Goerlich, Daniel L. (author), Munsell, John F. (author), Boyd, Heather H. (author), Moeltner, Klaus (author), and Virginia Cooperative Extension
Virginia Tech
University of Notre Dame
Format:
Online journal article
Publication Date:
2019-12
Published:
United States: Extension Journal, Inc.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 124 Document Number: D11233
5 pages, via online journal, Cooperative Extension produces public value through educational programming that benefits the greater community. Forests provide numerous valuable benefits to society through the provision of ecosystem services. Cooperative Extension educational programming positively affects forest owners, who, in turn, conduct actions that enhance ecosystem services. An understudied relationship exists between Cooperative Extension and ecosystem services that can be drawn on to document Extension's public value. Applying ecosystem services values to Extension natural resources–related programmatic outcomes through benefit transfer provides an avenue through which Extension can potentially make significant advancements in monetizing its public value.
21 pages, Context: Honey bees provide multiple ecosystem services. Comparisons of coupled social-ecological systems (SES) can improve the understanding of the factors affecting honey bees and beekeeping. Objectives: Stressing the need for SES analyses, we explore beekeepers' perceived factors affecting bees and beekeeping, test the hypothesis that honey bee colony losses are associated to agricultural land use intensity, and discuss the role of beekeeping for rural development. Methods: We used as a case study the steep gradient in SES in Ukraine's Chernivtsi region with three strata: (i) traditional villages, (ii) intermediate and (iii) intensive agriculture. In each stratum, we analysed the social system using five open-ended focus groups. Regarding the ecological system, we analysed data about winter loss rate of honey bee colonies, number of colonies per beekeeper, the average amount of supplemental feeding, and proportion of beekeepers treating against Varroa mite. Results: Thirty-three themes were extracted, of which 73% concerned the social system at multiple levels of governance. The number of themes increased from the traditional stratum with higher winter colony losses to the intensive agriculture stratum with lower losses. This does not support the hypothesis that the intensive agriculture per se affect honey bees negatively. Conclusions: Social system factors dominate over ecological factors, and interact across scales. This requires systems analyses of honey bees and beekeeping. We see beekeeping as a social innovation enhancing stakeholders' navigation in social systems, thus supporting rural development in countries in transition like Ukraine.
