi Bartomeus
  • Penelope J. Bebeli
  • Danilo Bevk
  • Jacobus C. Biesmeijer
  • Róbert Chlebo
  • Anželika Dautartė
  • Nikolaos Emmanouil
  • Chris Hartfield
  • John M. Holland
  • Andrea Holzschuh
  • Nieke T.J. Knoben
  • Anikó Kovács-Hostyánszki
  • Yael Mandelik
  • Heleni Panou
  • Robert J. Paxton
  • Theodora Petanidou
  • Miguel A.A. Pinheiro de Carvalho
  • Maj Rundlöf
  • Jean Pierre Sarthou
  • Menelaos C. Stavrinides
  • Maria Jose Suso
  • Hajnalka Szentgyörgyi
  • Bernard E. Vaissière
  • Androulla Varnava
  • Montserrat Vilà
  • Romualdas Zemeckis
  • Jeroen Scheper

Organisational units

Abstract

Agricultural intensification and associated loss of high-quality habitats are key drivers of insect pollinator declines. With the aim of decreasing the environmental impact of agriculture, the 2014 EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) defined a set of habitat and landscape features (Ecological Focus Areas: EFAs) farmers could select from as a requirement to receive basic farm payments. To inform the post-2020 CAP, we performed a European-scale evaluation to determine how different EFA options vary in their potential to support insect pollinators under standard and pollinator-friendly management, as well as the extent of farmer uptake. A structured Delphi elicitation process engaged 22 experts from 18 European countries to evaluate EFAs options. By considering life cycle requirements of key pollinating taxa (i.e. bumble bees, solitary bees and hoverflies), each option was evaluated for its potential to provide forage, bee nesting sites and hoverfly larval resources. EFA options varied substantially in the resources they were perceived to provide and their effectiveness varied geographically and temporally. For example, field margins provide relatively good forage throughout the season in Southern and Eastern Europe but lacked early-season forage in Northern and Western Europe. Under standard management, no single EFA option achieved high scores across resource categories and a scarcity of late season forage was perceived. Experts identified substantial opportunities to improve habitat quality by adopting pollinator-friendly management. Improving management alone was, however, unlikely to ensure that all pollinator resource requirements were met. Our analyses suggest that a combination of poor management, differences in the inherent pollinator habitat quality and uptake bias towards catch crops and nitrogen-fixing crops severely limit the potential of EFAs to support pollinators in European agricultural landscapes. Policy Implications. To conserve pollinators and help protect pollination services, our expert elicitation highlights the need to create a variety of interconnected, well-managed habitats that complement each other in the resources they offer. To achieve this the Common Agricultural Policy post-2020 should take a holistic view to implementation that integrates the different delivery vehicles aimed at protecting biodiversity (e.g. enhanced conditionality, eco-schemes and agri-environment and climate measures). To improve habitat quality we recommend an effective monitoring framework with target-orientated indicators and to facilitate the spatial targeting of options collaboration between land managers should be incentivised.

Details

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)681-694
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Applied Ecology
Volume57
Issue number4
Early online date16 Feb 2020
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2020
Peer-reviewedYes

Keywords

    Research areas

  • agri-environment schemes, bees, CAP Green Architecture, Common Agricultural Policy, Ecological Focus Areas, habitat complementarity, pollination services, pollinator conservation, BIODIVERSITY, RESOURCES, SERVICES, BEE ABUNDANCE, INCREASE, HABITATS, INSECTS, DIVERSITY, LANDSCAPES, REVEALS

Downloads statistics

No data available

View graph of relations

ID: 177842586

Related by author
  1. Impacts of multiple pollutants on pollinator activity in road verges

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  2. Eight problems with literature reviews and how to fix them

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  3. Working landscapes need at least 20% native habitat

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  4. Enhancing road verges to aid pollinator conservation: A review

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Related by journal