IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v76y2025ics2212041625000804.html

Economic valuation of pest regulation benefits provided by arthropods in the UK

Author

Listed:
  • King, Peter
  • Robinson, Theresa
  • Howard, Charlotte
  • Breeze, Tom D.
  • Dallimer, Martin

Abstract

The role of arthropods as regulators of crop pests has gone underexamined in comparison to those species that are crop pollinators. While pollination services have been widely studied, the economic value of pest regulation provided by natural enemies remains underexplored. The suppression of insect crop pests by these natural enemies may provide substantial value to agriculture in reduced crop losses. Here, we estimate the economic value of pest regulation services provided by arthropod natural enemies in the UK for wheat (Triticum spp.), barley (Hordeum vulgare), and oilseed rape (Brassica napus) crops. We used a structured literature search to parameterise an economic production function to estimate the average annual value of pest regulation provided by arthropod natural enemies in the UK. We then simulated changes in economic benefits across different levels of natural enemy presence. A marginal 10% reduction from a full community of natural enemies had an estimated value per hectare between £108.98 − £171.13 for barley, £36.93 − £73.97 for oilseed rape, and £0.74 − £9.60 for wheat. We performed sensitivity analysis to evaluate how robust these benefits were across field management strategies. There are areas of uncertainty around the efficacy of natural enemies, crop yield response, economic thresholds, and field management. Resolving these sources of uncertainty and quantifying the economic value of pest regulation could inform sustainable pest management strategies and wider insect conservation practice.

Suggested Citation

  • King, Peter & Robinson, Theresa & Howard, Charlotte & Breeze, Tom D. & Dallimer, Martin, 2025. "Economic valuation of pest regulation benefits provided by arthropods in the UK," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:76:y:2025:i:c:s2212041625000804
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101776
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041625000804
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101776?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Farnsworth, K.D. & Adenuga, A.H. & de Groot, R.S., 2015. "The complexity of biodiversity: A biological perspective on economic valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 350-354.
    2. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    3. Daniels, Silvie & Witters, Nele & Beliën, Tim & Vrancken, Kristof & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2017. "Monetary Valuation of Natural Predators for Biological Pest Control in Pear Production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 160-173.
    4. Ana Klinnert & Ana Luisa Barbosa & Rui Catarino & Thomas Fellmann & Edoardo Baldoni & Caetano Beber & Jordan Hristov & Maria Luisa Paracchini & Carlo Rega & Franz Weiss & Peter Witzke & Emilio Rodrigu, 2024. "Landscape features support natural pest control and farm income when pesticide application is reduced," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Letourneau, Deborah K. & Ando, Amy W. & Jedlicka, Julie A. & Narwani, Anita & Barbier, Edward, 2015. "Simple-but-sound methods for estimating the value of changes in biodiversity for biological pest control in agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 215-225.
    6. Ostman, Orjan & Ekbom, Barbara & Bengtsson, Janne, 2003. "Yield increase attributable to aphid predation by ground-living polyphagous natural enemies in spring barley in Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 149-158, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniels, Silvie & Bellmore, J. Ryan & Benjamin, Joseph R. & Witters, Nele & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2018. "Quantification of the Indirect Use Value of Functional Group Diversity Based on the Ecological Role of Species in the Ecosystem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 181-194.
    2. Daniels, Silvie & Witters, Nele & Beliën, Tim & Vrancken, Kristof & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2017. "Monetary Valuation of Natural Predators for Biological Pest Control in Pear Production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 160-173.
    3. Peled, Yoav & Zemah-Shamir, Shiri & Israel, Alvaro & Shechter, Mordechai & Ofir, Eyal & Gal, Gideon, 2020. "Incorporating insurance value into ecosystem services assessments: Mitigation of ecosystem users’ welfare uncertainty through biological control," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    4. Donggeun Han & Donghee Yoo & Taeyoung Kim, 2023. "Analysis of social welfare impact of crop pest and disease damages due to climate change: a case study of dried red peppers," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    6. Qu, Yang & Hooper, Tara & Austen, Melanie C. & Papathanasopoulou, Eleni & Huang, Junling & Yan, Xiaoyu, 2023. "Development of a computable general equilibrium model based on integrated macroeconomic framework for ocean multi-use between offshore wind farms and fishing activities in Scotland," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 332(C).
    7. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    8. Yao, Richard T. & Wallace, Lisa, 2024. "A systematic review of non-market ecosystem service values for biosecurity protection," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    9. Pan, Ying & Wu, Junxi & Zhang, Yanjie & Zhang, Xianzhou & Yu, Chengqun, 2021. "Simultaneous enhancement of ecosystem services and poverty reduction through adjustments to subsidy policies relating to grassland use in Tibet, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    10. Azizi, Leyla & Scope, Christoph & Ladusch, Anne & Sassen, Remmer, 2025. "Biodiversity disclosure in the European finance sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    11. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    12. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    13. Nibedita Mukherjee & Jean Huge & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas & Nico Koedam, 2014. "Ecosystem service valuations of mangrove ecosystems to inform decision making and future valuation exercises," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/217963, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    14. Hougner, Cajsa & Colding, Johan & Soderqvist, Tore, 2006. "Economic valuation of a seed dispersal service in the Stockholm National Urban Park, Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 364-374, September.
    15. Rodríguez-Ortega, T. & Olaizola, A.M. & Bernués, A., 2018. "A novel management-based system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 74-84.
    16. Iversen, Sara V. & Naomi, van der Velden & Convery, Ian & Mansfield, Lois & Holt, Claire D.S., 2022. "Why understanding stakeholder perspectives and emotions is important in upland woodland creation – A case study from Cumbria, UK," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    17. repec:ags:uqseee:208090 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Hou, Lingling & Liu, Na & Liu, Pengfei & Lv, Xinxin & Li, Saiwei, 2026. "Information and consequentiality: Evidence from willingness to pay for eco-labelling products based on Becker-Degroot-Marschak mechanism," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    19. Everard, Mark & Longhurst, James & Pontin, John & Stephenson, Wendy & Brooks, Joss, 2017. "Developed-developing world partnerships for sustainable development (1): An ecosystem services perspective," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 241-252.
    20. repec:dbl:dblbks:1415 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Ewa Zawojska & Zbigniew Szkop & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Tomasz Żylicz, 2016. "Economic valuation of ecosystem services provided by the Wilanów Park: A benefit transfer study," Working Papers 2016-31, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    22. Sangha, Kamaljit K & Evans, Jay & Edwards, Andrew & Russell-Smith, Jeremy & Fisher, Rohan & Yates, Cameron & Costanza, Robert, 2021. "Assessing the value of ecosystem services delivered by prescribed fire management in Australian tropical savannas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:76:y:2025:i:c:s2212041625000804. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.