Before reading this article, we sincerely invite you to click "Follow" at the top right, which is convenient for you to discuss and share, and you can read the latest content in time, thank you for your support.
To reduce poaching, it is recommended to trade in rhino horn legally.
To test the implications of this proposition, we conducted a choice experiment with 345 rhino horn consumers in Vietnam, investigating their preferences for legality, source, price, and equivalent efficacy when deciding to buy rhino horn.
We calculated the consumer's willingness to pay for each attribute level.
Consumers prefer and are willing to pay more for wild rhino horn than semi-wild and farmed rhino horn, but show the strongest preference for legal rhino horn, although higher-income consumers are less concerned about legality.
Peers who used rhino horn without positive effects reduced their preference for wild rhino horn and increased their preference for legality.
Our findings suggest that the legal trade in rhino horn is likely to continue to face a similar competitive black market.
Whether poaching will decrease depends on the legal supply of wild and semi-wild rhino horn, the ability to change consumer preferences, and regulatory efforts.
In the past decade, nearly 10,000 rhinos have been killed by poachers in Africa.
The remaining rhino population is steadily declining, and less than 30,000 left in 2020 have already invested considerable effort in the campaign to reduce the demand for rhino horn.
But many of these activities have been criticized for lacking in-depth knowledge of the target audience, reducing demand for rhino horn and other illegal wildlife products, requiring an understanding of the determinants of demand and the consumer's decision-making process, and an open question is how elastic rhino horn demand is to price changes In Vietnam, most rhino horn consumers buy a small piece of rhino horn (usually 100 grams), ground into powder, and use it for a long time.
This powder, mixed with water, was shared with business partners at gatherings to strengthen relationships, or as a hangover treatment and after-the-fact body detoxification based on interviews with 50 rhino horn consumers, and it was found that the willingness to buy and/or use rhino horn was most influenced by individuals in the direct network of potential consumers who had experience using the product.
In some countries where rhinos are distributed, particularly South Africa, rhinos are often dehorned to discourage poaching, which has led to increasing stocks of rhino horn, and there have been proposals that rhino horn could be sold in legal trade to reduce poaching.
However, the legal outcome of international trade in rhino horn remains controversial and proponents argue that selling sustainably harvested and stored rhino horn can meet consumer demand.
Generate revenue to fund anti-poaching activities, create jobs for local communities, deter poachers, and encourage private rhino owners to protect rhinos Most of the Chinese medicine interviewed in Hong Kong also supports legal industry and Guangdong Province in China, however, there is little evidence of consumer preference for legal trade, and existing research provides conflicting predictions about its likely outcomes.
The current stockpile, dominated by white rhino horn, appears to be large, provided by rhino populations, and covers a range of management practices from wild to "farmed".
While most white rhinos are considered wild, many subpopulations live on privately owned pastures managed on large or semi-large-scale management, and some subpopulations live in extensive, semi-extensive or semi-intensive management environments, generally growing faster than captive rhinos and can support the conservation of wild populations as a supplementary source.
Some private owners keep their rhinos in more centrally managed semi-wild environments, providing supplemental feeding, water and veterinary care, and it is worth noting that the term "farmed" rhinos can be misunderstood and confused with "captive breeding."
However, intensive rhino management that fits the accepted description of "agriculture" is very limited, and almost all African rhinos are considered at least "semi-wild".
Privately owned white rhinos are seen as a major source of rhino horn in the proposed legal trade, and in early 2020, nearly 50% of South Africa's white rhinos were in private game reserves, however, private rhino owners are facing increasing costs for safety measures.
This could lead them to abandon the coronavirus pandemic, hampering tourism and further creating significant financial challenges for rhino farms to operate, and it has been suggested that rhino owners may be increasingly willing to engage in legal rhino horn trade to offset these costs, although South Africa's domestic trade ban ended in 2017, with little revenue from rhino horn sales as international buyers can pay higher prices.
Here, we aim to assess the preferences and trade-offs between our own reported consumers and those who intend to buy rhino horn.
We investigate their options for purchasing rhino horn, including in the context of legal trade, to provide insights into the design of rhino horn demand reduction strategies, and to assess the possible outcomes of legal rhino horn trade.
Specifically, we interviewed these consumers and conducted a choice experiment to assess their preferences for different attributes of the product, including its origin, claimed efficacy, legitimacy, and price.
We compare the role of attributes in scenario calculations of willingness to pay (WTP).
In addition, we tested the impact of consumer sociodemographics, including interactions in the model to further explore which changes would most effectively reduce the demand for rhino horn and its impact on legal trade.
Vietnam and China are considered the two largest markets for rhino horn We conducted this study in Hanoi, the capital of Vietnam and the second most populous city, identified as a hot spot for trade and consumption of rhino horn.
As of 2019, the GDP per capita of the Greater Hanoi region is estimated at VND 6.34 million (about 1 million yuan) per month.
