Convert to organic farming

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Study locations

Key messages

  • Nine studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of converting to organic farming. Four studies were in Sweden, and one was in each of the UK, Canada, Switzerland, Germany and Taiwan.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (9 STUDIES)

  • Richness/diversity (9 studies): Four of seven replicated, site comparison studies (including two paired studies) in Sweden, Canada, Switzerland, Germany and Taiwan found that organic arable farms had a greater species richness of butterflies, burnet moths and all moths than conventionally managed farms. However, two of these studies only found this in intensively managed not in more diverse landscapes, and in farms managed organically for <6 years but not 15–23 years. The other three studies found that organic arable and mixed farms had a similar species richness of macro-moths and butterflies to conventionally managed farms. One before-and-after study in the UK found that within 4 years after a mixed farm converted to organic management (along with increasing the proportion of grassland and reducing grazing intensity) the species richness of large moths increased. One replicated, site comparison study in Sweden found that organic mixed farms had a more consistent species richness of butterflies across the farm, but a similar consistency through the summer and between years, compared to conventional farms.

POPULATION RESPONSE (8 STUDIES)

  • Abundance (8 studies): Four of seven replicated, site comparison studies (including two paired studies) in Sweden, Canada, Switzerland, Germany and Taiwan found that organic arable and mixed farms had a similar abundance of macro-moths and butterflies to conventionally managed farms. The other three studies found that organic arable farms had a greater abundance of butterflies and burnet moths, and all moths, than conventionally managed farms. However, two of these studies only found this in intensively managed not in more diverse landscapes, and in farms managed organically for <6 years but not 15–23 years. One before-and-after study in the UK found that within 4 years after a mixed farm converted to organic management (along with increasing the proportion of grassland and reducing grazing intensity) the total abundance of large moths, and the abundance of lunar underwing moths and 5 out of 23 butterfly species, increased, but the abundance of two butterfly species decreased.

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated, paired, site comparison study in 2003–2004 on 24 arable farms in Scania, Sweden (Rundlof & Smith 2006) found that organic farms had a higher abundance and species richness of butterflies and burnet moths than conventional farms in intensively farmed but not more diverse landscapes. In intensively farmed landscapes, both the abundance (1.7 individuals/50 m) and species richness (0.9 species/50 m) of butterflies and burnet moths on organic farms were higher than on conventional farms (abundance: 0.4 individuals/50 m; richness: 0.3 species/50 m). However, in more diverse landscapes, the abundance (4.5 individuals/50 m) and species richness (1.6 species/50 m) of butterflies and burnet moths on organic farms were not significantly different from conventional farms (abundance: 3.6 individuals/50 m; richness: 1.4 species/50 m). Twelve arable farms with >50% of land under EU-subsidized organic management in 2002 and 12 conventional farms of similar size, crop type and landscape features, were selected. Farm pairs were 3–8 km apart. Six pairs of farms were in diverse landscapes (15% arable land, 19% pasture, small fields), and six pairs were in intensively farmed landscapes (70% arable land, 3% pasture, large fields). From June–August 2003 and May–August 2004, butterflies and burnet moths were surveyed 5–6 times/year along 400–750 m routes along cereal field boundaries. Individuals occurring 5 m into the crop and in adjacent 2-m uncultivated margins were counted.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A before-and-after study in 1994–2006 on a mixed farm in Oxfordshire, UK (Taylor & Morecroft 2009) found that following adoption of the Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme, including stopping the application of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, the abundance and species richness of large moths and some species of butterfly increased. After Environmentally Sensitive Area management began, the total abundance (1,000–1,450 individuals) and species richness of large moth species was higher than before (800–1,250 individuals, richness data not presented). One of the five most abundant moth species (lunar underwing Omphaloscelis lunosa) and five of 23 butterfly species (meadow brown Maniola jurtina, brown argus Aricia agestis, common blue Polyommatus icarus, small copper Lycaena phlaeas and red admiral Vanessa atalanta) increased in abundance after the change in management. However, two butterfly species became less abundant (green-veined white Pieris napi and large white Pieris brassicae, data presented as model results). Overall butterfly abundance and species richness increased over the entire monitoring period, but the increase did not just happen after the management change. In 2002, the farm entered the Environmentally Sensitive Areas agri-environment scheme, and fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides were no longer used. Additionally, the proportion of grassland increased, and the total number of livestock dropped from 180 cows and 1,000 sheep to 120 cows and 850 sheep. Butterflies were monitored weekly from April–September on a fixed 3.6 km transect divided into 13 sections. Moths were monitored nightly from dusk to dawn using a light trap in a fixed position in the middle of the farm.

    Study and other actions tested
  3. A replicated, site comparison study in 2001 on 16 arable farms in Ontario, Canada (Boutin et al. 2011) found that organic farms had a similar abundance and species richness of macro-moths to conventionally managed farms. On organic farms, the total abundance (51–418 individuals/trap) and species richness (8–26 species/trap) of moths were not significantly different to on conventional farms (abundance: 40–359 individuals/trap; richness: 9–21 species/trap). However, more species of the family Notodontidae were found in organic than conventional farms (data not presented). Of 126 species collected only once, 91 were found on organic farms compared to 35 on conventional farms (statistical significance not assessed). See paper for species results. Eight organic farms had no chemical inputs for at least three years. Eight conventional farms had chemical fertilizers and herbicides applied. From June–September 2001, macro-moths were sampled on six nights/site. Each night, one fluorescent UV black-light funnel trap was set halfway along a hedge, and one was set ~50 m away in the middle of the adjacent crop field. Two organic and two conventional farms were sampled each night, and all sites were sampled within five nights every two weeks.

