Disentangling economic, cultural, and nutritional motives to identify entry points for regulating a wildlife commodity chain

Bachmann, Mona; Junker, Jessica; Mundry, Roger; Nielsen, Martin Reinhardt; Haase, Dagmar; Cohen, Heather; Kouassi, Joseph A.K.; Kühl, Hjalmar S.

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2019.07.022

Cited by 17 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The utilization of most taxa was related to differing levels of environmental awareness, and consumption of primate meat to a cultural and educational context. Previous studies have shown that within a commodity chain the motivations for utilization of bushmeat can vary between user groups (Bachmann et al., 2019) and the determinants of specific taxa utilization can vary within the same user group (Catarina et al., 2017; East et al., 2005; Foerster et al., 2012; Jones et al., 2018; Luiselli et al., 2019). According to our results, determinants and preferences can vary not only between and within user groups, but also depending on taxa, revealing the full complexity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In our analyses, we found the strongest support for effects of economic reliance for hunters. Here hunters more dependent on bushmeat income targeted a broader diversity of species (Figure 3, 1a, 2a, 3a), probably because they preferred species‐rich PAs over agricultural landscapes as hunting grounds (Bachmann et al., 2019). Furthermore, the long travel distance to and within the PAs (22.45 ± 19.88 km), and the associated risk of apprehension by park rangers may foster opportunistic behaviour, causing hunters to target any profitable species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This relationship might be non‐causal, as both variables can be indicators of higher market accessibility, which can facilitate the sale of bushmeat, and thus spur commercial hunting (Allebone‐Webb et al., 2011; Junker et al., 2015). When assuming causality here, reducing economic reliance of hunters on bushmeat through the provision of alternative livelihoods, ideally combined with enforcement and sanctions (Bachmann et al., 2019; Sylvia & Coad, 2019), could reduce offtake of duikers and primates. However, primates were consumed independently from price and the availability of proteins, hence, providing consumers with bushmeat substitutes would probably decrease demand on rodents, but not necessarily on vulnerable species like primates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lastly, the amount of meat required to fulfil household protein and micronutrient requirements can increase reliance on bushmeat and affect selectivity (Friant et al., 2020). We therefore included the number of dependent children per household, as the pressure to provide nourishment or money may be higher for households with more mouths to feed (Bachmann et al., 2019; Kouassi et al., 2017; Overview see Table 2, summary statistic Appendix Tables A.1.4–A.1.6).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Paradoxically, with drivers varying between species, the probability of a successful outcome from a conservation strategy designed to reduce overall bushmeat utilization, would decline with a given species’ rarity. Another often neglected element is the structure of the bushmeat trade chain, which involves multiple actors, intertwined through complex demand–supply dynamics (Bachmann et al., 2019; McNamara et al., 2016). In wildlife depleted areas, hunters may determine the supply (Allebone‐Webb et al., 2011; McNamara et al., 2016), whereas in remote areas with higher availability of bushmeat, the few present traders may determine which species reach urban markets by controlling supply to increase profit (Allebone‐Webb et al., 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Saving rodents, losing primates—Why we need tailored bushmeat management strategies

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Saving rodents, losing primates—Why we need tailored bushmeat management strategies

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Range‐wide indicators of African great ape density distribution

Ordaz‐Németh

Sop

Amarasekaran³

et al. 2021

American J Primatol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Species distributions are influenced by processes occurring at multiple spatial scales. It is therefore insufficient to model species distribution at a single geographic scale, as this does not provide the necessary understanding of determining factors. Instead, multiple approaches are needed, each differing in spatial extent, grain, and research objective. Here, we present the first attempt to model continent‐wide great ape density distribution. We used site‐level estimates of African great ape abundance to (1) identify socioeconomic and environmental factors that drive densities at the continental scale, and (2) predict range‐wide great ape density. We collated great ape abundance estimates from 156 sites and defined 134 pseudo‐absence sites to represent additional absence locations. The latter were based on locations of unsuitable environmental conditions for great apes, and on existing literature. We compiled seven socioeconomic and environmental covariate layers and fitted a generalized linear model to investigate their influence on great ape abundance. We used an Akaike‐weighted average of full and subset models to predict the range‐wide density distribution of African great apes for the year 2015. Great ape densities were lowest where there were high Human Footprint and Gross Domestic Product values; the highest predicted densities were in Central Africa, and the lowest in West Africa. Only 10.7% of the total predicted population was found in the International Union for Conservation of Nature Category I and II protected areas. For 16 out of 20 countries, our estimated abundances were largely in line with those from previous studies. For four countries, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia, and South Sudan, the estimated populations were excessively high. We propose further improvements to the model to overcome survey and predictor data limitations, which would enable a temporally dynamic approach for monitoring great apes across their range based on key indicators.

show abstract

Fluid hunter motivation in Central Africa: Effects on behaviour, bushmeat and income

Froese,

Ebang Mbélé,

Beirne

et al. 2023

People and Nature

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individual motivation for the rural use of common‐pool resources (CPRs) can be fluid, with the line between subsistence and commercial often unclear and in flux. Implications of fluid motivation are understudied yet important for social–ecological systems (SESs), such as bushmeat hunting throughout Central Africa that is essential to local protein/nutrition, income and culture. Making locally informative predictions of multiple SESs nested within a landscape‐scale SES has been historically difficult, but community‐driven participatory approaches provide new kinds and quantities of data, opening previously inaccessible doors for research and governance. We apply hierarchical Bayesian structural equation modelling to a novel dataset of 910 hunts from 111 gun and trap hunters across nine villages in Gabon, generated in a participatory process whereby hunters conducted GPS self‐follows in conjunction with paraecologist surveys of their motivation, behaviour and offtake. We (i) establish the human behaviour driving gun‐hunting and trapping success and predict its effect on offtake across villages and (ii) link fluid motivation of gun hunters to their behaviour, number of animals hunted, biomass yielded and income earned. Gun hunts across villages yielded more animals during the night than the day, and when hunters brought high amounts of ammunition and walked far distances from villages. Gun hunts were less successful when coupled with trapping while per‐hunt success of trapping itself was generally low and difficult to predict. Fluid gun hunters hunted fewer animals when motivated strictly by subsistence, despite no reduction in ammunition brought or distance walked, while offtake from strictly commercial versus mixed motivation was the same. Numbers of animals hunted, biomass and income were tightly linked. We discuss the implications of these results for the ecological sustainability of hunting and participatory forecasting in bushmeat research and policy. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

show abstract

Disentangling economic, cultural, and nutritional motives to identify entry points for regulating a wildlife commodity chain

Cited by 17 publications

References 26 publications

Saving rodents, losing primates—Why we need tailored bushmeat management strategies

Saving rodents, losing primates—Why we need tailored bushmeat management strategies

Range‐wide indicators of African great ape density distribution

Fluid hunter motivation in Central Africa: Effects on behaviour, bushmeat and income

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About