We study the environmental and economic consequences of introducing a program to compensate peasants for damages caused by wildlife. We show that the widely held belief that compensation induces wildlife conservation may be erroneous. In a partially open economy, compensation can lower the wildlife stock and result in a net welfare loss for local people. In an open economy, compensation can trigger wildlife extinction and also reduce welfare. We identify the conditions leading to a reduction of the wildlife stock and discuss the implications for current and planned compensation programs in Africa and Asia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rondeau et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: