4 Supporting pollinators
85. The requirement for pollinators for agriculture
cannot be deliberately reduced by growing fewer insect-pollinated
crops, because this would increase reliance on imports, affect
food security and consumer choice and damage UK agriculture. Pollination
services to agriculture cannot be maintained through managed honeybees,
because huge numbers of colonies would be required and managed
pollinators are prone to diseaseslarge-scale honeybee losses
have occurred more than 30 times in the past 200 years.[153]
Moreover, the pollination needs of most wild plants and future
potential crops are not known, and they may depend on wild pollinators.
Therefore, to provide stable pollination services, policies to
maintain both wild and managed pollinators are needed.
86. Providing new habitat with forage and nesting
sites may help to safeguard pollinators. This has other benefits,
including providing a refuge from agrochemicals and helping pollinators
to migrate in response to climate change. Sowing wildflower seed
mixes in field margins and corners might be a quick and relatively
cheap way of benefiting pollinators.[154]
The amount of pollinator habitat needed in the landscape is not
known, but expert opinions range from 1.25% to 2.5%. Field trials
run by the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology found that bumblebee
abundance was 14 times higher in wildflower margins than in the
conventionally managed cereal crop.[155]
CAP reform
87. The EU Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) has increasingly
provided programmes that can support pollinators. The Entry Level
Stewardship scheme provides payments to farmers for establishing
nectar flowers in blocks or strips, as well as other environmental
activities. Defra told us that "the design is intended to
provide a large quantity of nectar from a small area, to mimic
some of the nectar-bearing crops that were once a feature of more
traditional agricultural systems and to limit the genetic impact
on native wild flower species of the widespread sowing of commercial
seed".[156] Within
Higher Level Stewardship, a wider range of options is available,
including "floristically enhanced grass margins and conservation
headlands".[157]
88. However, Defra told us that that the uptake of
such nectar flower planting has been "lower than expected"
and that Natural England and the industry-led Campaign for the
Farmed Environment have been "specifically promoting the
selection of options of benefit for pollinating insects".[158]
More generally, the voluntary approach of the Campaign for the
Farmed Environment to leave a proportion of land on farms un-cropped
might provide a degree of further pollinator support before any
new 'greened' CAP programme is agreed.[159]
In the meantime, Defra is planning to publish by March 2013 "a
streamlined framework of advice, incentives and voluntary initiatives
to enable farmers and land managers to be more competitive and
yield better environmental results".[160]
In its forthcoming review
of advice, incentives and voluntary initiatives for farmers, Defra
should give prominence to measures which would support bees and
other pollinators, including leaving land un-cropped.
89. The current negotiations on CAP reform offer
an opportunity to introduce more significant pollinator-friendly
programmes. Pillar 1 of the CAP, which is funded entirely from
the EU budget, provides direct income support to farmers, including
Entry and Higher Level Stewardship schemes. Pillar 2 of the CAP
is co-financed between the EU budget and Member States over a
seven-year planning cycle, providing payments to farmers for undertaking
specific additional activities or investments, including for environmental
protection.[161] The
Commission has proposed that the next seven-year CAP programme
replaces the existing direct payments under Pillar 1 with a basic
payment topped up by an additional payment conditional on farmers
respecting certain "agricultural practices beneficial for
the climate and the environment" financed from 30% of the
national Pillar 1 envelope.[162]
Such 'greening' activities could include crop diversification
and 'Ecological Focus Areas', which could include buffer strips
between crops.[163]
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee inquiry on Greening
the CAP heard that sowing pollen and nectar mixes could underpin
Ecological Focus Areas and that a range of different habitats
would help to support pollinators.[164]
90. Member States agreed the seven-year EU budget
for 2014-2020 on 8 February 2013, including annual sums for 'natural
resources' payments which subsumes common agricultural and fisheries
policies payments. That financial settlement has yet to be agreed
in the European Parliament, and there is an unfinished debate
in the European Commission and between Member States about the
details of the new CAP package, including the degree of flexibility
that states will have in interpreting what would constitute qualifying
'greening' activities and the flexibility that will be possible
for transfers between a country's Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 budgets.[165]
In our inquiry, our agronomist witnesses favoured CAP reform which
provided more support for pollinators:
If the Commission came up with a system for paying
farmers to produce margins around the edges of their crops that
provided a habitat for pollinators, that would be music to our
ears, because we have been talking to Defra and their predecessors
for 25 years, I should think, asking them what the value of great
swathes of grass from one end of the country to the other is when,
for a little bit more attention to detail and a little bit more
cash incentive, farmers could be putting something in that is
far more beneficial in terms of not only honeybees but bumblebees
and a whole range of other pollinating species. I would be wholly
in favour if that is the route they are going to go down.[166]
91. While
much detail remains to be negotiated in the European Commission
and between Member States, the prospective CAP package for the
next seven years offers opportunities for significant additional
'greening' measures, including programmes which could support
greater use of 'buffer strips' and other pollinator habitats.
The Government's stance in negotiations in Europe on the
new CAP package should be to push measures which offer meaningful
pollinator support within the environmental schemes qualifying
for payment. And from that baseline, the Government should then
follow a similar outlook in designing qualifying initiatives in
England (the devolved Administrations would manage their own schemes).
