IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pre/wpaper/201513.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Categorisation and Evaluation of Rhino Management Policies

Author

Listed:
  • Douglas J. Crookes

    (Department of Economics, University of Pretoria)

  • James N. Blignaut

    (Department of Economics, University of Pretoria)

Abstract

Rhino populations are at a critical level and new approaches are needed to ensure their survival. This study conducts a review and categorisation of policies for the management of rhinos. Twenty seven policies are identified and classified into in situ (reserve based) and ex situ (market based) policies. The policies are then evaluated based on four target areas: poachers/hunters; consumers; intermediaries and the game reserves themselves. The study finds that protected areas management policies seem most beneficial in the short run, in particular the enforcement of private property rights over resource utilisation, as well as the establishment of wildlife sanctuaries that act as sustainable breeding grounds for rhino populations.

Suggested Citation

  • Douglas J. Crookes & James N. Blignaut, 2015. "A Categorisation and Evaluation of Rhino Management Policies," Working Papers 201513, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:pre:wpaper:201513
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.up.ac.za/media/shared/61/WP/wp_2015_13.zp48653.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bulte, Erwin H., 2003. "Open access harvesting of wildlife: the poaching pit and conservation of endangered species," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 27-37, January.
    2. Messer, Kent D., 2010. "Protecting endangered species: When are shoot-on-sight policies the only viable option to stop poaching?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2334-2340, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alan Collins & Caroline Cox & Juniours Marire, 2020. "On the judicial annulment of the ‘domestic’ trade moratorium in South African rhinoceros horn: a law and economics perspective," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 361-372, June.
    2. Glynatsi, Nikoleta E. & Knight, Vincent & Lee, Tamsin E., 2018. "An evolutionary game theoretic model of rhino horn devaluation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 389(C), pages 33-40.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Conrad, Jon M. & Lopes, Adrian A., 2017. "Poaching and the dynamics of a protected species," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 55-67.
    2. Adrian A. Lopes, 2019. "Transnational links in rhino poaching and the black‐market price of rhino horns," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(1), pages 95-115, January.
    3. Sam M Ferreira & Judith M Botha & Megan C Emmett, 2012. "Anthropogenic Influences on Conservation Values of White Rhinoceros," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(9), pages 1-14, September.
    4. Lee, Tamsin E. & Roberts, David L., 2016. "Devaluing rhino horns as a theoretical game," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 337(C), pages 73-78.
    5. Ram Ranjan, 2017. "Tuskers, tasty crops and the forest tribes in between: managing HECs through financial incentives in human–elephant–forest ecosystems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 79-95, January.
    6. Reinoud Joosten, 2016. "Strong and Weak Rarity Value: Resource Games with Complex Price–Scarcity Relationships," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 97-111, March.
    7. Ugochukwu, Albert I. & Hobbs, Jill E. & Phillips, Peter W.B. & Kerr, William A., 2018. "Technological Solutions to Authenticity Issues in International Trade: The Case of CITES Listed Endangered Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 730-739.
    8. Fischer, Carolyn & Sterner, Thomas & Muchapondwa, Edwin, 2005. "Bioeconomic Model of Community Incentives for Wildlife Management Before and After CAMPFIRE," RFF Working Paper Series dp-05-06, Resources for the Future.
    9. Kashwan, Prakash, 2017. "Inequality, democracy, and the environment: A cross-national analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 139-151.
    10. Reinoud Joosten & Robin Meijboom, 2010. "Stochastic games with endogenous transitions," Papers on Economics and Evolution 2010-24, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    11. John Tschirhart, 2012. "Biology as a Source of Non-convexities in Ecological Production Functions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(2), pages 189-213, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Rhino; economics; property rights; tragedy of the commons;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pre:wpaper:201513. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Rangan Gupta (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/decupza.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.