IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea01/20547.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Empirical Analysis Of Honeybee Pollination Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Rucker, Randal R.
  • Thurman, Walter N.
  • Burgett, Michael

Abstract

Pollination by honeybees plays an important role in modern agriculture. Some crops are greatly dependent on honeybees (almonds, apples, avocados, blueberries, and cherries are examples) while the yields and quality of other crops are significantly enhanced by honeybee pollination. The importance of understanding pollination markets has increased recently due to changes brought on by the twin scourges of Varroa and tracheal mites. Both are infestations of feral and domestic bees that imply greater future reliance on domesticated bees at higher cost. In the United States a complex market has evolved that connects itinerant beekeepers and their bee colonies with farmers who demand their services. While the fields of entomology and crop science have developed a large literature on general principles of beekeeping and its application to particular crops, there has been little economic analysis of pollination markets. In this paper, we begin to remedy this lack of attention by analyzing an extensive panel data set of individual pollination transactions for Oregon beekeepers. The Oregon panel constitutes a considerably larger and richer data set on pollination markets than the data set examined by Cheung (1973), which is our only empirical precedent. Using cross-sectional time series regression models, we find results that are consistent with Cheung's earlier findings on the consistency of pollination market outcomes with economic theory. Fees charged for placing colonies on crops that yield marketable honey are found to be less than for crops that yield no honey income to the beekeeper: the pollination fee for crops that produce honey is about $17 per colony less than for crops that produce no honey. Pollination fees also vary over time in response to changes in both crop prices and honey prices. Because bees are paid according to their value of marginal product in the production of crops, pollination fees should vary positively with crop prices. We find that a ten percent increase in crop prices causes pollination fees to increase by about $.40 per colony. With respect to honey prices, we find that a ten percent increase is estimated to decrease pollination fees by about $2.50 per colony. This estimated effect is a previously unexplored link between the now-defunct honey program and its longstanding public policy rationale, the encouragement of honeybee pollination. Insofar as the honey program successfully maintained the price of honey above levels that would otherwise have been observed, our analysis suggests that elimination of the program has resulted in a reduction in pollination services and an increase in pollination fees.

Suggested Citation

  • Rucker, Randal R. & Thurman, Walter N. & Burgett, Michael, 2001. "An Empirical Analysis Of Honeybee Pollination Markets," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20547, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea01:20547
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.20547
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/20547/files/sp01ru02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.20547?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cheung, Steven N S, 1973. "The Fable of the Bees: An Economic Investigation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 11-33, April.
    2. Muth, Mary K & Rucker, Randal R & Thurman, Walter N & Chuang, Ching-Ta, 2003. "The Fable of the Bees Revisited: Causes and Consequences of the U.S. Honey Program," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 46(2), pages 479-516, October.
    3. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    4. Muth, Mary K. & Thurman, Walter N., 1995. "Why Support the Price of Honey?," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 10(2), pages 1-3.
    5. Francis M. Bator, 1958. "The Anatomy of Market Failure," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 72(3), pages 351-379.
    6. Alan L. Olmstead & Donald B. Wooten, 1987. "Bee Pollination and Productivity Growth: The Case of Alfalfa," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 69(1), pages 56-63.
    7. John W. Siebert, 1980. "Beekeeping, Pollination, and Externalities in California Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 62(2), pages 165-171.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Narjes, Manuel Ernesto & Lippert, Christian, 2019. "The Optimal Supply of Crop Pollination and Honey From Wild and Managed Bees: An Analytical Framework for Diverse Socio-Economic and Ecological Settings," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 278-290.

    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. Elodie Bertrand, 2011. "What do cattle and bees tell us about the Coase theorem?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 39-62, February.
    2. Vesa Kanniainen & Tuula Lehtonen & Ilkka Mellin, 2013. "Honeybee Economics - Implications for Ecology Policy," CESifo Working Paper Series 4204, CESifo.
    3. Muth, Mary K & Rucker, Randal R & Thurman, Walter N & Chuang, Ching-Ta, 2003. "The Fable of the Bees Revisited: Causes and Consequences of the U.S. Honey Program," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 46(2), pages 479-516, October.
    4. Frank F. Limehouse & Robert E. McCormick & Melissa M. Yeoh, 2012. "The Private Provision of Public Goods: An Analysis of Homes on Golf Courses," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 27(Spring 20), pages 103-120.
    5. Goodrich, Brittney K. & Goodhue, Rachael E., 2020. "Are All Colonies Created Equal? The Role of Honey Bee Colony Strength in Almond Pollination Contracts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    6. Demsetz, Harold, 1996. "The core disagreement between Pigou, the profession, and Coase in the analyses of the externality question," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 565-579, December.
    7. Terry L. Anderson, 2015. "If Hayek and Coase Were Environmentalists: Linking Economics and Ecology," Economics Working Papers 15102, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
    8. Glenn Furton & Adam Martin, 2019. "Beyond market failure and government failure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 178(1), pages 197-216, January.
    9. Ferrier, Peyton M & Rucker, Randal R. & Thurman, Walter N. & Burgett, Michael, 2018. "Economic Effects and Responses to Changes in Honey Bee Health," Economic Research Report 276245, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    10. Luciano Pilati & Vasco Boatto, 2013. "Bio-Economics Of Allocatable Pollination Services: Sequential Choices And Jointness In Sites," DEM Discussion Papers 2013/18, Department of Economics and Management.
    11. Marco FRIGERIO & Daniela VANDONE, 2018. "Virtuous or Vicious? Development Banks in Europe," Departmental Working Papers 2018-07, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    12. Wiser, R. H., 2000. "The role of public policy in emerging green power markets: an analysis of marketer preferences," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 177-212, June.
    13. Nathalie Berta, 2016. "On the definition of externality as a missing market," Post-Print halshs-01277990, HAL.
    14. Marek Wigier, 2015. "Results of Support for Agriculture during the CAP Implementation in Poland," Oblik i finansi, Institute of Accounting and Finance, issue 1, pages 134-144, March.
    15. Marciano, Alain, 2011. "Buchanan on externalities: An exercise in applied subjectivism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 280-289.
    16. Kitti, Mitri & Heikkila, Jaakko & Huhtala, Anni, 2006. "Fair policies for the coffee trade - protecting people or biodiversity?," Discussion Papers 11858, MTT Agrifood Research Finland.
    17. Meagan Krupa & Branka Valcic, 2011. "Sustainable fisheries: how externalities impact urban fishery management," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 1(3), pages 159-168, September.
    18. Déprés, Christophe & Grolleau, Gilles & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2005. "Analyse exploratoire de quelques stratégies de fourniture ‘non publique’ des biens ‘publics’," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 74.
    19. Akee, Randall K. Q., 2006. "Checkerboards and Coase: Transactions Costs and Efficiency in Land Markets," IZA Discussion Papers 2438, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Jonathan M. Karpoff, 2021. "On a stakeholder model of corporate governance," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 50(2), pages 321-343, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Marketing;

    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:ags:aaea01:20547. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.