Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 73, Issue 2, pp 661–678 | Cite as

Conservation Incentives from an Ecosystem Service: How Much Farmland Might Be Devoted to Native Pollinators?

  • R. David SimpsonEmail author


Some conservation advocates hope the ecosystem services that areas of natural habitat provide will generate sufficient incentives to offset the opportunity costs of habitat preservation. In this paper I consider a service that has received considerable attention: pollination. While many crops are pollinated by rented honeybees, wild organisms might also pollinate crops if habitats were maintained to sustain them. I develop conditions under which a farmer might choose to maintain such habitats rather than to pay to rent bees. For pollination, as with many other ecosystem services, there may be a “paradox of efficiency”. If areas of habitat provide services efficiently, they might prove to be quite valuable. Under the same circumstances, however, appeals to ecosystem services values might motivate only modest conservation. I illustrate these ideas using the example of California almond farming. Even if almond farmers could profitably rely on wild pollinators, they might devote only a small fraction of their holdings to habitat for such pollinators. It may be important in light of these findings to ask what the objectives of conservation really are, and whether they can be best achieved by instrumental arguments as opposed to appeals to the less tangible benefits of conservation.


Pollination Paradox of efficiency Diminishing returns Ecosystem services Habitat 

JEL Classification

Q15 Q57 



I am grateful to two anonymous referees and the editor for many extremely helpful suggestions. Seminar participants at Resources for the Future and the 2015 Annual Conferences of the BioEcon group also provided useful feedback. Edward Barbier, James Boyd, Nicholas Hanley, Laura Onofri, Stephen Newbold, Paulo Nunes, Walter Thurman, Jeffrey Vincent, Lisa Wainger, and Martin Weitzman offered helpful comments on earlier versions of this and related work. Correspondence with Lena Dempewolf, David Kleijn, and Rachael Winfree was helpful in developing my understanding of the biology of conservation, and Linus Blomqvist provided me with timely notice of important news developments. I thank all of the above without implicating any in whatever errors may remain.


  1. Armsworth PR, Chan KMA, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR, Kremen C, Sanjayan MA, Ricketts TR (2007) Ecosystem service science and the way forward for conservation. Conserv Biol 21(6):1383–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbier EB, Koch EW, Silliman BR, Hacker SD, Wolanski E, Primavera J, Granek EF, Polasky S, Aswani S, Cramer LA, Stoms DM, Kennedy CJ, Bael D, Kappel CV, Perillo GME, Reed DJ (2008) Coastal ecosystem-based management with nonlinear ecological functions and values. Sci 319(5861):321–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bateman IJ, Mace GM, Fezzi C, Atkinson G, Turner K (2011) Economic analysis for ecosystem service assessments. Environ Resour Econ 48:177–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brittain C, Williams N, Kremen C, Klein A-M (2013) Synergistic effects of non-Apis bees and honey bees for pollination services. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 280(1754):20122767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chomitz KM, Kumari K (1998) The domestic benefits of tropical forests: a critical review. World Bank Res Obs 13(1):13–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Daily GC (1997) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  7. Daily GC, Matson PA (2008) Ecosystem services: from theory to implementation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(28):9455–9456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Embry P (2018) A promising backup to the honeybee is shut down. Sci Am, published online 5 March 2018:
  9. Fisher B, Turner RK, Morling P (2009) Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 68:643–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fitchette T (2015) Large almond grower looks to wild bees for pollination. Western Farm Press, 31 March. Accessed 19 August 2015
  11. Gallai N, Salles J-M, Settele J, Vaissière BE (2009) Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecol Econ 68:810–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ghazoul J (2005) Buzziness as usual? Questioning the global pollination crisis. Trends Ecol Evol 20(7 July):367–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guerry A et al (2015) Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions: from promise to practice. Proc Natl Acad Sci (US) 112(24):7348–7355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) (2017) InVEST user guide. Accessed 3 May 2017
  15. Jabr F (2013) The mind-boggling math of migratory beekeeping. Sci Am 309.
  16. Kareiva P, Lalasz R, Marvier M (2011) Conservation in the anthropocene: beyond solitude and fragility. Breakthr J, 2(Fall 2011): 29–38Google Scholar
  17. Kleczkowski A, Ellis C, Hanley N, Goulson D (2017) Pesticides and bees: ecological-economic modelling of bee populations on farmland. Ecol Model 360:53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kleijn D, Winfree R, Bartomeus I, Carvalheiro LG, Henry M, Isaacs R, Klein A-M, Kremen C, M’Gonigle LK, Rader R, Ricketts TH, Williams NM, Adamson NL, Ascher JS, Báldi A, Batáry P, Benjamin F, Biesmeijer JC, Blitzer EJ, Bommarc R (2015) Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation. Nat Commun 6:7414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Losey JE, Vaughan M (2006) The economic value of ecological services provided insects. Bioscience 56(4):311–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Moisset B, Buchmann S (2011) Bee basics: an introduction to our native bees. United States Department of Agriculture. Accessed 8 October 2015
  21. Morse RA, Calderone NW (2000) The value of honey bees as pollinators of U.S. crops in 2000. Bee Culture 128:1–15Google Scholar
  22. National Research Council (NRC) (2006) Status of pollinators in North America. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  23. Philpott T (2015) Holy shit! Almonds require a ton of bees. Mother Jones. 25 May 2015. Accessed 3 October 2016
  24. Plummer ML (2009) Assessing benefit transfer for the valuation of ecosystem services. Front Ecol Environ 7:38–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pope KS, Lightle DM, Buchner RP, Niederholzer F, Klonsky K, Sumner DA, Stewart D, Gutierrez CA (2016) Sample costs to establish an orchard and produce almonds: Sacramento Valley micro-sprinkler irrigation—2016. University of California Agriculture and Natural resources Cooperative Extension Agricultural Issues Center/University of California Davis Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics. Accessed 3 October 2016
  26. Ricketts TH, Regetz J, Steffan-Dewenter I, Cunningham SA, Kremen C, Gemmill B, Greenleaf SS, Klein AM, Mayfield MM, Morandin LA, Ochieng’ A, Winfree R (2007) Landscape effects on crop pollination services: are there general patterns? Ecol Lett 11:499–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosner H (2013) Return of the natives: how wild bees will save our agricultural system. Sci Am 309(3):70–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) (2016). June drop. Accessed 7 July 2017
  29. Simpson RD (2017) The simple but not-too-simple valuation of ecosystem services: basic principles and an illustrative example. J Environ Econ Policy 6(1):96–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Soulé M (2013) The new conservation. Conserv Biol 27(5):895–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Southwick EE, Southwick L Jr (1992) Estimating the economic value of honey bees (Hymenoptera: apidae) as agricultural pollinators in the United States. J Econ Entomol 85(3):621–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Winfree R, Gross BJ, Kremen C (2011) Valuing pollination services to agriculture. Ecol Econ 71:80–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.RDS Analytics, LLCViennaUSA

Personalised recommendations