IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-02-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Complex Interaction of Markets For Endangered Species Products

Author

Listed:
  • Fischer, Carolyn

    (Resources for the Future)

Abstract

Economic models of trade in endangered species products often do not incorporate four focal arguments in the policy debate over trade bans: 1) law-abiding consumers may operate in another market, separate from illegal consumers, that trade would bring online; 2) legal trade reduces stigma, which affects demand of law-abiding consumers; 3) laundering may bring illegal goods to legal markets when trade is allowed; 4) legal sales may affect illegal supply costs. This paper analyzes systematically which aspects of these complicated markets, separately or in combination, are important for determining whether limited legalized trade in otherwise illegal goods can be helpful for achieving policy goals like reducing poaching.

Suggested Citation

  • Fischer, Carolyn, 2002. "The Complex Interaction of Markets For Endangered Species Products," RFF Working Paper Series dp-02-21, Resources for the Future.
    • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-02-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-02-21.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shogren,Jason F. & Tschirhart,John (ed.), 2001. "Protecting Endangered Species in the United States," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521662109, September.
    2. Bergstrom, Ted, 1990. "On the Economics of Crime and Confiscation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 171-178, Summer.
    3. Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman, 2002. "Garbage, Recycling, and Illicit Burning or Dumping," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 2, pages 49-62, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Erwin H. Bulte & G. Cornelis van Kooten, 1999. "Economics of Antipoaching Enforcement and the Ivory Trade Ban," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(2), pages 453-466.
    5. Ian M. Dobbs, 1991. "Litter and Waste Management: Disposal Taxes versus User Charges," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 221-227, February.
    6. Charles Morcom & Michael Kremer, 2000. "Elephants," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 212-234, March.
      • Michael Kremer & Charles Morcom, 1996. "Elephants," NBER Working Papers 5674, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
      • Kremer, M. & Morcom, C., 1996. "Elephants," Working papers 96-17, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
    7. Heltberg, Rasmus, 2001. "Impact of the ivory trade ban on poaching incentives: a numerical example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 189-195, February.
    8. Bulte, Erwin H. & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 1996. "A note on ivory trade and elephant conservation," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(4), pages 433-443, 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. Frey, Gregory E. & Chamberlain, James L. & Prestemon, Jeffrey P., 2018. "The potential for a backward-bending supply curve of non-timber forest products: An empirical case study of wild American ginseng production," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 97-109.
    2. van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2006. "Protecting the African Elephant: A Dynamic Bioeconomic Model of Ivory Trade," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21206, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Abbott, Brant & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2011. "Can domestication of wildlife lead to conservation? The economics of tiger farming in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 721-728, February.
    4. Collins, Alan & Cox, Caroline & Pamment, Nick, 2017. "Culture, Conservation and Crime: Regulating Ivory Markets for Antiques and Crafts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 186-194.
    5. Chen, Frederick & ’t Sas-Rolfes, Michael, 2021. "Theoretical analysis of a simple permit system for selling synthetic wildlife goods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    6. Brennan, Andrew John & Kalsi, Jaslin Kaur, 2015. "Elephant poaching & ivory trafficking problems in Sub-Saharan Africa: An application of O'Hara's principles of political economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 312-337.
    7. Mika Kurohata, 2020. "Effect of the CITES trade ban on preferences for ivory in Japan," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(3), pages 383-403, July.
    8. Robert Innes & George Frisvold, 2009. "The Economics of Endangered Species," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 485-512, September.
    9. Barbier, E. & Bulte, E.H., 2004. "Introduction to the symposium on trade, renewable resources and biodiversity," Other publications TiSEM 23d4672f-7b59-47f8-b81e-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Ferrier, Peyton Michael, 2009. "The Economics of Agricultural and Wildlife Smuggling," Economic Research Report 55951, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    11. Heid, Benedikt & Márquez-Ramos, Laura, 2023. "International environmental agreements and imperfect enforcement: Evidence from CITES," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    12. Gary D. Libecap, 2014. "Addressing Global Environmental Externalities: Transaction Costs Considerations," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(2), pages 424-479, June.
    13. van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2006. "A Dynamic Bioeconomic Model of Ivory Trade: Details and Extended Results," Working Papers 37030, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    14. G. Cornelis van Kooten & Tim Bogle & Frans P. de Vries, 2012. "Rent Seeking and the Smoke and Mirrors Game in the Creation of Forest Sector Carbon Credits: An Example from British Columbia," Working Papers 2012-06, University of Victoria, Department of Economics, Resource Economics and Policy Analysis Research Group.
    15. Barbier, Edward B. & Bulte, Erwin H., 2004. "Introduction to the symposium on trade, renewable resources and biodiversity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 883-890, September.
    16. 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.
    17. Dang Vu, Hoai Nam & Nielsen, Martin Reinhardt & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2022. "Conserving rhinos by legal trade: Insights from a choice experiment with rhino horn consumers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    18. Gary D. Libecap, 2013. "Addressing Global Environmental Externalities: Transaction Costs Considerations," NBER Working Papers 19501, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Balistreri, Edward J. & Worley, Christopher M., 2009. "Mercury: The good, the bad, and the export ban," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 195-204, December.
    20. Damania, Richard & Bulte, Erwin H., 2007. "The economics of wildlife farming and endangered species conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 461-472, May.

