What's in a name? Challenging the commodification of pollination through the diverse economies of 'Bee Cities'

Abstract

One million species are threatened with extinction globally, including more than half of the native bee species in North America. In Canada, as of July 2020, 42 municipalities have signed a resolution to commit to the standards of the Bee City Canada program which includes creating and enhancing pollinator habitat, along with celebrating and raising awareness about pollinators in their communities. Our central argument is that the commodification of pollination has detrimental effects on people, pollinators, and ecosystems, and that a diverse economies framework is one conceptual model that can help shift our perspective. Within the 'save the bees' narrative, a capitalocentric, unidimensional image of pollination persists, driven by particular forms of market power and domination. Well-intentioned individuals and groups may be constrained by industrydominated messaging that limits their understanding of appropriate interventions. Meanwhile, Bee City Canada offers municipalities the opportunity to engage in conservation efforts by starting where they are and building on a network of Bee Cities across the country. We conducted a collective case study involving in-depth interviews with members of Ontario Bee Cities. Our thematic interpretive analysis shows how a diverse economies framework can help us to understand the value and contributions of this initiative in previously undervalued and under-recognized ways and how they help to advance a whole-of-community approach. It is only through decentering the hegemonic market-based view of pollination that true conservation of bee diversity, and associated pollination services, can be prioritized. Our findings show that Bee Cities can animate a vibrant political ecology through a collective municipal identity, by centering bees (and other pollinators by proxy).

Geographies of the pollinator commons

“…Native American tribes in the western United States used fire as a forest management tool potentially benefiting pollinator communities by increasing the abundance of preferred herbaceous flowering species (Charnley and Hummel 2011). There is also some evidence for floral resources themselves as the commons coming from individual and collective action for managing pollinator habitats in urban and suburban areas (Hall et al 2017; Knezevic and Marshman 2021). But in these urban and suburban contexts, habitat provision for pollinators has been described as a continuous public good collective action problem in the sense that the effect of one “individual's contribution to the public good is not influenced by how many others also contribute” (Niemiec, McCaffrey and Jones 2020).…”

“…Here, we are interested particularly in the conditions that would allow for the emergence of collective action institutions to manage wild pollinators among farmers whose livelihoods are dependent on pollinator-dependent crops. While some existing research has focused on the importance and current collective practices of wild pollinator conservation in cities (Hall et al 2017; Knezevic and Marshman 2021), the subjects of collective action of interest to this paper are those whose livelihoods are inextricably connected with wild pollinator health– farmers who grow pollinator-dependent crops. As laudable and necessary as urban pollinator conservation is, pollination scarcity is not a material concern that immediately impacts the livelihoods of those who engage in these efforts.…”

Pollination crisis Down‐Under: Has Australasia dodged the bullet?

“…For example, many people, especially in the general community, have equated the well‐being of managed populations of the (European) honeybee with conservation of bee diversity, amelioration of pollination issues, and the quality of the relationship between humanity and nature, leading to calls to “save the bees,” which has really meant “save the honeybees” (Hall & Martins, 2020; Lorenz, 2021; Marshman & Knezevic, 2021; Sponsler & Bratman, 2021). Furthermore, this perspective of the honeybee has fuelled recent and very large increases in urban honeybee keeping (Sponsler & Bratman, 2021).…”

“…Further such studies of non‐Apis bees and other pollinator species are clearly warranted (Franklin & Raine, 2019; Siviter, Richman, et al., 2021). Adoption of the (European) honeybee as the icon for pollinator conservation, in general, and bee conservation, in particular, with associated growth in urban honeybee keeping.For example, many people, especially in the general community, have equated the well‐being of managed populations of the (European) honeybee with conservation of bee diversity, amelioration of pollination issues, and the quality of the relationship between humanity and nature, leading to calls to “save the bees,” which has really meant “save the honeybees” (Hall & Martins, 2020; Lorenz, 2021; Marshman & Knezevic, 2021; Sponsler & Bratman, 2021). Furthermore, this perspective of the honeybee has fuelled recent and very large increases in urban honeybee keeping (Sponsler & Bratman, 2021).…”

Framing Good Food: Communicating Value of Community Food Initiatives in the Midst of a Food Crisis

“…As one approach to frame reflection, Nourishing Communities' researchers have utilized Gibson-Graham's "diverse economies" (2008). While not the only possible approach, and perhaps not even the best one in certain contexts, 4 it can pave way for reframing values in food systems (Ballamingie et al, 2019;Marshman and Knezevic, 2021). Diverse economies framework conceptualizes economy as a wider frame.…”