Abstract
The determination and evaluation of ecosystem services provides crucial information for a comprehensive strategy to preserve near natural habitats such as rainforest margins. We show results of an economic evaluation of coffee bee pollination services and pest control in two distinct tropical regions: a low human-impact area in Indonesia with continuous near natural forests neighboring agroforestry and a high-impact landscape in Ecuador with almost no forest fragments left. We evaluate bee pollination services comparing forest destruction scenarios, where coffee yields depend on forests providing nesting sites and foraging habitats for bees and present three novel approaches: first, we show how net coffee revenues depend on pollination services of adjacent forests considering berry weight in addition to fruit set, thereby providing a more comprehensive evaluation. Second, we combine our findings on pollination with an assessment of pest management affecting coffee production. Third, we determine net welfare effects of land-use changes including the fact that former forestland is normally used for alternative crops. In both regions, crop revenues exceed coffee pollination values, generating incentives to convert forest margins even if owners would be compensated for pollination services. The promotion of certified “biodiversity-friendly” coffee is a feasible option to maintain shade-coffee systems for conservation purposes. This is of special importance in high-impact areas where only small forest fragments remain. We conclude that a comprehensive economic analysis is necessary to adequately evaluate rainforest preservation for the enhancement of ecosystem services within a mosaic of competing land-use systems.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aizen MA, Feinsinger P (2003) Bees not to be? Responses of insect pollinator faunas and flower pollination to habitat fragmentation. in Bradshaw GA, Marquet PA (eds) How landscapes change: Human disturbance and ecosystem fragmentation in the Americas, Ecological Studies: Volume 162. Springer-Verlag Berlin, Germany, pp 111–129
Benítez PC, Kuosmanen T, Olschewski R, van Kooten GC (2006) Conservation payment under risk — a stochastic dominance approach. Am J Agr Econ, 88(1): 1–15
Blanche R, Cunningham SA (2005) Rain forest provides pollinating beeles for atemaya crops. J Econ Entom 98: 1193–1201
Blanche KR, Cunningham SA, Ludwig JA (2006) Proximity to rainforest enhances pollination and fruit set in macadamia and longan orchards in north Queensland, Australia. J Appl Ecol in press
Chacoff NP, Aizen MA (2006) Edge effects on flower-visiting insects in grapefruit plantations bordering premontane subtropical forest (Unique ID: 217568-18476). J Appl Ecol 43(1): 18–27
COFENAC (2002) Café orgánico — Guia del cafecultor. Consejo Cafetalero Nacional. Manta, Ecuador
Cunningham SA (2000) Depressed pollination in habitat fragments causes low fruit set. Proc Royal Soc London. Series B 267: 1149–1152
Daily GC, Alexander S, Ehrlich PR, Goulder L, Lubchenco J, Matson PA, Mooney, Postel S, Schneider SH, Tilman D, Woodwell GM (1997) Ecosystem Services: Benefits Supplied to Human Societies by Natural Ecosystems, Issues Ecol 2: 1–18
De Marco Pjr, Coelho FM (2003) Services performed by the ecosystem: forest remnants influence agricultural cultures pollination and production. Biodiv Conserv 13: 1245–1255
Dietsch T, Philpott SM, Rice R, Greenberg R, Bichier P (2004) Policy alternatives for conservation in coffee landscapes. Science 303: 625
Ghazoul J, Liston KA, Boyle TJB (1998) Disturbance-induced density-dependent seed set in Shorea siamensis(Dipterocarpaceae), a tropical forest tree. J Ecol 86:462–473
Gillison AN, Liswanti N, Budidarsono S, van Noordwijk M, Tomich TP (2004) Impact of cropping methods on Biodiversity in coffee agroecosystems in Sumatra, Indonesia. Ecol Soc 9(2): 7 [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art7
Gobbi JA (2000) Is biodiversity-friendly coffee financially viable? An analysis of five different coffee production systems in western El Salvador. Ecol Econ 33: 267–281
Heard T, Exley E (1994) Diversity, Abundance and distribution of insect visitors to Macadamia Flowers. Environ. Entomol. 23: 91–100
IISD (2005) Biodiversity: Science and Governance Bulletin. A summary report of the International Scientific Conference 24.–28. January 2005 in Paris. [online] URL: http://www.iisd.ca/sd/icb http://www.iisd.ca/sd/icb
Kalshoven LGE (1981) Pest of crops in Indonesia. P.T. Ichtiar Baru, Van Hoeve, Jakarta, 701 pp.