$270), luxury wildlife products are popular among Hanoi's wealthy class, and rhino horn trafficked from Africa is supplied both to local consumers and to Chinese tourists visiting the city, with the study focusing on local consumers.
The selection experiment and this study focused on using rhino horn as a source of body detox powder, treatment for hangovers, and sharing prestige.
To design selection experiments, we used a hybrid approach that combined literature reviews, interviews with key informants, focus group discussions, and pilot testing.
First, we reviewed the literature and conducted semi-structured interviews with representatives from Vietnam's CITES Authority, conservation organizations working in Hanoi, researchers, and experts on rhino horn issues to develop a list of attributes influencing the choice of rhino horn for consumption.
We then discussed this list with focus group participants made up of rhino horn users, intended users, and people with a history of trading rhino horn.
Between June and July 2019, six focus groups consisting of 3-5 participants were conducted.
The final list includes four attributes: the source of the horn, peer reference, the legitimacy of the horn, and the price per 100 grams of horn. The combination of attributes and their levels yielded 36 alternatives.
We used a d-efficient design from the software NGENE. The design consists of 12 choice sets, which are divided into two blocks, each containing 6 choice sets.
Each choice card consists of two scenarios, with conditions for buying rhino horn and an option to "not buy". With the exception of peer references, all attributes vary in the alternatives. Peer reference attributes with three levels are fixed within blocks to reduce the cognitive burden on respondents. We conducted design tests on a sample of 30 respondents.
Data from the pilot test was used to estimate the multinomial logit model (MNL). We use a priori in this model to update the design portfolio, but maintain the original basic structure.
Selection cards include descriptive images to describe attributes and differentiate their levels, reducing the cognitive burden on respondents.
Each respondent receives two different blocks, each containing six option sets.
The number and order of peers and blocks are systematically changed to avoid sequential effects and to ensure that the likelihood of independent effects is estimated. Respondents were randomly assigned one of them.
The implementation questionnaire included an introduction script describing the objectives of the study; Sign the informed consent form; structured questions about the respondent's behavior, beliefs, knowledge; A short video and selection experiment that includes a scenario description (i.e., about peer reference level), attributes, and its level to ensure respondents receive the same information from the research assistant.
An inexpensive talk script was integrated into the introduction to minimize bias stemming from the hypothetical nature of the selection experimentIn addition, respondents were reminded of the costs, benefits, and risks associated with their choice, including their budget constraints.
Follow-up questions were included to identify free riders and irrational respondents who did not strive to maximize utility.
Before completing the selection task, respondents were shown a short film on rhino farming and dehorning to illustrate the possibilities of sustainable and humane rhino horn production and to ensure a common frame of reference.
To avoid prejudice, people are careful to frame it in the middle.
Respondents were then asked to rate the importance of each attribute they chose (including source, peers, legitimacy, and price) on a four-point Likert scale (1 = not important, 4 = very important).
The questionnaire ended with questions about sociodemographic status, including whether anyone in the respondent's household was considered to be in urgent need of rhino horn for medical purposes.
The selection experiment was conducted on consumers who had consumed rhino horn at least once (hereinafter referred to as consumers) and prospective consumers who had not consumed rhino horn but expressed recent purchase intent (hereinafter referred to as "intended consumers") who had not consumed rhino horn but had not yet consumed it.
We provided respondents with available contact details. We used a snowballing approach to identify additional respondents through the personal network of lead authors and seven research assistants, expanding the initial sample to 347 consumers. Therefore, we cannot calculate the response rate.
From January to April 2020, data collection lasted four months.
The interview, including the selection experiment, lasted 20-30 minutes and was conducted face-to-face at a safe location of the respondent's choice
The selection experiment begins with the theory of random utility, which assumes that when an individual makes a choice, chooses an alternative that produces the highest level of utility (i.e., personal benefit), and that this utility is incorrectly observed.
The utility level is determined by the attribute level in the selected alternative plus random and unobservable components.
We implemented stochastic parameter logit (RPL) and latent class (LC) models with and without interaction with sociodemographic variables and other covariates.
The RPL model takes into account the heterogeneity of preferences and has the advantage of computational flexibility.
The RPL model also helps to loosen the independence assumption of uncorrelated alternatives for multiple logit models (IIA), which is generally inappropriate and we estimate that the RPL model has 1000 Halton lotteries.
We add explanatory variables, such as sociodemographics, behaviors, and beliefs, to the model by creating interactive terms with attributes.
We assume that all properties follow a normal distribution, except for price, which is a lognormal distribution, to avoid theoretical inconsistencies in positive preference prices.
We add an alternative specific constant (ASC) to the model, with a value of 1 for the "do not buy" option, otherwise a value of 0. ASC gets the preference not to buy, regardless of the attribute level of the other two alternatives.
Market Solutions for Biodiversity Conservation: Black Rhinoceros