Bee Well: a positive psychological impact of a pro-environmental intervention on beekeepers' and their families' wellbeing

The study investigates how beekeeping, implemented as part of an environmental initiative (Let it Bee) in Ireland, affects the psychological, emotional, and social wellbeing of farmers and their families. While honeybees deliver substantial environmental and human health benefits (e.g., pollination, therapeutic uses) and contribute to UN Sustainable Development Goals, their vulnerability to environmental pollutants underscores the need for protective actions. Irish public concern about bee preservation is high. Although some research notes potential negative impacts of managed bees on wild bees, bees remain critical for planetary and human health. Emerging accounts during the COVID-19 pandemic suggested that beekeeping may alleviate loneliness and stress and foster creativity, but these focused on coping rather than sustained wellbeing. Prior empirical studies (Vietnam, Italy) reported social and emotional benefits yet lacked a dedicated psychological framework. This study addresses that gap by applying Positive Psychology perspectives to examine beekeepers’ emotional, psychological, and social experiences and to assess broader societal wellbeing impacts of a pro-environmental intervention.

Prior work links beekeeping with social connectedness and coping benefits, including online support mitigating loneliness during COVID-19 and creative engagement with bee products. Two empirical studies reported improved family relations, community respect (Vietnam), and positive emotions, flow, amazement, and social connection (Italian beekeepers). These investigations predominantly used entomological and anthropological lenses rather than explicit psychological frameworks. Positive Psychology offers a complementary framework that emphasizes wellbeing resources and flourishing rather than the mere absence of illness. Models include Keyes’ Mental Health Continuum (emotional, psychological, and social wellbeing), Ryff’s eudaimonic Psychological Wellbeing, Diener’s Subjective Wellbeing, and Keyes’ Social Wellbeing, with the overarching outcome of flourishing. Flourishing protects against mood disorders but is fluid over time; increasing flourishing through interventions may reduce population-level mental health issues. An additional account of optimal functioning, psychological richness (diverse, perspective-expanding experiences), complements happiness and meaning. These frameworks motivate examining beekeeping as a potential route to flourishing by cultivating emotional, social, and psychological resources.

Design and ethics: A qualitative study (February–June 2023) received ethical approval from the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Procedures adhered to EU human rights frameworks, the Declaration of Helsinki, the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, and GDPR. Participants: Twelve farmers (10 male, 2 female); ages: five 60+, four 50–59, two 40–49, one 18–29; farm size: three small, three medium, six large. Context: Participants were among 30 farmers who received beehives, training, and mentoring in the National Groundwater Source Protection pilot (County Roscommon, launched 2019), part of the Let it Bee biodiversity strand. Procedure: 1) Pre-interview survey: Collected demographics and reflections on the project. Five-point Likert items assessed enjoyment, meaning, profit, stress, community connection, family quality of life, perceived biodiversity and water quality changes. Descriptive analyses were conducted in SPSS v27. 2) One-to-one semi-structured walking interviews explored motivations, obstacles, personal and family impacts, and changes in relationships, priorities, health, attitudes, or behaviors. Data collection and analysis: Interviews were audio-recorded on two devices, transcribed with anonymization. Researchers engaged in pre- and post-interview reflective practice and maintained reflective diaries to capture observations, impressions, and emotions for use during analysis. Thematic Analysis (combined inductive and deductive; Braun & Clarke, 2021) was conducted using MAXQDA (2022). Initial coding was performed by one researcher; a second researcher conducted subsequent coding and theme development. A three-hour consensus meeting finalized themes.

Pre-interview survey (N=12): Wellbeing—Enjoyment M=4.2 (SD=0.9), Meaning M=4.0 (SD=1.0), Connection M=4.0 (SD=0.9), Stress M=2.0 (SD=1.4), Quality of Life M=3.5 (SD=0.9). Environment—Biodiversity M=4.2 (SD=1.2); Water quality M=3.8 (SD=1.1). Financial—Profit M=2.2 (SD=1.5). Most participants found beekeeping enjoyable and meaningful and a way to connect with others; only two found it stressful; only five perceived improved overall quality of life. Most believed biodiversity improved, some saw water quality gains; financial benefits were limited. Interviews (Thematic Analysis): Five themes emerged. 1) Pride: Farmers expressed pride in product quality, community health contributions (e.g., honey for children with asthma), and visible environmental impacts (e.g., more berries). Community collaboration (e.g., mental health service users building bee-hotels) amplified pride. 2) Togetherness (subthemes: connection, engagement, confidence, kindness, support): Deep connection with bees and nature (emotional synchronization), expanded social ties (beekeepers’ clubs, neighbors), family bonding and shared activities; increased engagement across generations; boosts in children’s and adults’ confidence; pervasive kindness through gifting honey and mutual beekeeper help; strong support networks and mentoring. 3) Value (subthemes: growth, flow, restoration): Lifelong learning and skill development; experiences of flow (losing track of time while working with bees); restorative calm, serenity, awe, and stress relief from observing bees. 4) Greater Good (subthemes: meaning, perspective): Beekeeping seen as meaningful environmental stewardship and legacy for future generations; shifts in worldview inspired by bees’ social organization, fostering conservation-oriented attitudes and prosocial perspectives. 5) Character strengths: Beekeeping provided avenues to use personal strengths (e.g., leadership in community initiatives, teaching in clubs, attentional focus, kindness), contributing to a sense of accomplishment and optimal functioning.

Findings demonstrate that participation in a pro-environmental beekeeping initiative is associated with enhanced psychological, emotional, and social wellbeing for farmers and their families. The Togetherness theme extends prior observations of family benefits by documenting intergenerational engagement, identity development, and confidence among youth. A novel contribution is evidence consistent with a form of positivity resonance between humans and bees, wherein perceived bee affect synchronizes with human emotional states—a phenomenon previously studied mainly in human-human contexts. Community support exceeded simple reciprocity, with neighbors adapting land-use practices to favor bees, suggesting broader communal buy-in. The Greater Good theme aligns with and extends the concept of psychological richness, indicating that beekeeping can be a perspective-changing, prosocially oriented experience. Beekeeping facilitated use of character strengths, a pathway associated with flourishing. Overall, results map onto Positive Psychology frameworks (e.g., elements akin to PERMA, Keyes’ Mental Health Continuum, psychological richness), suggesting beekeeping can serve as a Positive Psychology Intervention that benefits individual and family wellbeing while advancing environmental goals.

This study is the first to examine beekeeping’s wellbeing effects through a Positive Psychology lens, identifying pride, togetherness, greater good, value (growth, flow, restoration), and character strengths as key themes linking beekeeping with enhanced emotional, psychological, and social functioning. It contributes to environmental research by clarifying how pro-environmental behavior can yield wellbeing gains that may motivate participation. Policy and practice implications include integrating wellbeing benefits into land and landscape management frameworks and reframing climate action communications to emphasize personal benefits alongside environmental outcomes. Future research should test generalizability with larger, more diverse samples, explore biological and psychological mechanisms of human–animal positivity resonance, compare beekeeping’s effects on psychological richness with other activities, and directly assess family members’ perspectives.

Generalizability is limited by the small, specific sample. The Let it Bee program’s explicit environmental goal (improving water quality) may have amplified eudaimonic outcomes, potentially biasing effects. Family wellbeing impacts were reported only from beekeepers’ perspectives; future work should include direct input from family members.