Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/104618
Type of publication: Straipsnis Clarivate Analytics Web of Science ar/ir Scopus / Article in Clarivate Analytics Web of Science or / and Scopus (S1)
Field of Science: Ekologija ir aplinkotyra / Ecology and environmental sciences (N012)
Author(s): Cole, Lorna J;Kleijn, David;Dicks, Lynn V;Stout, Jane C;Potts, Simon G;Albrecht, Matthias;Balzan, Mario V;Bartomeus, Ignasi;Bebeli, Penelope J;Bevk, Danilo;Biesmeijer, Jacobus C;Chlebo, Robert;Dautartė, Anželika;Emmanouil, Nikolaos;Hartfield, Chris;Holland, John M;Holzschuh, Andrea;Knoben, Nieke T.J;Kovács-Hostyánszki, Anikó;Mandelik, Yael;Panou, Heleni;Paxton, Robert J;Petanidou, Theodora;Pinheiro de Carvalho, Miguel A.A;Rundlof, Maj;Sarthou, Jean-Pierre;Stavrinides, Menelaos C;Suso, Maria Jose;Szentgyorgyi, Hajnalka;Vaissiere, Bernard E;Varnava, Androulla;Vila, Montserrat;Zemeckis, Romualdas;Scheper, Jeroen
Title: A critical analysis of the potential for EU Common Agricultural Policy measures to support wild pollinators on farmland
Is part of: Journal of Applied Ecology. Hoboken : Wiley, 2020, vol. 57, iss. 4
Extent: p. 681-694
Date: 2020
Keywords: Agri-environment schemes;Bees;CAP Green Architecture;Common Agricultural Policy;Ecological Focus Areas;Habitat complementarity;Pollination services;Pollinator conservation
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.[...]
Internet: https://doi.org/10.1111/1365- 2664.13572
Affiliation(s): Miškų ir ekologijos fakultetas
Proj. "Vilko ekologijos tyrimai"
Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas
Žemės ūkio akademija
Appears in Collections:Universiteto mokslo publikacijos / University Research Publications

Files in This Item:
marc.xml19.06 kBXMLView/Open

MARC21 XML metadata

Show full item record
Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats
Export to Other Non-XML Formats

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations 5

1
checked on Jun 2, 2020

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.