Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Bee Health Card infographic shown to surveyed respondents.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Summary of survey questions.

See Table A in S1 Appendix for full survey.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Estimated number of beekeepers per country.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Rate of colony losses and colony numbers.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Clusters and individual variables shown on MCA plots.

The plots investigate (i) the willingness to use the tool and accept extra costs (MCA 1), and (ii) the frequency of use of the tool (MCA 2), with and without economic incentives. The way each variable and cluster was used in the subsequent regression analysis (‘Regression’) is also reported. See Table M in S3 Appendix for number and percentages of beekeepers agreeing, being neutral, and disagreeing with each cluster.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Final usable response rate1 by country.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Fig 2.

Respondents’ level of agreement, across countries, with prospective benefits of the Bee Health Card.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Respondents’ level of agreement, across countries, with prospective barriers of the Bee Health Card.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

MCA 1: Willingness to use the tool and accept extra costs with and without economic incentives.

A total of 58 variables were included, explaining a comprehensive 24.8% of the variation in the data (14.6% by component 1 and 10.2% by component 2). Similarities between individuals are shown through proximity on the map. Variables: (i) Benefits: cp_ben (crop production), bh_ben (bee health), g_ben (grower communication), qe_ben (tool quick and easy), ep_ben (environment protection), pp_ben (pollinator protection), p_ben (productivity), tc_ben (treatment cost); (ii) Barriers: t_bar (time-consuming), d_bar (difficult), i_bar (not important), c_bar (cost), e_bar (not effective), g_bar (poor grower communication); (iii) Confidence in effectiveness: evc (extremely to very confident), msc (moderately to slightly confident), nc (not confident); (iv) Countries: est, ger, ire, ita, spa, swi, uk; (v) Use: use_inc_no (no use with incentives), use_no_inc_no (no use without incentives), use_inc_yes_c (use with incentives and with extra costs), use_inc_yes_nc (use with incentives and without extra costs), use_no_inc_yes_c (use without incentives and with extra costs), use_no_inc_yes_nc (use without incentives and without extra costs). See Table 4 for in-detail description of variables and corresponding codes.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

MCA 2: Frequency of use of the tool with and without economic incentives.

A total of 56 variables were included, explaining a comprehensive 25.1% of the variation in the data (14.9% by component 1 and 10.2% by component 2). Similarities between individuals are shown through proximity on the map. Variables: (i) Benefits: cp_ben (crop production), bh_ben (bee health), g_ben (grower communication), qe_ben (tool quick and easy), ep_ben (environment protection), pp_ben (pollinator protection), p_ben (productivity), tc_ben (treatment cost); (ii) Barriers: t_bar (time-consuming), d_bar (difficult), i_bar (not important), c_bar (cost), e_bar (not effective), g_bar (no grower communication); (iii) Confidence in effectiveness: evc (extremely to very confident), msc (moderately to slightly confident), nc (not confident); (iv) Countries: est, ger, ire, ita, spa, swi, uk; (v) Use frequency: freq_inc_reg_irr (regular to irregular use with incentives), freq_no_inc_reg_irr (regular to irregular use with no incentives), freq_inc_lim_no (limited to no use with incentives), freq_no_inc_lim_no (limited to no use without incentives). See Table 4 for in-detail description of variables and corresponding codes.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Table 6.

Overview of total costs associated with bee health card use in each country on a per use and total national scale.

For comparison, the budget available in 2024 for bee health under the EU National Apicultural Programmes (total amount allocated to technical assistance for beekeepers and combating beehive invaders and diseases) is also included.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Estimates of additional honey production arising from adoption of the bee health card.

These are upscaled using different adoption rates (from the survey) and different efficiency frontiers (optimistic and pessimistic) to bound values.

More »

Table 7 Expand