arrow
Return

Synthesis of Pollinator-Friendly Management in European Protected Areas

delete2026-08-11
delete0
delete
OA
AI
G
Gabriella Süle *
A
Andràs Báldí
D
David Kleijn
I
Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter
M
Matthias Albrecht
P
Péter Batáry
C
Carolin Biegerl
P
Petr Bogusch
V
Veronika Braunisch
J
Jörn Buse
A
Andree Cappellari
T
Tristan Eckerter
T
Thomas Fartmann
T
Thomas Frank
F
Florian Fumy
M
Michael Garratt
M
Maria Georgi
E
Elia Guariento
P
Petr Heneberg
A
Andreas Hilpold
A
Andrea Holzschuh
S
Sebastian Hopfenmüller
J
Jakub Horák
R
Raja Imran Hussain
Z
Zsolt Józan
R
Reet Karise
V
Vassiliki Kati
A
Alexandra‐Maria Klein
A
Anikó Kovács‐Hostyánszki
P
Petr Kozel
Á
Ádám Kőrösi
E
Egle Liiskmann
F
Franz Löffler
L
Lorenzo Marini
G
Gabrielle McLaughlin
A
Amparo Mora
M
Morgan Morrison
K
Konstantina Nasiou
K
Kristýna Nehybová
P
Péter Ódor
D
Dominik Poniatowski
Z
Zoltán Soltész
I
István Szentirmai
C
Csaba Tölgyesi
K
Konstantina Zografou
V
Viktor Szigeti
DOI:10.1111/cobi.70366delete
deleteOriginal
deleteShare
deleteSave
View PDF
Abstract

Abstract

En 中文
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.
Keywords:
abandonment
biodiversity conservation
forest management
grassland
grazing
meta-analysis
mowing
Natura 2000
Abandono
conservación de la biodiversidad
gestión forestal
metaanálisis
Natura 2000
pastoreo
praderas
siega
AI Summary

AI Summary

Key information extracted from the uploaded paper, including a brief overview, abstract, background, key highlights, visual analysis, and future outlook.

Journal

Conservation Biology cover
Conservation Biology
IF:
5.5
Papers:
5.9K
Citations:
2.3W

Organization

B
black forest national park
Scholars:
4
Papers: 3
Citations: 0
B
biology centre of the czech academy of sciences
Scholars:
74
Papers: 47
Citations: 0
R
rippl-ronai museum
Scholars:
2
Papers: 1
Citations: 0
W
wageningen university
Scholars:
505
Papers: 242
Citations: 2
U
University of Ioannina
Scholars:
7.7K
Papers: 7.0K
Citations: 8.0K
A
agroscope
Scholars:
270
Papers: 112
Citations: 0
B
BOKU University
Scholars:
556
Papers: 228
Citations: 0
H
Hun-ren Centre for Ecological Research
Scholars:
704
Papers: 542
Citations: 0
N
nabu-forest institute
Scholars:
2
Papers: 2
Citations: 0
P
picos de europa national park
Scholars:
2
Papers: 1
Citations: 0
O
orseg national park directorate
Scholars:
2
Papers: 1
Citations: 0
R
royal holloway university of london
Scholars:
79
Papers: 61
Citations: 0
M
MTA-HUN-REN Centre for Ecological Research
Scholars:
17
Papers: 10
Citations: 0
U
university of szeged
Scholars:
937
Papers: 304
Citations: 0
Osnabrück University cover
Osnabrück University
Scholars:
186
Papers: 69
Citations: 3.0K
E
Eurac Research
Scholars:
156
Papers: 68
Citations: 2.8K
C
charles university
Scholars:
990
Papers: 395
Citations: 1
B
buro geyer und dolek
Scholars:
3
Papers: 2
Citations: 0
U
University of Hradec Králové
Scholars:
67
Papers: 46
Citations: 0
Estonian University of Life Sciences cover
Estonian University of Life Sciences
Scholars:
2.0K
Papers: 1.4K
Citations: 2.5K
U
University of Würzburg
Scholars:
647
Papers: 241
Citations: 0
U
university of Padova
Scholars:
1.3K
Papers: 456
Citations: 10
U
university of freiburg
Scholars:
3.0K
Papers: 1.1K
Citations: 0
U
University of Reading
Scholars:
9.9K
Papers: 1.1W
Citations: 1.7W
researcher View more organizations