Crush and Burn: How the destruction of ivory fails to save elephants

IF 5.4 1区 经济学 Q1 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES World Development Pub Date : 2024-09-04 DOI:10.1016/j.worlddev.2024.106766
{"title":"Crush and Burn: How the destruction of ivory fails to save elephants","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.worlddev.2024.106766","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Elephant populations have declined by half since 1979. In response, activists have promoted destroying confiscated and stockpiled ivory to “send a message” to reduce elephant poaching and ivory demand. As a result, more than 280 tons of ivory has been destroyed between 1989 and 2017. This is the first paper to estimate the causal effect of the amount and location of these destructions on the elephant poaching rate across African and Asian countries with elephants. I use data from CITES’ Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants program from 2003 to 2019, paired with information on ivory destruction events. The main result is that the destruction of ivory does not reduce poaching rates. On the contrary, in African countries with elephants, ivory destructions increase poaching rates, with negative spillover effects from in-country events on the rest of the continent. This suggests the negative supply shock from the destructions dominate and incentivize poaching by increasing the (illicit) ivory price. For sites in Asia there is no evidence that elephant poaching rates respond to ivory destructions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48463,"journal":{"name":"World Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Development","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X24002365","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Elephant populations have declined by half since 1979. In response, activists have promoted destroying confiscated and stockpiled ivory to “send a message” to reduce elephant poaching and ivory demand. As a result, more than 280 tons of ivory has been destroyed between 1989 and 2017. This is the first paper to estimate the causal effect of the amount and location of these destructions on the elephant poaching rate across African and Asian countries with elephants. I use data from CITES’ Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants program from 2003 to 2019, paired with information on ivory destruction events. The main result is that the destruction of ivory does not reduce poaching rates. On the contrary, in African countries with elephants, ivory destructions increase poaching rates, with negative spillover effects from in-country events on the rest of the continent. This suggests the negative supply shock from the destructions dominate and incentivize poaching by increasing the (illicit) ivory price. For sites in Asia there is no evidence that elephant poaching rates respond to ivory destructions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
粉碎与燃烧:销毁象牙如何拯救不了大象
自 1979 年以来,大象的数量减少了一半。对此,活动家们提倡销毁没收和储存的象牙,以 "传递信息 "减少偷猎大象和象牙需求。因此,1989 年至 2017 年期间销毁了 280 多吨象牙。这是第一篇估算这些销毁行动的数量和地点对非洲和亚洲有大象的国家偷猎大象比率的因果效应的论文。我使用了濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约(CITES)"监测非法杀戮大象 "项目 2003 年至 2019 年的数据,并配以象牙销毁事件的信息。主要结果是,销毁象牙并不会降低偷猎率。相反,在拥有大象的非洲国家,象牙销毁会增加偷猎率,而国内事件会对非洲大陆其他国家产生负面溢出效应。这表明,象牙毁坏造成的负面供应冲击通过提高(非法)象牙价格来主导和激励偷猎行为。在亚洲,没有证据表明大象偷猎率会对象牙破坏做出反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World Development
World Development Multiple-
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
5.80%
发文量
320
期刊介绍: World Development is a multi-disciplinary monthly journal of development studies. It seeks to explore ways of improving standards of living, and the human condition generally, by examining potential solutions to problems such as: poverty, unemployment, malnutrition, disease, lack of shelter, environmental degradation, inadequate scientific and technological resources, trade and payments imbalances, international debt, gender and ethnic discrimination, militarism and civil conflict, and lack of popular participation in economic and political life. Contributions offer constructive ideas and analysis, and highlight the lessons to be learned from the experiences of different nations, societies, and economies.
期刊最新文献
Benefit or procedure? Determinants of perceived distributive fairness in rural China Gender imbalance and temporary migration: Evidence from rural China A qualitative examination of microfinance and intimate partner violence in India: Understanding the role of male backlash and household bargaining models Indigenous forest destroyers or guardians? The indigenous Batwa and their ancestral forests in Kahuzi-Biega National Park, DRC Fishery access benefits early childhood development through fish consumption and fishing income pathways
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1