Insect pollination as an ecosystem
service
92. Natural
ecosystem services provide
a wide range of goods and services to society. Pollination is
a critical link in the functioning of ecosystems and is essential
for a wide range of crops. Without this service, many interconnected
processes in the ecosystem would collapse. Although cereal crops
are wind-pollinated, it has been estimated that a total pollinator
loss, affecting other types of crops, would reduce world agricultural
production by approximately 5%.[167]
It would also markedly reduce food diversity. Globally, cultivation
of insect-pollinated crops has increased at a greater rate than
the number of honeybee hives. That has created a growing imbalance
between pollination supply and demand which, without sufficient
wild pollinators, could limit yields in future.
93. About 80% of British plant species, including
many crops, rely on insects to transfer pollen between flowers
to produce seeds and fruits.[168]
Without pollinating insects, those plants would reproduce less
well, or not at all. This effect could resonate through ecosystems
by, for example, affecting the food available for seed-eating
birds, which depend on insect-pollinated plants for food. Pollination
helps to maintain biodiversity and support other vital ecosystem
functions, including soil protection, flood control and carbon
sequestration. Insect-pollinated crops form an increasingly important
proportion of UK agriculture and, as of 2007, accounted for 20%
of the value of UK crops, and future land use and crop production
patterns may further increase the role of pollination services
to UK agriculture.[169]
94. The available evidence suggests that wild insect
pollinators are declining in abundance (paragraph 11). One reason
why pollinators might lack sufficient protection against threats
is a lack of understanding of their true worth. We were given
various estimates of the economic value of pollinators to the
UK. For example, Buglife stated that pollinators have an economic
worth of £510 million a year to UK agriculture[170];
the Soil Association cited a figure derived from research by the
Natural Environment Research Council of £430 million a year;[171]
and Professor Simon Potts of Reading University, who was one of
the authors of Defra's UK National Ecosystem Assessment,
calculated a value of £603 million in 2010.[172]
Such estimates only measure the direct 'use' of pollinators to
agricultural producers, however, rather than pollinators' total
value, which includes pollinators' indirect contribution to maintaining
agricultural production and natural ecosystems. Furthermore, measures
of the value of pollinators to the agricultural economy exclude
the replacement cost of pollinating by other means. For example,
if bees did not pollinate apples and producers had to rely on
hand pollination, the price of dessert apples would rise by about
120% if production were maintained at existing levels.[173]
Taking such replacement costs into account (but excluding ecosystem
services such as carbon sequestration, biodiversity and soil and
water quality), Professor Potts calculated the overall worth of
pollinators to UK agriculture at approximately £1.9 billion
a year.[174] In Professor
Potts's view, however, much remains to be done before economics
can capture the full impact of pesticides on pollinators:
The problem is we have not quantified three steps.
Exactly how much do pesticides impact on pollinators? How much
do pollinators then deliver or reduce the amount of pollination
they do? Then how much does that pollination impact on the economics?
We are quite fuzzy on the last two, and we are only just starting
to make headway on the first. It is a great idea in theory, but
I think we are quite a long way off being able to do that, except
for having a very simple tax or something equivalent to a tax
on pesticides where it would go into a communal pot, but that
is also probably not a good fiscal instrument. I cannot imagine
many people buying into that.[175]
95. The
conservation of pollinators is crucial to maintaining biodiversity
in the UK. In addition, pollinators have a significant economic
value as an ecosystem service to UK agriculture. Farmers and environmentalists
therefore have a shared interest in conserving pollinators. The
data on the value and health of pollinator populations is currently
insufficiently precise to inform a marketised approach that could
capture the benefits and costs of pesticide use. Defra should
prioritise its work on valuing ecosystem services and at an early
stage in that work address the particular case study of pollinators
to ensure that policy making on insecticides fully reflects not
only direct financial costs but wider environmental costs.
153 Insect Pollination, POSTnote 348, Parliamentary
Office of Science and Technology, January 2010 Back
154
Ev 157 Back
155
Insect Pollination, POSTnote 348, Parliamentary Office
of Science and Technology, January 2010 Back
156
Ev 213-215 Back
157
Ibid. Back
158
Ibid. Back
159
Ibid. Back
160
Ibid. Back
161
See Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, Fifth Report
of Session 2010-12, The Common Agricultural Policy after 2013,
HC 671-I and Greening the CAP, First Report of 2012-13,
HC 170, for fuller descriptions of the structure of the CAP. Back
162
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, Greening the
CAP, para 1 Back
163
ibid, para 3 Back
164
ibid, para 67 Back
165
European Commission, Multiannual Financial Framework: Conclusions,
February 2013, paras 61-75 Back
166
Q 577 Back
167
M. Aizen and L. Harder, New Scientist, vol 2731 (2009),
pp 26-27 Back
168
Insect Pollination, POSTnote 348, Parliamentary Office
of Science and Technology, January 2010 Back
169
Ev 116 Back
170
Ev 139 Back
171
Ev 116 Back
172
Ev 233 Back
173
Insect Pollination, POSTnote 348, Parliamentary Office
of Science and Technology, January 2010 Back
174
Ev 233 Back
175
Q 248 Back
|