Kevan PG, Phillips TP (2001) The economic impact of pollinator declines: an approach to assessing the consequences. Cons Ecol 5(1): 8 [online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss1/art8 http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss1/art8
Klein AM, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2003a) Fruit set of highland coffee increases with the diversity of pollinating bees. Proc Royal Soc London Series B 270: 955–961
Klein AM, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2003b) Pollination of Coffea cenephora in relation to local and regional agroforestry management. J Appl Ecol 40: 837–845
Kremen C (2005) Managing ecosystem services: what do we need to know about their ecology. Ecol Lett 8: 468–479
Kremen C, Williams NM, Bugg RL, Fay JP, Thorp RW (2004) The area requirements of an ecosystem service: crop pollination by native bee communities in California. Ecol Lett 7: 1109–1119
Le Pelley RH (1968) Pests of coffee. Tropical Science Series. Longmans Press, Green and Co. Ltd., London
Manrique AJ, Thimann RE (2002) Coffee (Coffea arabica) pollination with africanized honeybees in Venezuela. Intercienca 27: 414–416
Mathieu F, Brun LO, Frerot B, Suckling DM, Frampton C (1999) Progression in field infestation is linked with trapping of coffee berry borer, Hypothenemus hampei (Col., Scolytidae). J Appl Entom 123: 535–540
Morandin LA, Winston ML (2006) Pollinators provide economic incentive to preserve natural land in agroecosystems. Agric Ecosyst Environ. in press
O’Brian TG, Kinnaird MF (2003) Caffeine and Conservation. Science 300: 587
Olschewski R, Tscharntke T, Benítez PC, Schwarze S, Klein AM (2006) Economic evaluation of pollination services comparing coffee landscapes in Ecuador and Indonesia. Ecol Soc 11(1): 7 [online] URL http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art7/
Oxfam America (2005) The coffee crisis continues. Situation assessment and policy recommendations for reducing poverty in the coffee sector. [online] URL http://www.oxfamamerica.org/crisis_continues
Perfecto I, Rice R, Greenberg R, van der Voort M (1996) Shade coffee as refuge of biodiversity. Bioscience 46: 598–608
Perfecto I, Vandermeer J, Mas A, Soto Pinot L (2005) Biodiversity, yield, and shade coffee certification. Ecol Econ 54: 435–446
Philpott SM, Dietsch T (2003) Coffee and conservation: a global contextand the value of farmer involvement. Conserv Biol 17: 1844–1846
Ricketts TH (2004) Tropical forest fragments enhance pollinator activity in nearby coffee crops. Conserv Biol 18: 1262–1271
Ricketts TH, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR, Michener CD (2004) Economic value of tropical forest to coffee production. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101: 12579–12582
Roubik DW (2002) Tropical agriculture-The value of bees to the coffee harvest. Nature 417: 708
SICA (2003) Estadísticas Agropequarias. Precio Finca y Rendimientos. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería, Quito
Southwick EE, Southwick LJr (1992) Estimating the Economic Value of Honey Bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) as Agricultural Pollinators in the United States. J Econ Entom 85(3): 621–633
Tscharntke T, Klein AM, Kruess A, Steffan-Dewenter I, Thies T (2005) Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversityecosystem service management. Eco Lett 8: 857–874
Vijayan V, Rehman P, Vijayalakshmi CK (1999) Influence of shade on coffee berry borer. Insect Environ 5: 132
Wegbe K, Cilas C, Decazy B, Alauzet C, Dufour B (2003) Estimation of production losses caused by the coffee berry borer (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) and calculation of an economic damage threshold in Togolose coffee plots. J Econ Entom 96: 1473–1478
Zeller M, Schwarze S, van Rheenen T (2002) Statistical Sampling Frame and Methods Used for the Selection of Villages and Households in the Scope of the Research Program on Stability of Rainforest Margins in Indonesia (STORMA). STORMA Discussion Paper Series Subprogram A (SDPS-A) No. 1, Göttingen, Germany, and Bogor, Indonesia
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Olschewski, R., Tscharntke, T., Benítez, P.C., Schwarze, S., Klein, AM. (2007). Economic evaluation of ecosystem services as a basis for stabilizing rainforest margins? The example of pollination services and pest management in coffee landscapes. In: Tscharntke, T., Leuschner, C., Zeller, M., Guhardja, E., Bidin, A. (eds) Stability of Tropical Rainforest Margins. Environmental Science and Engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30290-2_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30290-2_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-30289-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-30290-2
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)