Social Ecological System: the honey bee

In italic are the comments I added on December 30.

General framework

Ostrom (’09) proposed a general framework that could help analyzing complex social-ecological systems (SES). In here framework a resource unit (the unit humans actually consume) is always embedded in a larger resource system, as well as we (the user/consumer) are always guided by some sort of governance system. And of course, all possible interaction take place between these four parts of the framework. The system is also affected by social, economic and political settings and related ecosystems. This can be seen in figure 1.

Figure 1: source

Honey bee

In this short SES-analysis, I will focus on the decline of the honey bee, that is not just of importance for us as a source of honey, but as a pollinator of 1/3 of the world food crop production as well (Rabobank review, 2011). In recent years, the number of honey bee colonies has declined rapidly, with starvation rates of 35% of the colonies per year. The same Rabobank review estimated the anual economic value of honey bees on around 40 billion euro per year.

Because of their huge importance to food production, honey bees can be seen as public goods (non-excludable, non-rivalrous). 

To assess the complexity of the problem of honey bee starvation, I will reuse figure 1, but now include the honey bee in it. 

The resource unit in figure 2 is the honey bee, embedded in a larger ecosystem (in this case a flower field). The bee is used by humans. The keeping of bees is regulated by several layers of governance, ranging from bee keepers to national governments. The beekeepers can be seen as a layer of governance that is highly self-organizing.

The causes of the bee starvation are unclear. It is thought that neonicotinoids, used as insecticides, may be the cause. However, the ban of these chemicals in France has not altered starvation rates. Another cause may be the varroa destructor, a mite that causes a disease called apis mellifera. In any case, there is no clear description of solving this issue. 

It might help to see this SES in the light of the panarchy model, proposed by Holling ('01), which explaines the concept of adaptive cycles. In nature, change often occurs rigidly and rapidly, and after an initial face of reorganization, exploitation and conservation of a feature will take place. If we apply this model to our honey bee situation, you might say that the pressure to innovate (evolve) is high for the species, and therefore the starvation may end abrupt as well.

Increase profits 

Friedman propagated the idea that the sole purpose of a business should be to increase its profits. I introduced the consumer as the user in the SES framework. However, the Friedman principle applies to the unit of the firm. In this case, I would like to argue that farmers are the relevant unit, as they are most dependent on the honey bee for their financial success.

However, even though the honey bee is a species that is of vital importance to global food production, the bees are not necessarily owned by farmers. This means that they do not feel the direct responsibility to invest in research that is needed to identify the cause of bee starvation. Therefore, I don't see a way to use this principle constructively in the sustainable management in this SES. 

However, according to Andersson and Ostrom ('08), it is often beneficial to analyze a resource management system on different levels. They found that decentralized or local governance structures work best if they are offered clear institutional incentives from central levels of governance. 

If I combine this insight with the Friedman thesis, I'd propose a system in which the central government financially supports research that can be done by bee keepers, who have accurate knowledge. Hopefully, this will lead to a achievable strategy to decrease the starvation of honeybees in future.