Beneficial insects are associated with botanically rich margins with trees on small farms.

Beneficial insect communities on farms are influenced by site- and landscape-level factors, with pollinator and natural enemy populations often associated with semi-natural habitat remnants. They provide ecosystem services essential for all agroecosystems. For smallholders, natural pest regulation may be the only affordable and available option to manage pests. We evaluated the beneficial insect community on smallholder bean farms (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and its relationship with the plant communities in field margins, including margin trees that are not associated with forest fragments. Using traps, botanical surveys and transect walks, we analysed the relationship between the floral diversity/composition of naturally regenerating field margins, and the beneficial insect abundance/diversity on smallholder farms, and the relationship with crop yield. More flower visits by potential pollinators and increased natural enemy abundance measures in fields with higher plant, and particularly tree, species richness, and these fields also saw improved crop yields. Many of the flower visitors to beans and potential natural enemy guilds also made use of non-crop plants, including pesticidal and medicinal plant species. Selective encouragement of plants delivering multiple benefits to farms can contribute to an ecological intensification approach. However, caution must be employed, as many plants in these systems are introduced species.

Insect pollination is important in a smallholder bean farming system.

BACKGROUND: Many crops are dependent on pollination by insects. Habitat management in agricultural landscapes can support pollinator services and even augment crop production. Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is an important legume for the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in many low-income countries, particularly so in East Africa. While this crop is autogamous, it is frequently visited by pollinating insects that could improve yields. However, the value of pollination services to common beans (Kariasii) yield is not known. METHODS: We carried out pollinator-exclusion experiments to determine the contribution of insect pollinators to bean yields. We also carried out a fluorescent-dye experiment to evaluate the role of field margins as refuge for flower-visitors. RESULTS: Significantly higher yields, based on pods per plant and seeds per pod, were recorded from open-pollinated and hand-pollinated flowers compared to plants from which pollinators had been excluded indicating that flower visitors contribute significantly to bean yields. Similarly, open and hand-pollinated plants recorded the highest mean seed weight. Extrapolation of yield data to field scale indicated a potential increase per hectare from 681 kg in self-pollinated beans to 1,478 kg in open-pollinated beans indicating that flower visitors contributed significantly to crop yield of beans. Our marking study indicated that flower-visiting insects including bees, flies and lepidopterans moved from the field margin flowers into the bean crop. Overall, these results show that insect pollinators are important for optimising bean yields and an important food security consideration on smallholder farms. Field margin vegetation also provides habitat for flower-visiting insects that pollinate beans. Hence, non-crop habitats merit further research focusing on establishing which field margin species are most important and their capacity to support other ecosystem services such as natural pest regulation or even pests.

A quasi-experimental study of impacts of Tanzania's wildlife management areas on rural livelihoods and wealth.

Since the 2000s, Tanzania's natural resource management policy has emphasised Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs), designed to promote wildlife and biodiversity conservation, poverty alleviation and rural development. We carried out a quasi-experimental impact evaluation of social impacts of WMAs, collecting data from 24 villages participating in 6 different WMAs across two geographical regions, and 18 statistically matched control villages. Across these 42 villages, we collected participatory wealth ranking data for 13,578 households. Using this as our sampling frame, we conducted questionnaire surveys with a stratified sample of 1,924 household heads and 945 household heads' wives. All data were collected in 2014/15, with a subset of questions devoted to respondents' recall on conditions that existed in 2007, when first WMAs became operational. Questions addressed household demographics, land and livestock assets, resource use, income-generating activities and portfolios, participation in natural resource management decision-making, benefits and costs of conservation. Datasets permit research on livelihood and wealth trajectories, and social impacts, costs and benefits of conservation interventions in the context of community-based natural resource management.