Economic Incentives to Conserve Wildlife on Private Lands: Analysis and Policy

Some believe that provision of private property rights in wildlife on private land provides a powerful economic incentive for nature conservation because it enables property owners to market such wildlife or its attributes. If such marketing is profitable, private landholders will conserve the wildlife concerned and its required habitat. But land is not always most profitably used for exploitation of wildlife, and many economic values of wildlife (such as non-use economic values) cannot be marketed. The mobility of some wildlife adds to the limitations of the private-property approach. While some species may be conserved by this approach, it is suboptimal as a single policy approach to nature conservation. Nevertheless, it is being experimented with, in the Northern Territory of Australia where landholders had a possibility of harvesting on their properties a quota of eggs and chicks of red-tailed black cockatoos for commercial sale. This scheme was expected to provide an incentive to private landholders to retain hollow trees essential for the nesting of these birds but failed. This case and others are analysed. Despite private-property failures, the long-term survival of some wildlife species depends on their ability to use private lands without severe harassment, either for their migration or to supplement their available resources, for example, the Asian elephant. Nature conservation on private land is often a useful, if not essential, supplement to conservation on public lands. Community and public incentives for such conservation are outlined.     

Wild meat trade over the last 45 years in the Peruvian Amazon

The trade in wild meat is an important economic component of rural people's livelihoods, but it has been perceived to be among the main causes of the decline of wildlife species. Recently, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought to light an additional concern of wildlife markets as a major human-health challenge. We analyzed data from the largest longitudinal monitoring (1973–2018) of the most important urban wild-meat markets in Iquitos, Peru, to examine the trends in and impacts of these markets on people's livelihoods. Over the last 45 years, wild meat sales increased at a rate of 6.4 t/year (SD 2.17), paralleling urban population growth. Wild meat sales were highest in 2018 (442 t), contributing US$2.6 million (0.76%) to the regional gross domestic product. Five species of ungulates and rodents accounted for 88.5% of the amount of biomass traded. Vulnerable and Endangered species represented 7.0% and 0.4% of individuals sold, respectively. Despite growth in sales, the contribution of wild meat to overall urban diet was constant: 1–2%/year of total meat consumed. This result was due to greater availability and higher consumption of cheaper meats (e.g., in 2018, poultry was 45.8% cheaper and was the most consumed meat) coupled with the lack of economic incentives to harvest wild meat species in rural areas. Most wild meat was sold salted or smoked, reducing the likelihood of foodborne diseases. Community-based wildlife management plans and the continued trade bans on primates and threatened taxa may avoid biodiversity loss. Considering the recent COVID-19 pandemic, future management plans should include potential viral hosts and regulation and enforcement of hygiene practices in wild-meat markets.