RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT VIEWPOINT: WHY COMPENSATING WILDLIFE DAMAGES MAY BE BAD FOR CONSERVATION

By Erwin H. Bulte, Daniel Rondeau. 2005

232 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Economics and Econometrics, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5d03982f59e6cfa620495f391df4c33c1c46454c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. E. Gese
2. David W. Macdonald
3. Laurence Frank
4. S. Cavalcanti
5. Mathias Tobler
6. G. Powell

In Economics and Econometrics

1. David W. Macdonald

In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

1. David W. Macdonald
2. S. Cavalcanti

Citations in the corpus

• Conflicts Between Humans and Terrestrial Vertebrates: A Global Review (2018, background): “Previous knowledge of compensation for conflict damage can lead people to reduce the care for crops and livestock that they normally would practice (Bulte & Rondeau, 2005).”
• Taking the Elephants' Perspective: Remembering Elephant Behavior, Cognition and Ecology in Human-Elephant Conflict Mitigation (2018, background): “Any inputs into the system, such as providing farmers with new mitigation tools or compensation could influence this balance in different ways, including stimulating further conversion of land to agricultural use (Bulte and Rondeau, 2005).”
• Kill rates and predation patterns of jaguars (Panthera onca) in the southern Pantanal, Brazil (2010, background): “…claim processes causing lengthy time delays, compensation below market value, lack of sustainable funding, high administrative costs, and moral hazard are some of the drawbacks associated with compensation programs (Bulte and Rondeau 2005; Nyhus et al. 2005; Zabel and HolmMüller 2008).”
• Human–Brown Bear Conflicts in Artvin, Northeastern Turkey: Encounters, Damage, and Attitudes (2008, background): “However, although it will reduce resentment among farmers and help finance damage, compensation may not solve the real problem or may even create additional problems (Bulte and Rondeau 2005).”
• Evaluation of a compensation scheme to bring about pastoralist tolerance of lions (2009, background): “Bulte and Rondeau (2005) hypothesize that compensation can lead to ‘‘excessive damages” as people put their livestock (especially sick animals) into situations where they will be killed in order to qualify for compensation.”
• Elephants in the garden: Financial and social costs of crop raiding (2012, background): “Programs have to guard against fraudulent claims (Bulte and Rondeau, 2005), verify damage was caused by protected animals (Nyhus et al., 2005), and guard against ‘moral hazard’; a situation where the farmer looses the incentive to protect their crops, because all are equally compensated for losses…”