Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Although significant advances have been made in implementing international mechanisms to support the benefit sharing of natural resources in low and middle income countries, there are limited practical examples. Our research examines how the ornamental horticulture sector might be able to meet its benefit sharing requirements.Employing a consumer survey, we reveal the potential for monetary benefit sharing to emerge for plants with Known Wild Provenance. Our results indicate that although consumers value plants that have their Known Wild Provenance clearly labelled, the magnitude of this estimate is insufficient to generate meaningful monetary benefits. Summary• The global trade in ornamental plants is significant and growing. Historically, the relationship between the acquisition of novel plants from the wild for use in ornamental horticulture has been referred to as plant hunting. However, questions are now being raised about the ethical utilisation of biological resources and if those countries providing access to material from the wild are receiving adequate benefits. It is in this context that we examine if plants of Known Wild Provenance (KWP) are valued by UK consumers, and if a potential premium could be the basis of a benefit-sharing agreement.• Employing a choice experiment, we assess consumers' preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for KWP.• Our analysis reveals that KWP did not prove to be a strong driver for plant buyers.• Although a positive WTP is generated it is relatively small. Thus, the ability of commercial horticulture to provide monetary benefits to support benefit sharing is likely limited. This result raises questions as to how benefit sharing might then be implemented if buyers of plants are not prepared to pay a price premium.
Although significant advances have been made in implementing international mechanisms to support the benefit sharing of natural resources in low and middle income countries, there are limited practical examples. Our research examines how the ornamental horticulture sector might be able to meet its benefit sharing requirements.Employing a consumer survey, we reveal the potential for monetary benefit sharing to emerge for plants with Known Wild Provenance. Our results indicate that although consumers value plants that have their Known Wild Provenance clearly labelled, the magnitude of this estimate is insufficient to generate meaningful monetary benefits. Summary• The global trade in ornamental plants is significant and growing. Historically, the relationship between the acquisition of novel plants from the wild for use in ornamental horticulture has been referred to as plant hunting. However, questions are now being raised about the ethical utilisation of biological resources and if those countries providing access to material from the wild are receiving adequate benefits. It is in this context that we examine if plants of Known Wild Provenance (KWP) are valued by UK consumers, and if a potential premium could be the basis of a benefit-sharing agreement.• Employing a choice experiment, we assess consumers' preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for KWP.• Our analysis reveals that KWP did not prove to be a strong driver for plant buyers.• Although a positive WTP is generated it is relatively small. Thus, the ability of commercial horticulture to provide monetary benefits to support benefit sharing is likely limited. This result raises questions as to how benefit sharing might then be implemented if buyers of plants are not prepared to pay a price premium.
One of the major challenges facing agricultural and food systems today is the loss of agrobiodiversity. Considering the current impasse of preventing the worldwide loss of crop diversity, this paper highlights the possibility for a radical reorientation of current legal seed frameworks that could provide more space for alternative seed systems to evolve which centre on norms that support on-farm agrobiodiversity. Understanding the underlying norms that shape seed commons are important, since norms both delimit and contribute to what ultimately will constitute the seeds and who will ultimately have access to the seeds and thus to the extent to which agrobiodiversity is upheld and supported. This paper applies a commoning approach to explore the underpinning norms of a Swedish seed commons initiative and discusses the potential for furthering agrobiodiversity in the context of wider legal and authoritative discourses on seed enclosure. The paper shows how the seed commoning system is shaped and protected by a particular set of farming norms, which allows for sharing seeds among those who adhere to the norms but excludes those who will not. The paper further illustrates how farmers have been able to navigate fragile legal and economic pathways to collectively organize around landrace seeds, which function as an epistemic farming community, that maintain landraces from the past and shape new landraces for the present, adapted to diverse agro-ecological environments for low-input agriculture. The paper reveals how the ascribed norms to the seed commons in combination with the current seed laws set a certain limit to the extent to which agrobiodiversity is upheld and supported and discusses why prescriptions of “getting institutions right” for seed governance are difficult at best, when considering the shifting socio-nature of seeds. To further increase agrobiodiversity, the paper suggests future seed laws are redirected to the sustenance of a proliferation of protected seed commoning systems that can supply locally adapted plant material for diverse groups of farmers and farming systems.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.