Logo
TAAT e-catalog for government
https://e-catalogs.taat-africa.org/gov/technologies/farming-with-alternative-pollinators-integrated-pollinator-habitat-for-sustainable-agriculture
Request information View pitch brochure
Request information Download pitch brochure Translate

Farming with Alternative Pollinators: Integrated Pollinator Habitat for Sustainable Agriculture

Boost yields. Protect biodiversity. Increase profits.

The Farming with Alternative Pollinators (FAP) is an ecological intensification practice that integrates biodiversity conservation within productive agricultural landscapes by incorporating marketable habitat enhancement plants (MHEP) directly into crop fields. The approach combines a main crop area with strategically designed habitat zones (typically 25% of smallholder fields or narrow MHEP strips within larger fields) planted with diverse flowering species selected according to pollinator attractiveness, market value, and flowering periods. FAP designs multi-species floral resources to ensure continuous availability of pollen and nectar throughout the cropping cycle, complemented by locally adapted nesting and water-support structures for wild pollinators.

2

This technology is pre-validated.

8•7

Scaling readiness: idea maturity 8/9; level of use 7/9

Positive impacts: 12

Target Groups Positives Impacts
Women smallholder farmers in arid and semi-arid regions
  • Increased income opportunities through the integration of Marketable Habitat Enhancement Plants (MHEP) that can generate additional revenue.
  • Improved resilience to climate variability through diversified production systems.
  • Increased participation of women in sustainable agricultural practices and decision-making.
  • Enhanced access to knowledge on pollinators, biodiversity, and improved farm management.
Low-income smallholder farmers with limited literacy and access to technical knowledge
  • Increased farm profitability through improved yields and additional income from MHEP.
  • Reduced production risks through diversified farm outputs.
  • Improved understanding of beneficial insects and sustainable farming practices.
  • Reduced dependency on expensive external inputs.
Smallholder farmers highly dependent on external agricultural inputs, particularly pesticides
  • Reduced dependence on costly chemical inputs through improved natural pest control.
  • Lower pest abundance (average 64.8% reduction in FAP fields).
  • Improved farm profitability through reduced input costs and increased productivity.
  • Increased awareness of beneficial insects and integrated pest management.
More...
Unintended impacts: 8
Mitigations: 12
Barriers: 12
Mitigations: 12

Climate adaptability: Highly adaptable

Farmer climate change readiness: Significant improvement

Biodiversity: Positive impact on biodiversity

Environmental health: Greatly improves environmental health

Water use: More water used

Problem

  • Declining pollinator populations and biodiversity loss caused by agricultural intensification, habitat destruction, and climate change, which threaten agricultural productivity and ecosystem resilience. 87% of flowering plants and 75% of leading food crops depend on animal pollination.
  • Unsustainable agricultural intensification that increases dependence on pesticides and reduces natural pest regulation.
  • Growing food demand and agricultural land expansion, by increasing productivity on existing farmland rather than converting natural ecosystems.
  • Limited scalability of conventional pollinator conservation programmes, which often require continuous public subsidies and land set aside for non-productive habitats.

Solution

  • Boosts national food production by increasing yields of pollinator-dependent crops (e.g., 54.3% more melon fruits) through enhanced pollination.
  • Improves farmer livelihoods, with an average 121% increase in net income and gains exceeding 200% for some crops (e.g., eggplant).
  • Protects biodiversity by restoring habitats for wild pollinators and beneficial insects within productive farmland.
  • Reduces pesticide dependence, lowering pest populations by an average of 64.8% through natural biological control.
  • Conserves agricultural land, increasing production on existing farmland and reducing pressure for agricultural expansion (e.g., simulations show 1,800+ hectares of land saved in Morocco with 50% adoption).
  • Provides a cost-effective conservation strategy, replacing expensive agri-environmental subsidies with market-driven incentives for farmers.
  • Supports national commitments on biodiversity conservation, climate adaptation, sustainable agriculture, and food security.
  • Offers a scalable policy solution suitable for low- and middle-income countries with limited public resources.

Key points to design your project

By simultaneously advancing SDG 1 , 2, 13, and 15 , the Farming with Alternative Pollinators (FAP) provides an approach that delivers economic, environmental, and social benefits, making it a strong investment for sustainable agricultural development projects. To successfully integrate FAP into national agricultural projects, governments should consider the following key elements:

1. Strategic Policy and Institutional Alignment

  • Engage agricultural extension services to support farmer outreach, field demonstrations, and the scaling of FAP.
  • Align with international initiatives, such as the Coalition of the Willing on Pollinators, to strengthen national policy development and implementation.

2. Capacity Building and Information Campaigns

  • Invest in farmer training and awareness to improve knowledge of wild pollinators, their habitat requirements, and the economic benefits of FAP.
  • Provide technical expertise, including entomologists and plant protection specialists, to support the participatory selection of Marketable Habitat Enhancement Plants (MHEP) and monitor pest thresholds.

