The "White Gold of Jihad": violence, legitimisation and contestation in anti-poaching strategies

White, Natasha

doi:10.2458/v21i1.21146

Cited by 25 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While there is growing attention in the research community to the subject of IWT, in‐depth, empirical studies examining the patterns, processes, and mechanisms of illicit trade in wild species remain a relatively new area of academic research (Rosen & Smith, ). Within the social sciences, studies of IWT span the fields of green criminology (e.g., Lavorgna, ; Ngoc & Wyatt, ; Wyatt, ), geography (Collard, ; Massé, ; Moore, ; White, ; Zhu, , ), and international politics (Duffy, ; Duffy, St John, Büscher, & Brockington, ; Elliot, ). Legal scholars have also engaged with IWT and the role and efficacy of legislation in combating IWT, with particular attention to transnational organized crime (Lee, ; Warchol, ; Zimmerman, ).…”

Section: Plant Blindness and Illegal Wildlife Tradementioning

confidence: 99%

Illegal wildlife trade and the persistence of “plant blindness”

Margulies

Bullough

Hinsley

et al. 2019

Plants People Planet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Societal Impact Statement A wide variety of plant species are threatened by illegal wildlife trade (IWT), and yet plants receive scant attention in IWT policy and research, a matter of pressing global concern. This review examines how “plant blindness” manifests within policy and research on IWT, with serious and detrimental effects for biodiversity conservation. We suggest several key points: (a) perhaps with the exception of the illegal timber market, plants are overlooked in IWT policy and research; (b) there is insufficient attention from funding agencies to the presence and persistence of illegal trade in plants; and (c) these absences are at least in part resultant from plant blindness as codified in governmental laws defining the meaning of “wildlife.” Summary This review investigates the ways in which “plant blindness,” first described by Wandersee and Schussler (1999, p. 82) as “the misguided anthropocentric ranking of plants as inferior to animals,” intersects with the contemporary boom in research and policy on illegal wildlife trade (IWT). We argue that plants have been largely ignored within this emerging conservation arena, with serious and detrimental effects for biodiversity conservation. With the exception of the illegal trade in timber, we show that plants are absent from much emerging scholarship, and receive scant attention by US and UK funding agencies often driving global efforts to address illegal wildlife trade, despite the high levels of threat many plants face. Our article concludes by discussing current challenges posed by plant blindness in IWT policy and research, but also suggests reasons for cautious optimism in addressing this critical issue for plant conservation.

show abstract

Section: Plant Blindness and Illegal Wildlife Tradementioning

confidence: 99%

Illegal wildlife trade and the persistence of “plant blindness”

Margulies

Bullough

Hinsley

et al. 2019

Plants People Planet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, some conservation nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and national governments have tried recently to claim that illegal wildlife hunting for ivory in the Horn of Africa is being used to fund Al Shabaab (a militia group based in Somalia but allied to Al Qaeda since 2012). These claims were reported in a 2012 report by Elephant Action League (EAL) (Kalron & Crosta ) and were taken up in the international media and in policy discussions (Lawson & Vines ; White ). Elsewhere, we questioned the evidence base of these claims (the EAL report was based on very limited empirical research in Somalia) and contend that the blunt links made between illegal hunting for ivory and terrorism are overly simplistic (Duffy et al.…”

Section: Structure Agency and Illegal Wildlife Huntingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a new understanding of the links between poverty and illegal wildlife hunting

Duffy

John

Büscher

et al. 2015

Conservation Biology

194

160

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation organizations have increasingly raised concerns about escalating rates of illegal hunting and trade in wildlife. Previous studies have concluded that people hunt illegally because they are financially poor or lack alternative livelihood strategies. However, there has been little attempt to develop a richer understanding of the motivations behind contemporary illegal wildlife hunting. As a first step, we reviewed the academic and policy literatures on poaching and illegal wildlife use and considered the meanings of poverty and the relative importance of structure and individual agency. We placed motivations for illegal wildlife hunting within the context of the complex history of how wildlife laws were initially designed and enforced to indicate how hunting practices by specific communities were criminalized. We also considered the nature of poverty and the reasons for economic deprivation in particular communities to indicate how particular understandings of poverty as material deprivation ultimately shape approaches to illegal wildlife hunting. We found there is a need for a much better understanding of what poverty is and what motivates people to hunt illegally.

show abstract

“…A good example is the link drawn between poaching and Al Shabaab, which can be traced back to a single investigation by the Elephant Action League (Kalron & Crosta 2012; see also White 2014 (Goldenberg 2013; The White House 2013). The idea that ivory poaching funds terrorism thus circulates in high political circles, but it does so on a paucity of clear evidence and using simplifications of a complex political economy of poaching.…”

Section: Anti-poaching As a Global Security Initiativementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Declaration proposes a broad palette of action, but that breadth is threatened by growing calls for stronger armed responses to poaching from a wide range of conservation non-governmental organizations (NGOs, including leading international organizations) and national governments (including the US Government; White 2014; Duffy 2015). We argue that these calls could be counter-productive because they are founded on limited knowledge about poverty and poaching, inadequately address rising wealth in user markets (Ayling 2013;Roe et al 2014), make oversimplified claims that trafficking is funding terrorism (White 2014), and do not adequately consider demand reduction strategies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The militarization of anti-poaching: undermining long term goals?

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryConservation is at a critical juncture because of the increase in poaching which threatens key species. Poaching is a major public concern, as indicated by the rises in rhino and elephant poaching, the United for Wildlife Initiative and the London Declaration, signed by 46 countries in February 2014. This is accompanied by an increasing calls for a more forceful response, especially to tackle the involvement of organized crime in wildlife trafficking. However, there is a risk that this will be counter-productive. Further, such calls are based on a series of assumptions which are worthy of greater scrutiny. First, calls for militarization are based on the idea that poverty drives poaching. Yet, poaching and trafficking are changing because of the shifting dynamics of poverty in supply countries, coupled with changing patterns of wealth in consumer markets. Second, the ways increases in poaching are being linked to global security threats, notably from Al Shabaab are poorly evidenced and yet circulate in powerful policy circles. There is a risk that militarization will place more heavily armed rangers in the centre of some of the most complex regional conflicts in the world (such as the Horn of Africa and Central Africa/Sahel region).

show abstract

The "White Gold of Jihad": violence, legitimisation and contestation in anti-poaching strategies

Cited by 25 publications

References 72 publications

Illegal wildlife trade and the persistence of “plant blindness”

Illegal wildlife trade and the persistence of “plant blindness”

Toward a new understanding of the links between poverty and illegal wildlife hunting

The militarization of anti-poaching: undermining long term goals?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About