    Study and other actions tested
  4. A replicated, site comparison study in 2009 on 60 arable farms in Uppland and Scania, Sweden (Jonason et al. 2012) found that organic farms had a higher abundance and species richness of butterflies and day-flying moths than conventional farms.  Data were not presented. Forty organic and 20 conventional farms (>2 km apart) were selected. Organic farms had been under organic management for 1–25 years. From June–August 2009, butterflies and burnet moths (Zygaenidae) were surveyed 5–6 times on three transects/farm. One 250-m transect was located along an uncropped margin of a cereal field, and two 50-m transects ran perpendicular to the margin into the field.

    Study and other actions tested
  5. A replicated, site comparison study in 2010 in 18 arable farms in south-east Sweden (Jonason et al. 2013) found that recently established organic farms had a higher abundance and species richness of moths than older organic farms or conventional farms. On farms which had been managed organically for up to six years, the abundance (357 individuals) and species richness (26 species) of moths was higher than on farms which had been managed organically for over 15 years (abundance: 48 individuals; richness: 11 species) and on conventionally managed farms (abundance: 50 individuals; richness: 12 species). Twelve species of moth were associated with new organic farms (see paper for details), but no species were associated with old organic or conventional farms. Six farms had been in organic management for ≤6 years, six had been in organic management for 15–23 years, and six were still managed conventionally. In early August 2010, moths were sampled for four consecutive days using three bait traps/farm. Traps were placed 50 m apart along one 1.5–3-m-wide, >300-m-long, uncropped field margin/farm, 1.7 m above ground, and baited with sugar saturated red wine.

    Study and other actions tested
  6. A replicated, site comparison study in 2009–2011 in 133 mixed farms in the Central Plateau, Switzerland (Stoeckli et al. 2017) found that organic farms had a similar abundance and species richness of butterflies to conventional farms. On organically managed farms, both the abundance and species richness of butterflies was similar to conventionally managed farms (data presented as model results). Of 133 farms (17–34 ha, 13–91% arable crops), 42 were managed organically, and 91 were managed conventionally. All farms contained “Ecological Compensation Areas” under agri-environment schemes. From May–September 2009–2011, butterflies were surveyed six times on 10–38 transects/farm, totalling 2,500 m/farm. Each transect ran diagonally through a single crop or habitat type, with all available crops and habitats represented. All visits to a farm were completed in a single year, and the species richness was summed across all visits. Total abundance of butterflies was calculated from the number recorded in each habitat, and the availability of each habitat across the farm.

    Study and other actions tested
  7. A replicated, site comparison study in 2015 on seven arable farms in Germany (Sybertz et al. 2017) found that field margins next to organically managed fields had more butterfly species than field margins next to conventionally managed fields. On margins next to organically managed fields, there were more butterfly species than on margins next to conventionally managed fields (data presented as model results). Overall, 143–542 butterflies of 8–25 species were recorded on each organic farm, and 217–446 butterflies of 10–16 species were recorded on each conventional farm (statistical significance not assessed). Five farms (80–700 ha) were managed organically, and two farms (58–260 ha) were managed conventionally. From June–August 2015, butterflies were surveyed six times along 10 permanent, unsprayed and uncropped arable field margins (≥1 m wide, 50–250 m long) on each farm.

    Study and other actions tested
  8. A replicated, site comparison study in 2015–2017 on 19 mixed farms in Scania, Sweden (Carrie et al. 2018) found that organic farms had more consistent butterfly species richness across the farm than conventional farms. Across three field types, butterfly species richness was more consistent on organic than on conventional farms (data presented as model results). However, the consistency of butterfly species richness within a single field type throughout the summer, and between years, was similar on organic and conventional farms. On each of 10 organic and nine conventional farms, three fields were surveyed: a cereal field, a grass ley (rotational, sown, improved grassland), and a semi-natural grassland. From May–August 2015–2017, butterflies were surveyed five times (two weeks apart) along two 100-m transects/field.

    Study and other actions tested
  9. A replicated, paired, site comparison study in 2017 in four farms in Hualien County, Taiwan (Yen et al. 2018) found that organic farms had a similar abundance and species richness of butterflies to conventional farms. On organic farms, the abundance (287 individuals/ha) and species richness (11 species/farm) of butterflies was not significantly different from that on conventional farms (abundance: 191 individuals/ha; richness: 9 species/farm). Within a National Park, 39 ha of farmland remained in production and farmers were encouraged to convert to organic farming. In each of two areas, one organic and one conventional farm were selected (number of years since conversion to organic not given). Farms were 250–3,200 m apart. From May–September 2017, butterflies were surveyed once/month along 150-m transects at each farm (number not specified).

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Bladon A.J., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2022) Butterfly and Moth Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for butterflies and moths. Conservation Evidence Series Synopsis. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Butterfly and Moth Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Butterfly and Moth Conservation
Butterfly and Moth Conservation

Butterfly and Moth Conservation - Published 2022

Butterfly and Moth Synopsis

What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 19

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust