Preventing Wildlife Crimes: Solutions That Can Overcome the ‘Tragedy of the Commons’

Abstract

The 'tragedy of the commons' dilemma occurs when individuals working independently of one another, will overuse a common-property resource for short-term benefits while decimating the resource for long-term use (Hardin 1968). This is often found in the field of wildlife crimes where species become overexploited to increase short-term profits while endangering and eliminating a natural resource for future users. Wildlife crimes suffering from the 'tragedy' need to be prevented in order for species to avoid extinction while also conserving a natural resource that monetarily benefits numerous people and their respective communities. Current approaches to the illegal wildlife trade include implementing trade bans or regulatory schemes at the national and international level, yet their effectiveness of reducing the trade is unknown. Perhaps, a better approach in reducing the illegal wildlife trade is a combination of making it more difficult to poach (i.e. situational crime prevention) and incentivizing locals to abstain from poaching. This paper will first review the literature on wildlife crimes and then use a case study approach that will examine the literature on the illegal parrot trade, the market for wildlife skins, and over-fishing. Through these case studies, a comprehensive review of the problem will be detailed as well as innovative conservation solutions that show promise in reducing the poaching and exploitation of species. Amongst these solutions will be the use of situational crime prevention that has shown immediate reductions in crime when tailored towards highly-targeted areas and crimes.

Wildlife crime: a conceptual integration, literature review, and methodological critique

“…Based on the theories of rational choice (Cornish and Clarke 2014) and routine activities (Cohen and Felson 1979), SCP aims to reduce criminal opportunities through various techniques that take advantage of five crime reducing mechanisms: (1) making it harder; (2) less rewarding, (3) riskier to commit crime (Clarke 2009), (4) reducing provocations (Wortley 2001), and (5) removing excuses (Homel and Clarke 1997). Crime scientists have already suggested ways in which SCP might be applied to reduce poaching of elephants (Lemieux and Clarke 2009), rhinos (Eloff and Lemieux 2014), parrots (Pires 2012), tigers ) and wildlife more generally (Lemieux 2014;Petrossian et al 2016;Pires and Moreto 2011;Schneider 2008Schneider , 2012). Yet, these suggestions have not been applied in the field.…”

“…Various strategies adopted by conservationists to protect environmental biodiversity align with principles of SCP, differing only in terminology (Pires and Moreto 2011). While conservationists use an environmental protection framework for interventions, the objective of such an approach is reflective of the objective of crime science in that prevention is the motivation.…”

Introducing intelligence-led conservation: bridging crime and conservation science

“…forensic DNA), including those from a crime science perspective (see Smith and Tilley 2005), may be incorporated to supplement and support conservation intelligence. Such information can then be used to inform policy as well as avenues for prevention, including situational crime prevention (Pires and Moreto 2011) and the market reduction approach (Schneider 2008).…”

Preventing Philippine Eagle hunting: what are we missing?

“…In designing such wildlife offense-deterring environments, the Situational Crime Prevention (SCP) framework is very instructive. An emerging theory in contemporary criminology, the SCP is seen to supplement the many limitations of formal social control, especially in developing countries where law enforcement resources are very limited (Pires & Moreto 2011).…”