dc.contributor.author | Muchapondwa, Edwin | |
dc.contributor.author | Carlsson, Fredrik | |
dc.contributor.author | Köhlin, Gunnar | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2009-11-19T16:25:37Z | |
dc.date.available | 2009-11-19T16:25:37Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2009-11-19T16:25:37Z | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1403-2465 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2077/21443 | |
dc.description.abstract | If local communities living adjacent to the elephant see it as a burden, then they cannot be
trusted to be its stewards. To assess their valuation of it, a CVM study was conducted for one
CAMPFIRE district in Zimbabwe. Respondents were classi ed according to their preferences
over the elephant. The median WTP for the preservation of 200 elephants is ZW$260 (US$4.73)
for respondents who considered the elephant a public good while the same statistic is ZW$137
(US$2.49) for those favouring its translocation. The preservation of 200 elephants yields an
annual net worth of ZW$10,828 (US$196) to CAMPFIRE households. However, the majority
of households (62%) do not support elephant preservation. This is one argument against
devolution of elephant conservation to local communities. Adequate economic incentives must
be extended to local communities if their majority is to partake in sound elephant conservation.
External transfers constitute one way of providing additional economic incentives. | en |
dc.language.iso | eng | en |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Working Papers in Economics | en |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | 395 | en |
dc.subject | CAMPFIRE | en |
dc.subject | contingent valuation | en |
dc.subject | double bounded spike model | en |
dc.subject | elephant | en |
dc.subject | Zimbabwe | en |
dc.title | Can local communities in Zimbabwe be trusted with wildlife management?: Evidence from contingent valuation of elephants | en |
dc.type | Text | en |
dc.type.svep | report | en |