5 minute read
Frame hives prove a bad investment
Milan Wiercx van Rhijn, Project Manager, Bees for Development
Ayele Wasihun is a young man raised in a village near Lalibela, Ethiopia. At the age of 16 he was conscripted into the army. After seven years, he returned to Lalibela to find a job. Unfortunately job opportunities for young men like Ayele are rare. Searching for an alternative, he had the idea to begin beekeeping and to establish a tree nursery. He created an association with 11 other friends with their aim to build sustainable livelihoods through beekeeping and horticulture. After much negotiation, writing a proposal and investing initial capital, they managed to secure a plot of land from the local government.
Beekeeping is an intrinsic part of Ethiopian culture, and the honey and beeswax derived by local beekeepers are highly valued, important sources of income. This is what Ayele and his friends had heard, and they decided to put their capital from savings, family, and personal loans together to buy ten frame hives and ten bee colonies. They were full of hope that this could give them some income in the near future. Frame hives are promoted by the local agricultural office. They are called ‘modern’, considered an ‘innovation’ and therefore ‘must be better’ than the ‘traditional’ hives that are most widely used in Ethiopia. Ayele and his friends paid the Lalibela Agricultural Office US$110 (€85) for each hive, a total of US$1,100 (€850) for ten hives, and US$300 (€254) for ten bee colonies. In total, they had invested over US$1,400 (€1,186). This for 12 unemployed young people, in
a place where a typical salary of his peers is about US$170 (€144) a month. An enormously high investment for people in a vulnerable position. On the same land, next to the hives, they planted 5,000 indigenous fruit trees, vegetables and other trees and plants to provide abundant forage for the honey bees and at the same time to benefit from their pollination of the fruits and vegetables.
A year later, the flora is doing well. However, seven of the ten bee colonies absconded - translating into a significant loss on the investment.
Ayele and his friends recognised that simply applying so-called ‘modern’ technology - frame hives - was not appropriate for their situation. They had invested significant amounts of their money, believing this would result in a bigger return - as they were told that the frame hives were more productive than ‘simple’ hives. Now they had only three colonies left, and no money left to buy protective clothing or a honey extractor.
At Bees for Development we frequently encounter stories identical to Ayele’s. Why does this happen? Why are frame hives considered to be appropriate for people who cannot afford them?
Let us zoom in on the term productivity. It is a word that we hear unfortunately too often in a development context “Simple hives are not productive. We need modern frame hives; they have a higher productivity”. Often the people who pronounce these sentences do not know what they mean by the term ‘productivity’.
• The principle of a frame hive is to extract honey from combs held within frames, so that the bees can use the same (emptied) comb again. The bees will save the honey they would otherwise use to produce beeswax. However, you have the added cost of an extractor, the frame hive, frames, and wax foundation.
• Due to these high costs, it is in the interest of the beekeeper to meticulously take care of each colony. You cannot afford to have a frame hive without a colony, as it would be too expensive not to use this equipment in which you have invested. However, what about the nature of African bees? African honey bee colonies are more mobile than temperate zone colonies and quick to abscond when disturbed.
• The recycling of comb, and the high investment by the beekeeper, should make it imperative that these hives provide a return on investment.
Let us compare this with locally-made, simple hives:
• These hives can be made from any material that can be locally obtained, for example from clay, a hollowed-out log, reeds or woven bamboo.
• The cost of these hives will be time, plus the cost of the material (which will in most cases be at or close to zero).
• Who stops you from making as many hives as you can? If we take the same occupancy rate Ayele experienced (30%), with ten simple hives he would have had three colonies. However, his initial investment would have been minimal. If he had made 30 hives, for the same low investment, then he would have nine colonies. The occupancy rate does not matter. What matters is how many colonies you have from which you can harvest. Even if it were 50% of the honey crop of a frame hive, Ayele would still have a better result, less financial hardship, and the additional benefit of harvesting beeswax as well.
• As John Koster remarked in our recent Making money from beeswax webinar (see page 22: “Africa has the best and most pure beeswax in the world”). Why would you want to miss that by using frame hives that offer absolutely no beeswax to harvest?
Ayele and his associates find themselves in a very difficult financial situation. Bees for Development has helped them by providing technical information and putting them in contact with our partner organisation Bees for Development Ethiopia. However, their money, time and enthusiasm have been wasted, and they cannot recover the money they have lost in a situation that could have been avoided. This nonsense must stop!
Frame hives can work, but in many situations they do not. Frame hives are not pro-poor. Donor projects are keen on giving out frame hives because you can count them - often they will be found abandoned, used in people’s houses for furniture, or even repurposed as a wheel barrow (see picture right). At Bees for Development we agree that this may be a more useful destination for a frame hive. Precious money needed for real development work is thrown away on frame hives, and the ones profiting are the agents selling this equipment.