Synthesis of Pollinator‐Friendly Management in European Protected Areas
Gabriella Süle, András Báldi, David Kleijn, Ingolf Steffan‐Dewenter, Matthias Albrecht, Péter Batáry, Carolin Biegerl, Petr Bogusch, Veronika Braunisch, Jörn Buse, Andree Cappellari, Tristan Eckerter, Thomas Fartmann, Thomas Frank, Florian Fumy, Michael Garratt, Maria Georgi, Elia Guariento, Petr Heneberg, Andreas Hilpold, Andrea Holzschuh, Sebastian Hopfenmüller, Jakub Horák, Raja Imran Hussain, Zsolt Józan, Reet Karise, Vassiliki Kati, Alexandra‐Maria Klein, Anikó Kovács‐Hostyánszki, Petr Kozel, Ádám Kőrösi, Egle Liiskmann, Franz Löffler, Lorenzo Marini, Gabrielle McLaughlin, Amparo Mora, Morgan Morrison, Konstantina Nasiou, Kristýna Nehybová, Péter Ódor, Dominik Poniatowski, Zoltán Soltész, István Szentirmai, Csaba Tölgyesi, Konstantina Zografou, Viktor SzigetiAbstract
Pollinators are important to humans and nature due to their role in ecosystem functioning and services. Research on the effects of pollinator management in protected areas is insufficient compared with that on farmlands and urban areas, potentially hindering appropriate policy implementation. We addressed this knowledge gap by conducting a data‐based synthesis on measures to promote pollinators (especially bees, butterflies, and flies) across European protected areas. To compare the effects of management practices that enhance pollinators (pollinator‐friendly; treatment) and those not focused on pollinators (conventional; control) in protected areas, we used vegetation, floral resource, and pollinator datasets. Our synthesis involved 10 countries, 34 datasets, and 639 sampling sites with different management activities (land abandonment, mowing, grazing, mulching, flower sowing, gap creation, and uprooting and girdling trees) and habitats (grasslands, forests, reed beds, and sandpits). Pooled analysis indicated that pollinator‐friendly management had mainly neutral effects on floral resources and pollinators, with some positive effects but no negative effects. Dataset‐level details revealed mostly neutral effects from pollinator‐friendly management with some positive (15%) and fewer negative (3%) effects. Management slightly improved pollinator overall abundance and species richness, particularly for butterflies and wild bees (excluding bumblebees). Comparing our synthesis with previous studies suggests that implementing management practices for pollinators in protected areas is more challenging than in farmlands and cities, possibly because protected areas already host higher quality habitats. Alternatively, pollinator‐friendly approaches commonly implemented in protected areas may be insufficient. Although the Nature Restoration Regulation provides new opportunities for pollinator conservation, implementation will require careful planning for target areas, as effective management, including pollinator requirements, requires more focused and context‐specific measures than those applied in cities and farmlands. Although focused on Europe, our synthesis provides broadly applicable lessons for pollinator conservation in other highly modified landscapes but with adaptation to local ecological and socioeconomic conditions.