The endangerment of bees and new developments in beekeeping: a social science perspective using the example of Germany

Abstract

The endangerment of honeybees and pollination in agriculture is related to social causes and entails social consequences. The paper reflects the bee issue in terms of symbolism, discourses and practices, different perspectives and positions, and social dynamics. It then presents two case studies that apply qualitative methods to assess developments that are harmful or favourable to bees and new trends in beekeeping. The first case study addresses the booming development of urban beekeeping. This part of the paper also discusses the alternatives that organic beekeeping has to offer. The second case study investigates beekeeping for the purpose of pollination in orchards. It points to possibilities of cooperation between growers and beekeepers but also marks the main problems, which are related to insecticide use and the development of the pollination market.

Keywords:

• Honeybees
• Beekeeping
• Pollination
• Insecticides
• Sociology
• Case studies

Notes

1. A ‘Thematic assessment of pollinators, pollination and food production’ by the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity & Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is forthcoming and includes also social-science-related research. For the progress of the report, see IPBES website [19].

2. In this case, the symbolism of Einstein’s intellectual authority gives additional weight to the matter.

3. In a way, Becker [24] represents the antithesis to the ‘bio-political critique’ by Nimmo [12]. If we are only interested in a critique of oppressed creatures, we deprive ourselves of the opportunity to see differences and natural–cultural ‘co-developments.’ In this perspective, we always need an exploited nature ‘outside’ the human realm as an independent reference for what should/ could be an unexploited one – and which is at least implicitly considered to be a better one. Yet, if we think of all domesticated creatures just as other kinds of beings, we can hardly criticize their exploitation. Nimmo shows ways out of this contradiction when he writes that ‘biopower’ can ‘never achieve totality’ [12, p. 13], i.e. the industrial appropriation of the living world cannot control it completely. He also speaks of ‘biopolitical experiments’ [12, p. 14]. Were we to research and compare different ‘experimental’ co-existences, we would find criteria for more or less instrumental or ‘co-developed’ ones. Therefore, we cannot ‘avoid […] too narrow a focus upon specific practices’ at the expense of an assumed ‘essential logic’ in general, as Nimmo [12, p. 15] suggests, but we would rather need that narrow and differentiating focus.

4. Even in an extreme case of an instrumental use of the honeybees such as the military one, the human-bee relationship still shows aspects of interplay: ‘Honeybees form part of a growing militarized ecology in which new relationships and new forms of both insects and humans are being made. Bees are becoming more human, in that human sentiments become part of the bee and humans come to know the world in part through the bee, although in a particularly militarized form’ [25, p. 663].

5. Suryanrayanan and Kleinman [14] have shown that the different scientific and political cultures play an important role as well. Furthermore, the symbolism of nature-culture conflicts would need more analysis in the controversy over neonicotinoids, too. As systemic pesticides, they coat the seed and the substance then spreads throughout the growing plant. The producers maintain that this avoids open pesticide application later on and enables a more controlled use, but environmentalists claim a deeper invasion into nature with less controllable consequences. The symbolism of nature-culture conflicts needs more analysis.

6. The empirical research on the subject of bees and beekeeping spanned the period from 2012 to 2015, with related theoretical work during this time as well [28]. The studies were funded by the Volkswagen Foundation for 39 months between May 2012 and February 2016 (Az. 86161; seven months were funded otherwise in between). Kerstin Stark was a project collaborator for 20 months. She worked mainly on the case study of urban beekeeping in Berlin [11] and the preparation of an anthology on the controversies over endangered bees [29].

7. One group interview was conducted with the members of a training course in pollination beekeeping with 18 participants including lecturers and experts.

8. The methodological foundations of this combination are discussed in Lorenz [34] and more exemplifying details can be found in Lorenz and Stark [11].

9. Since 2015, new tax regulations may have affected the distribution of the beekeepers. Whereas before about 150 hives marked the limit of easier taxation, that level now is 70 hives. Some beekeepers might decide to become bigger while others will reduce their stock to avoid the additional time and effort to satisfy bureaucratic requirements.

10. This case study is summarized here; for more details and a theoretical discussion of the boom referring to the political ecology of Latour [38], see Lorenz and Stark [11].

11. The request itself is not dated, but the same letter is listed under the website section ‘Aktuell’ (i.e. news) for the years 2015, 2014, and 2013 [56].

12. Furthermore, they researched why the political decisions in the USA and France opposed each other (no regulation in the USA but a ban in France) although the scientific knowledge basis was the same [9].

13. The way US beekeeping is perceived in Germany gives an example of media influence. Many German beekeepers referred to images gained from media coverage of the almond pollination business and described US beekeeping as extremely industrialized and ruthless against the bees’ well-being. This is similar to the way many US backyard beekeepers think of commercial beekeepers. US entomologists, by contrast, find professional beekeepers to be more cautious in caring for their bees, at least on average and mainly related to Varroa treatment, which half of the backyard beekeepers do not engage in, whereas nearly all of the commercial ones do. This is assumed to be a major factor accounting for fewer winter losses among the professionals. But entomologists have registered higher summer losses among commercial beekeepers, and their summer losses seem to be becoming more significant and, therefore, to a greater extent related to factors other than Varroa [57].

14. The appropriate size of a colony depends on the crops and sites of pollination, e.g. pollination in greenhouses typically requires smaller colonies, which means harvesting smaller amounts of honey. Another example is that intensive pollination in orchards can result in too many fruits that are therefore too small.