4.4 Farm Level Costs and Benefits from Adoption of BEESPOKE Pollinator Friendly Seed Mixes

Iain Fraser, University of Kent, June 2023

Introduction

There is a significant body of research demonstrating that insects in general and pollinators in particular are in decline. As a result, there are a myriad of government policies (e.g. Agri-environmental policy (AEP)) and associated initiatives that seek to reverse the decline. However,

• Do they have the appropriate land management knowledge and skills to support pollinator friendly activities?

• Do they have the necessary land and other resources, including time, available to devote to this type of activity?

• Do the financial implications of adoption make sense?

To examine these questions, we have examined two AEP options available in England as part of the Countryside Stewardship Scheme (CSS) (AB1: Nectar flower mix; and AB8: Flower-rich margins and plots). The scenarios we examine also apply to other Interreg North Sea Region (NSR) partner countries that employ very similar policy options. Our analysis considers how changes to the cost of wildflower seed mixes might influence the economic incentives facing potential adopters. It has been implemented in Excel and it includes key land there is still the need to train land managers in the skills needed to identify pollinators and determine the pollination levels required for optimal crop production. And even when suitable training is available there is also a need to understand the potential likelihood of adoption of farm level practices explicitly designed to support pollinators either for production or biodiversity.

The decision to adopt or not one or more of the pollinator friendly practices can be a complex choice. This is because adoption requires land managers to simultaneously consider: use management decisions and the associated economic implications. Although our analysis is only illustrative it does enable us to see how the choice of alternative seed mixes impacts the financial incentives arising from the management of land used to support pollinators.

The Cost of Seed Mixes

The cost of seeds used to create the wildflower margins and strips varies significantly. For example, in the UK costs can range from around £100 per hectare to in-excess of £2,000 per hectare. This variation depends on the composition and source of the seed used. Similar variations in seed costs are also reported in other NSR countries. Currently, agricultural seed suppliers advertise seed mixes that can be used when adopting the AEP options such as AB1 and AB8. However, research conducted as part of the BEESPOKE project indicates that seed mixes that include a greater proportion of perennial flowers and less grass (and less aggressive grass) not only yield an increased number of flowers but a mix of flowers that can yield pollen for a much longer period each year. In addition, the BEESPOKE seed mixes will last much longer (up to 20 years) and require far less active management to supress excessive grass growth.

But, these mixes are significantly more expensive and so the question remains: Will land use managers adopt them?

Costs, Benefits and Adoption?

In undertaking our analysis, we identified the costs and benefits associated with growing wildflower strips on arable and orchard farms. Our analysis included versions for which AEP payments are available because of adoption of AB1 or AB8 as well as the potential impact on crop production. We also included the opportunity cost of lost production, variation in costs associated with seed bed preparation, ongoing management of flower strips and if the flower strips are grown on fragmented parcels of land.

In general, the cost of seed mix is not the main issue driving the balance between costs and benefits. That said, the use of a lower cost seed mix will increase the financial attractiveness of adoption. However, many of these mixes are not as effective as those developed by the BEESPOKE project when it comes to supporting pollinators. But, the impact on crop production as a result of enhanced pollination is less clear. Employing land that is currently in production can have a significant impact on the economics of whether or not to adopt this type of land use activity. Also, as parcels of land become more fragmented the costs of land preparation and management increase significantly. The magnitude of these costs is such that the economic incentives from adoption are negative for the given levels of payments on offer for AB1 and AB8. Importantly, the level of payments on offer in other NSR countries for related activities are generally higher and this clearly has a positive impact on the likelihood of adoption. It is only when there is little or no lost income from reducing existing crop production such as planting within orchards or replacing grassy non-productive areas between and around fields fields. In addition, in the case of orchards there can be an increase in fruit yield and quality that strengthens the economic incentive. Also, in some NSR countries, it has been found that there are also economic and biodiversity benefits when modifying seed mixes used in pasture production for livestock.

Concluding Observations

Our analysis indicates that the economic incentives facing land managers in terms of flower strip adoption to support pollinators are (in England) marginal. This result holds even before we consider the higher cost associated with employing the BEESPOKE seed mixes. But these seed mixes produce higher environmental benefits.

Very simply, if policy makers really want to increase levels of adoption and more importantly the ecological effectiveness of flower strips then payment levels, certainly in England, will need to increase.

Finally, there is evidence that adoption is also being hindered by complexity and overly prescriptive AEP design.

Clearly, the scientific evidence exists for how we can support pollinators, but this must be aligned with better policy design and implementation if efforts to reverse the decline in wild pollinators is to be successful.