Ecosystem services mapping for municipal policy: ESTIMAP and zoning for urban beekeeping

Erik Stange,Grazia Zulian,David Barton,Graciela Rusch,Megan Nowell

doi:10.3897/oneeco.2.e14014

Abstract

Pollinating insects are an integral part of cities’ natural capital and perform an important ecosystem function with a high degree of relevance to many cultural ecosystem services. Consequently, pollinators serve as a useful proxy for assessing urban biodiversity. Beekeeping has recently emerged as a popular activity in many urban areas and a good deal of the motivation for urban beekeeping for many stems from the cultural and non-consumptive aspects of beekeeping. Yet the recent increases in domestic honeybee densities in urban landscapes has raised concern regarding the potential threat that honeybees might pose to local populations of threatened bumblebee and solitary bee species. This issue constitutes a trade-off between the cultural ecosystem services associated with urban beekeeping and the regulation and maintenance ecosystem services of maintaining nursery populations of rare and threatened species. Municipal authorities in Oslo, Norway have proposed establishing eight “precautionary zones”, within which placement of honeybee hives could be more strictly regulated. We propose a mapping and assessment approach for informing zoning decisions regarding urban honeybees, utilising a model of an urban landscape’s biophysical capacity to support pollinating insects (ESTIMAP). Together with an additional model describing the approximate distrubtion of honeybees in Oslo, we identify areas in the city where domestic honeybees may be more likely to exhaust floral resources. This case also tests the policy relevance of ecosystem service mapping tools beyond awareness raising, with broader general lessons for ecosystem mapping and assessment .

Highlights

Animal-mediated pollination is both an integral ecosystem process and a key ecosystem service (ES)
We found no evidence that greater numbers of honeybees were negatively associated with the abundance or species diversity of wild bees
We opted to not parse land cover suitability scores into both floral resources and nesting site components, but rather use a single score based primarily on floral resource availability. We recognise that this is a modification which may not be appropriate for all urban areas

Summary

Introduction

Animal-mediated pollination is both an integral ecosystem process and a key ecosystem service (ES). The benefits humans derive from pollinators are considerable. Three-quarters of the world’s main food crops and over a third of the global food production benefit from animal pollination, with both wild and domestic bees comprising the most important species groups (Klein et al 2007, Roulston and Goodell 2011). Reports documenting global declines among all key insect pollinator groups—including honeybees, bumblebees and solitary bees—are a source of great concern (Goulson et al 2008, Potts et al 2010, Bartomeus et al 2013). Recent assessments concluded that as many as ten per cent of European wild bee populations are in danger of extinction Nieto et al 2014)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion