Aiding Animals: Does Foreign Aid Reduce Wildlife Crime?

• Author: Jonas Gamso
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/10704965221134820
• Published date: 01 March 2023
• Date: 01 March 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

The Journal of Environment &

Development

2023, Vol. 32(1) 34–60

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/10704965221134820

journals.sagepub.com/home/jed

Aiding Animals: Does

Foreign Aid Reduce

Wildlife Crime?

Jonas Gamso

Abstract

The illegal wildlife trade has come to the forefront of global politics, driven by concerns

about biodiversity loss, illicit markets, and animal-borne infectious diseases. Yet,

poaching remains common in many countries. The persistence of illegal hunting is

attributable to (among other factors) poverty and poor labor market opportunities,

which leave individuals in some communities with few viable alternatives to wildlife

crime. Foreign aid that alleviates poverty and unemployment may, therefore, lead to a

reduction in illegal hunting. However, cross-national research on aid and economic

development offers mixed f‌indings, suggesting a conditional effect. Against this

backdrop, I theorize that aid reduces the economic pressures that contribute to

poaching, but only in countries with representative political institutions. I test a

corresponding hypothesis using data on elephant poaching in African and Asian

countries. My f‌indings show that aid is accompanied by a reduction in elephant poachi ng

in democracies, but not in authoritarian countries.

Keywords

foreign aid, wildlife crime, poaching, elephants, ivory, conservation

Introduction

The illegal wildlife trade has come to the forefront of global politics in recent years,

driven by concerns about biodiversity loss, illicit markets, and animal-borne infectious

diseases. The issue has taken on special urgency following the outbreak of COVID-19

(Roe et al., 2020), but steps by the international community to reduce poaching and

Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA

Corresponding Author:

Jonas Gamso, Thunderbird School of Global Management, Arizona State University, Pheonix, AZ 85004,

USA.

Email: jonas.gamso@thunderbird.asu.edu

demand for wild animal parts predate the pandemic. The Convention on the Inter-

national Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) was formed in

1973 to regulate the wildlife trade and a 2013 resolution to the UN Convention on

Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) encouraged member states to treat wildlife

traff‌icking by organized criminal groups as a serious crime. More recently, China and

the United States agreed to halt ivory trading in 2017 (Gamso, 2019) and the UN,

through Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 15, Target 15.7, committed to “take

urgent action to end poaching and traff‌icking of protected species of f‌lora and fauna and

address both demand and supply of illegal wildlife products.”

1

Likewise, the Con-

vention on Biological Diversity prioritized the conservation of endangered speci es

through its 2011–2020 targets,

2

particularly Target 12,

3

and through its proposed 2021–

2030 targets.

4

Despite these efforts by members of the international community, illegal hunting

remains common in many countries (Schlossberg et al., 2020). Evidence suggests that

poaching is driven by poverty and joblessness (Challender & MacMillan, 2014;

Hauenstein et al., 2019;Lundstrum & Giv´

a, 2020;Moneron et al., 2020), among other

factors,

5

as individuals in poor communities and with few job opportunities engage in

poaching because they lack viable alternatives (Adams et al., 2004). These root causes

of wildlife crime may be addressed by tackling poverty and by creating alternative

opportunities in the formal labor market (Poudyal et al., 2009)—although these must be

mere components of a wider, multi-faceted strategy that addresses each node of the

supply chain (Challender et al., 2015).

Foreign aid is one of the primary tools that the international community uses to

alleviate poverty and to generate economic activities in less developed countries.

Donors have provided billions of dollars in aid in hopes of fostering economic growth

and development (Qian, 2015), which may, in turn, reduce wildlife crime. Biodiversity

aid is also one of the tools that governments in rich countries have used in their efforts to

combat poaching and traff‌icking (Mass´

e & Margulies, 2020;World Bank, 2016).

While donor efforts are laudable, the effects of foreign aid have been f‌iercely

debated without a consensus emerging (Gulrajani, 2011) and, while various studies

have explored the relationships between aid and the environment (e.g., Arvin & Lew,

2009;Chao & Yu, 1999), little systematic research has been carried out to determine

whether aid deters wildlife crime. Against this backdrop, the study that follows explores

whether aid can help to reduce illegal hunting through its wider effects on economic

development. To do so, I conduct statistical analysis using data on elephant poaching

from the Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) program, which reports

illegally killed elephant carcasses in African and Asian countries.

I focus on elephant poaching for several reasons. First, demand for ivory has led

elephants to be among the most widely poached animals (Hauenstein et al., 2019),

which has driven down elephant populations around the world (Wittemyer et al., 2014).

Second, protecting elephants has become a priority among international political actors

and activists (Gamso, 2019), owing to the unique majesty and charm of these creatures,

as well as their important roles in the wider ecosystems in which they reside (Haynes,

Gamso 35