3. Material and Technical Support

  • Promote low-cost nesting infrastructure by using locally available materials, such as hollow stems, wood, or dry mud, instead of expensive imported solutions.
  • Facilitate access to quality seeds for the diverse MHEP species needed to establish effective habitat enhancement plant assemblages.
  • Collaborate with ICARDA and other relevant partners to provide technical support and facilitate effective implementation.

IP

Open source / open access

Scaling Readiness describes how complete a technology\’s development is and its ability to be scaled. It produces a score that measures a technology\’s readiness along two axes: the level of maturity of the idea itself, and the level to which the technology has been used so far.

Each axis goes from 0 to 9 where 9 is the “ready-to-scale” status. For each technology profile in the e-catalogs we have documented the scaling readiness status from evidence given by the technology providers. The e-catalogs only showcase technologies for which the scaling readiness score is at least 8 for maturity of the idea and 7 for the level of use.

The graph below represents visually the scaling readiness status for this technology, you can see the label of each level by hovering your mouse cursor on the number.

Read more about scaling readiness ›

Scaling readiness score of this technology

Maturity of the idea 8 out of 9

Uncontrolled environment: tested

Level of use 8 out of 9

Common use by projects NOT connected to technology provider

Maturity of the idea Level of use
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Positive impact 12

Target Groups Positives Impacts
Women smallholder farmers in arid and semi-arid regions
  • Increased income opportunities through the integration of Marketable Habitat Enhancement Plants (MHEP) that can generate additional revenue.
  • Improved resilience to climate variability through diversified production systems.
  • Increased participation of women in sustainable agricultural practices and decision-making.
  • Enhanced access to knowledge on pollinators, biodiversity, and improved farm management.
Low-income smallholder farmers with limited literacy and access to technical knowledge
  • Increased farm profitability through improved yields and additional income from MHEP.
  • Reduced production risks through diversified farm outputs.
  • Improved understanding of beneficial insects and sustainable farming practices.
  • Reduced dependency on expensive external inputs.
Smallholder farmers highly dependent on external agricultural inputs, particularly pesticides
  • Reduced dependence on costly chemical inputs through improved natural pest control.
  • Lower pest abundance (average 64.8% reduction in FAP fields).
  • Improved farm profitability through reduced input costs and increased productivity.
  • Increased awareness of beneficial insects and integrated pest management.

Unintended impact 8

Target Groups Unintended Impacts Mitigation measures
Women smallholder farmers in arid and semi-arid regions
  • Additional labour requirements for establishing and managing MHEP and pollinator habitats may increase women’s workload.
  • Women may have limited control over land, production decisions, or income generated from additional crops.
  • Water scarcity in arid regions may create competition between MHEP and main crops.
  • Promote labour-efficient FAP designs adapted to women farmers’ capacities and available resources.
  • Ensure women’s participation in training, farmer groups, and decision-making processes.
  • Select MHEP adapted to local water availability and agroecological conditions.
  • Encourage household/community awareness to support women’s involvement and benefit-sharing.
Low-income smallholder farmers with limited literacy and access to technical knowledge
  • Complexity of FAP management (e.g., flowering synchronization, insect identification) may discourage adoption.
  • Misinterpretation of habitat plants as weeds may reduce acceptance.
  • Use practical, demonstration-based training approaches.
  • Develop visual and locally adapted training materials suitable for low-literacy farmers.
  • Establish farmer field demonstrations and peer-learning approaches.
  • Provide continuous technical support during early adoption stages.
Smallholder farmers highly dependent on external agricultural inputs, particularly pesticides
  • Initial reduction in pesticide use may create concerns about increased pest pressure.
  • Farmers may perceive restrictions on pesticide use as a production risk.
  • Transition period may require additional monitoring and technical support.
  • Provide training on integrated pest management and pest threshold monitoring.
  • Demonstrate economic benefits of reduced pesticide dependency.
  • Provide technical guidance during transition periods.
  • Promote evidence-based pesticide use rather than complete elimination where not justified.

Barriers 12

Target Groups Adoption Barriers Mitigation Measures
Women smallholder farmers in arid and semi-arid regions
  • Limited access to land, agricultural inputs, finance, and extension services.
  • Underrepresentation of women in agricultural programs and demonstrations.
  • Limited access to markets for MHEP products.
  • Limited recognition of women’s role in farm management.
  • Develop targeted outreach and training programs for women farmers.
  • Work with local organizations and extension services to reach women farmers.
  • Facilitate access to MHEP seeds and market linkages.
  • Include gender-responsive indicators in project monitoring.
Low-income smallholder farmers with limited literacy and access to technical knowledge
  • Limited knowledge of pollinators and ecosystem services.
  • Difficulty accessing technical advice and training.
  • Risk aversion due to limited financial capacity.
  • Limited access to quality MHEP seeds.
  • Strengthen extension service support and farmer coaching.
  • Promote participatory selection of MHEP according to farmer needs and local markets.
  • Establish demonstration plots showing economic benefits.
  • Facilitate access to seeds and locally available resources
Smallholder farmers highly dependent on external agricultural inputs, particularly pesticides
  • Strong dependence on chemical pest control practices.
  • Perception that all insects are harmful.
  • Lack of knowledge on natural enemies and pollination benefits.
  • Limited confidence in alternative pest management approaches.
  • Train farmers to identify beneficial insects and natural enemies.
  • Establish demonstration farms comparing FAP and conventional practices.
  • Engage plant protection specialists and extension agents.
  • Promote farmer observation and monitoring of field ecosystems.

Tested & adopted
Adopted
Tested
Testing ongoing
Egypt Equatorial Guinea Ethiopia Algeria Angola Benin Botswana Burundi Burkina Faso Democratic Republic of the Congo Djibouti Côte d’Ivoire Eritrea Gabon Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Cameroon Kenya Libya Liberia Madagascar Mali Malawi Morocco Mauritania Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Republic of the Congo Rwanda Zambia Senegal Sierra Leone Zimbabwe Somalia South Sudan Sudan South Africa Eswatini Tanzania Togo Tunisia Chad Uganda Western Sahara Central African Republic Lesotho
Countries where the technology is being tested or has been tested and adopted
Country Testing ongoing Tested Adopted
Algeria – –
Jordan – –
Morocco –
Palestine – –
Türkiye – –
Uzbekistan – –

This technology can be used in the colored agro-ecological zones. Any zones shown in white are not suitable for this technology.

Agro-ecological zones where this technology can be used
AEZ Subtropic - warm Subtropic - cool Tropic - warm Tropic - cool
Arid – – – –
Semiarid – –
Subhumid
Humid

Source: HarvestChoice/IFPRI 2009

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals that are applicable to this technology.

Sustainable Development Goal 1: no poverty
Goal 1: no poverty

FAP helps lift smallholders out of poverty by providing a method-inherent financial incentive, such as the average 121% increase in net income per surface area observed in field trials
Sustainable Development Goal 2: zero hunger
Goal 2: zero hunger

The approach enhances global food security by significantly increasing the yield quantity and quality of essential pollinator-dependent crops
Sustainable Development Goal 3: good health and well-being
Goal 3: good health and well-being

FAP promotes human well-being by reducing the agricultural dependency on harmful broad-spectrum pesticides through enhanced biological pest control
Sustainable Development Goal 13: climate action
Goal 13: climate action

The strategy builds climate change resilience by using marketable habitat enhancement plants (MHEP) as a financial safety net and buffer against crop losses caused by extreme weather

Step-by-Step Implementation of Farming with Alternative Pollinators (FAP)

Step 1: Select Marketable Habitat Enhancement Plants (MHEP)

  • Engage farmers and technical experts in a participatory selection process.
  • Identify the Marketable Habitat Enhancement Plants (MHEP) that:
    • Attract pollinators and beneficial insects.
    • Have market value and provide additional income opportunities.
    • Are adapted to local climate and farming conditions.
  • Examples include coriander, sunflower, basil, anise, and legumes.

Step 2: Design the Farm Layout

Adapt the FAP design according to farm size:

  • Smallholder fields (~300 m²):
    • Allocate 75% of the area to the main crop.
    • Dedicate 25% to MHEP habitat zones along field margins.
  • Large-scale fields (~1 ha):
    • Establish 1-meter-wide MHEP strips every 15.5 meters.
    • Maintain approximately 93% main crop and 7% MHEP.

Step 3: Plan MHEP Planting for Continuous Flowering

  • Select and sow a combination of MHEP species with different flowering periods.
  • Synchronize flowering to provide continuous food resources for pollinators:
    • One-third of MHEP species flower before or after the main crop.
    • Two-thirds flower at the same time as the main crop.
  • Extend pollinator food availability from 46–63 days in conventional monocultures to 80.5–93 days under FAP.

Step 4: Create Pollinator-Friendly Habitat Conditions

Enhance the farm environment by providing:

  • Nesting sites using low-cost local materials:
    • Hollow stems.
    • Wood logs.
    • Dry mud blocks with holes.
  • Water sources to support pollinator survival.
  • Bare soil patches for ground-nesting pollinators.

 

Last updated on Jul 31, 2026

International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA)
 Youssef Bencharki
Commodities
Melon Vegetable crop
Sustainable Development Goals Details ›
Sustainable Development Goal 1: no poverty
Sustainable Development Goal 2: zero hunger
Sustainable Development Goal 3: good health and well-being
Sustainable Development Goal 13: climate action
public.components.sdgs.motre
Category
Practices
Subcategory
Integrated pest management
Value chain step
Production
Tested/adopted in Details ›
Tested & adopted
Adopted
Tested
Testing ongoing
Where it can be used Details ›

This technology can be used in the colored agro-ecological zones.

Target groups
Farmers Advisory and Extension Services
QR code

Farming with Alternative Pollinators: Integrated Pollinator Habitat for Sustainable Agriculture

https://e-catalogs.taat-africa.org/gov/technologies/farming-with-alternative-pollinators-integrated-pollinator-habitat-for-sustainable-agriculture

Last updated on 31 July 2026, printed on Aug 2, 2026

Enquiries e-catalogs@taat.africa