title: Identification of policies for a sustainable legal trade in rhinoceros horn based on population projection and socioeconomic models.
abstract: Between 1990 and 2007, 15 southern white (Ceratotherium simum simum) and black (Diceros bicornis) rhinoceroses on average were killed illegally every year in South Africa. Since 2007 illegal killing of southern white rhinoceros for their horn has escalated to >950 individuals/year in 2013. We conducted an ecological-economic analysis to determine whether a legal trade in southern white rhinoceros horn could facilitate rhinoceros protection. Generalized linear models were used to examine the socioeconomic drivers of poaching, based on data collected from 1990 to 2013, and to project the total number of rhinoceroses likely to be illegally killed from 2014 to 2023. Rhinoceros population dynamics were then modeled under 8 different policy scenarios that could be implemented to control poaching. We also estimated the economic costs and benefits of each scenario under enhanced enforcement only and a legal trade in rhinoceros horn and used a decision support framework to rank the scenarios with the objective of maintaining the rhinoceros population above its current size while generating profit for local stakeholders. The southern white rhinoceros population was predicted to go extinct in the wild <20 years under present management. The optimal scenario to maintain the rhinoceros population above its current size was to provide a medium increase in antipoaching effort and to increase the monetary fine on conviction. Without legalizing the trade, implementing such a scenario would require covering costs equal to approximately $147,000,000/year. With a legal trade in rhinoceros horn, the conservation enterprise could potentially make a profit of $717,000,000/year. We believe the 35-year-old ban on rhinoceros horn products should not be lifted unless the money generated from trade is reinvested in improved protection of the rhinoceros population. Because current protection efforts seem to be failing, it is time to evaluate, discuss, and test alternatives to the present policy.
authors.affiliation: Finnish Centre of Excellence in Metapopulation Biology, Department of Biosciences, P.O. Box 65, FI-00014, University of Helsinki, Finland; School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 4041, South Africa.
authors.forename: Enrico
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Di Minin
authors.forename: Jussi
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Laitila
authors.forename: Federico
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Montesino-Pouzols
authors.forename: Nigel
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Leader-Williams
authors.forename: Rob
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Slotow
authors.forename: Peter S
authors.initials: PS
authors.lastname: Goodman
authors.forename: Anthony J
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Conway
authors.forename: Atte
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Moilanen
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D003132:Commerce; D003247:Conservation of Natural Resources; D058735:Environmental Policy / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D010527:Perissodactyla; D011157:Population Dynamics; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors; D013019:South Africa
keywords: African rhinos; CITES; caza furtiva; conservation policy; economics; economía; modelo poblacional; poaching; política de conservación; population model; rinocerontes Africanos