Common approach for socio-economic valuation of pollinator-friendly practices

• Autores: Garibaldi, Lucas Alejandro; Azzu, Nadine; Felipe Viana, Blandina; Hipólito, Juliana; Dondo Bühler, Mariana Beatriz; Gómez Carella, Dulce S.
• Año de publicación: 2020
• Idioma: inglés
• Tipo de recurso: parte de libro
• Materia: Agronomía, Cultivo y Protección de Plantas; Biodiversidad y Conservación; Ecología; Pollination; Ecosystem Services; Farming Systems; Agronomía, Cultivo y Protección de Plantas; Biodiversidad y Conservación; Ecología
• Institución: Universidad Nacional de Río Negro

Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas Alejandro. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural. Río Negro, Argentina.
Fil: Garibaldi, Lucas Alejandro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural. Río Negro, Argentina.
Fil: Azzu, Nadine. FAO; Italia.
Fil: Felipe Viana, Blandina. Universidade Federal da Bahia. Institute of Biology. Bahia, Brasil.
Fil: Hipólito, Juliana. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural. Río Negro, Argentina.
Fil: Dondo Bühler, Mariana B. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Centro Interdisciplinario de Estudios sobre Territorio, Economía y Sociedad. Río Negro, Argentina.
Fil: Gómez Carella, Dulce S. Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural. Río Negro, Argentina.
Fil: Gómez Carella, Dulce S. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural. Río Negro, Argentina.
Fil: Hipólito, Juliana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecología y Desarrollo Rural. Río Negro, Argentina.
Fil: Hipólito, Juliana. Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia. Manaus AM, Brazil.
Fil: Dondo Bühler, Mariana B. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Río Negro, Argentina.
With increasing recognition of the centrality of ecosystem services in agricultural production, the need for placing a value on these services has also increased in order to provide a value- or “evidence”-based argument for their maintenance and enhancement. There are different ways to define and measure value, of which monetary is only one. The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) notes that: “in keeping with the general anthropocentric notion of ‘nature’s benefits to people’, one might consider a benefit to be an ecosystem’s contribution to some aspect of a good quality of life, where a benefit is a perceived thing or experience of value,” (IPBES, 2013). SECTION 3. MEASURES AT LANDSCAPE SCALE160In the definition provided by the IPBES Conceptual Framework, the “value” is multi-dimensional and cannot be properly estimated with only one variable. This is one of the bases of the multi-dimensional aspect of the protocol for socio-economic valuation of pollination-friendly landscapes presented here.Commonly, valuation estimates have focused on the benefits of pollination to crop production and do not include all the benefits that pollinators provide to the economy. A region ́s wealth includes the financial, physical, natural, human and social capital that enhances development and sustainable rural livelihoods. Therefore, comparing the influence of practices (or landscapes) that are pollinator-friendly versus practices that are unfriendly, using all of these measures of capital would be a more robust approach to putting a value on pollinator changes, and allows quantification of the synergies and trade-offs associated to pollinator enhancement. This chapter presents a protocol for determining the socio-economic value of pollinator-friendly versus -unfriendly practices that can be implemented at different spatial levels (for example, farms or landscapes). The scope is comprehensive and includes both small- and large-scale farming systems; indeed, the comparison between these systems can be of great interest. The results of the application of this protocol may interest both producers and decision-makers wishing to answer, for example, questions such as: are differences in the socioeconomic assets of the producers associated with friendly or unfriendly practices? Can a group of socioeconomic variables predict the number of pollinator-friendly practices applied by producers? Which assets should be promoted to enhance the number of pollinator-friendly practices? Are there trade-offs or synergies among different assets (for example, biodiversity and crop production)?