IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-05-06.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bioeconomic Model of Community Incentives for Wildlife Management Before and After CAMPFIRE

Author

Listed:
  • Fischer, Carolyn

    () (Resources for the Future)

  • Sterner, Thomas
  • Muchapondwa, Edwin

Abstract

This paper formulates a bioeconomic model to analyze community incentives for wildlife management under benefit-sharing programs like the Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) in Zimbabwe. Two agents influence the wildlife stock: a parks agency determines hunting quotas, and a local community chooses to either aid or discourage outside poachers. Wildlife generates revenues from hunting licenses and tourism; it also intrudes on local agriculture. We consider two benefit-sharing regimes: shares of wildlife tourism rents and shares of hunting licenses. Resource sharing does not necessarily improve community welfare or incentives for wildlife conservation. Results depend on the exact design of the benefit shares, the size of the benefits compared with agricultural losses, and the way in which the parks agency sets hunting licenses.

Suggested Citation

  • Fischer, Carolyn & Sterner, Thomas & Muchapondwa, Edwin, 2005. "Bioeconomic Model of Community Incentives for Wildlife Management Before and After CAMPFIRE," Discussion Papers dp-05-06, Resources For the Future.
  • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-05-06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-05-06.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bulte, Erwin H. & Horan, Richard D., 2003. "Habitat conservation, wildlife extraction and agricultural expansion," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 109-127, January.
    2. Richard Horan & Erwin Bulte, 2004. "Optimal and Open Access Harvesting of Multi-Use Species in a Second-Best World," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 28(3), pages 251-272, July.
    3. Swallow, Stephen K., 1990. "Depletion of the environmental basis for renewable resources: The economics of interdependent renewable and nonrenewable resources," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 281-296, November.
    4. Johannesen, Anne Borge & Skonhoft, Anders, 2005. "Tourism, poaching and wildlife conservation: what can integrated conservation and development projects accomplish?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 208-226, October.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Skonhoft, Anders & Solstad, Jan Tore, 1996. "Wildlife management, illegal hunting and conflicts. A bioeconomic analysis," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(02), pages 165-181, May.
    8. Rondeau, Daniel, 2001. "Along the Way Back from the Brink," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 156-182, September.
    9. Baland, Jean-Marie & Platteau, Jean-Philippe, 2000. "Halting Degradation of Natural Resources: Is There a Role for Rural Communities?," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198290612.
    10. PID Kinyua & G Cornelis van Kooten & EH Bulte, 2000. "African wildlife policy: protecting wildlife herbivores on private game ranches," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 27(2), pages 227-244, June.
    11. Skonhoft, Anders, 1998. "Resource utilization, property rights and welfare--Wildlife and the local people," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 67-80, July.
    12. Schulz, Carl-Erik & Skonhoft, Anders, 1996. "Wildlife management, land-use and conflicts," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(03), pages 265-280, July.
    13. Daniel Rondeau & Jon M. Conrad, 2003. "Managing Urban Deer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 266-281.
    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. Vallino, Elena & Aldahsev,Gani, 2013. "NGOs and participatory conservation in developing countries: why are there inefficiencies?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201318, University of Turin.
    2. Lee, Deborah E. & Du Preez, Mario, 2016. "Determining visitor preferences for rhinoceros conservation management at private, ecotourism game reserves in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa: A choice modeling experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 106-116.
    3. Astrid Zabel & Karen Pittel & Göran Bostedt & Stefanie Engel, 2011. "Comparing Conventional and New Policy Approaches for Carnivore Conservation: Theoretical Results and Application to Tiger Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 287-301, February.
    4. Zareena Begum. I & Amanat K. Gill, 2014. "Analyzing the Pathway to Improve Tiger Conservation in India," Working Papers 2014-090, Madras School of Economics,Chennai,India.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    bioeconomic; CAMPFIRE; community; poaching; wildlife; benefit sharing;

    JEL classification:

    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • Q20 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - General

    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-05-06. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Webmaster). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/degraus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.