    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. 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.
    2. Damania, Richard & Bulte, Erwin H., 2007. "The economics of wildlife farming and endangered species conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 461-472, May.
    3. 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.
    4. Chen, Frederick, 2017. "The Economics of Synthetic Rhino Horns," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 180-189.
    5. Bulte, Erwin & Cornelis van Kooten, G., 2002. "Downward sloping demand for environmental amenities and international compensation: elephant conservation and strategic culling," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 15-22, May.
    6. Erwin H. Bulte & Richard D. Horan & Jason F. Shogren, 2003. "Elephants: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1437-1445, September.
    7. Numata, Daisuke, 2009. "Economic analysis of deposit–refund systems with measures for mitigating negative impacts on suppliers," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 199-207.
    8. Tobias Erhardt, 2019. "Garbage In and Garbage Out? On Waste Havens in Switzerland," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(1), pages 251-282, May.
    9. Charles Morcom & Michael Kremer, 2000. "Elephants," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 212-234, March.
      • Michael Kremer & Charles Morcom, 1996. "Elephants," NBER Working Papers 5674, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
      • Kremer, M. & Morcom, C., 1996. "Elephants," Working papers 96-17, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
    10. Thomas C. Kinnaman & Don Fullerton, 2002. "The Economics of Residential Solid Waste Management," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 1, pages 1-48, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. 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.
    12. Paul C. Missios, 2004. "Wildlife trade and endangered species protection," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(4), pages 613-627, December.
    13. Don Fullerton & Wenbo Wu, 2002. "Policies for Green Design," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 5, pages 102-119, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Alexander, Robert R., 2000. "Modelling species extinction: the case for non-consumptive values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 259-269, November.
    15. Heid, Benedikt & Márquez-Ramos, Laura, 2023. "International environmental agreements and imperfect enforcement: Evidence from CITES," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    16. Loukil, Faten & Rouached, Lamia, 2012. "Modeling packaging waste policy instruments and recycling in the MENA region," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 141-152.
    17. Choe, Chongwoo & Fraser, Iain, 1999. "An Economic Analysis of Household Waste Management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 234-246, September.
    18. Heltberg, Rasmus, 2001. "Impact of the ivory trade ban on poaching incentives: a numerical example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 189-195, February.
    19. Naima Farah & John R Boyce, "undated". "Elephants and Mammoths," Working Papers 2015-26, Department of Economics, University of Calgary, revised 28 Jan 2016.
    20. Bulte, E.H. & Horan, R.D., 2003. "Habitat conservation, wildlife extraction and agricultural expansion," Other publications TiSEM 88fa3bff-65e8-478f-9edf-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    endangered species; black markets; CITES; poaching; stigma;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law
    • Q21 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory

    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:rff:dpaper:dp-02-21. 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: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.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.