Evidence or delusion: A critique of contemporary rhino horn demand reduction strategies

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Evidence or delusion : A critique of contemporary rhino horn demand reduction strategies. / Dang, Vu Hoai Nam; Nielsen, Martin Reinhardt.

In: Human Dimensions of Wildlife, Vol. 26, No. 4, 2021, p. 390-400.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Dang, VHN & Nielsen, MR 2021, 'Evidence or delusion: A critique of contemporary rhino horn demand reduction strategies', Human Dimensions of Wildlife, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 390-400. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2020.1818896

APA

Dang, V. H. N., & Nielsen, M. R. (2021). Evidence or delusion: A critique of contemporary rhino horn demand reduction strategies. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 26(4), 390-400. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2020.1818896

Vancouver

Dang VHN, Nielsen MR. Evidence or delusion: A critique of contemporary rhino horn demand reduction strategies. Human Dimensions of Wildlife. 2021;26(4):390-400. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2020.1818896

Author

Dang, Vu Hoai Nam ; Nielsen, Martin Reinhardt. / Evidence or delusion : A critique of contemporary rhino horn demand reduction strategies. In: Human Dimensions of Wildlife. 2021 ; Vol. 26, No. 4. pp. 390-400.

Bibtex

@article{ef951b3330bb4ed5aff9bbf521a71e45,
title = "Evidence or delusion: A critique of contemporary rhino horn demand reduction strategies",
abstract = "Considerable effort has been devoted to reducing rhinoceros (i.e., rhino) horn demand by changing consumer behavior. Implementing organizations often claim that their campaigns are based on reliable insights into rhino horn demand and that there is no scientific support for any medicinal effects of rhino horn. In this opinion piece, we evaluate the scientific evidence supporting this claim and discuss how campaigns using a delusive and paternalistic approach may backfire. As the use of rhino horn in traditional medicine has a thousand-year history, it is unlikely that such deeply entrenched beliefs will be swayed by a one-sided representation of the limited scientific evidence evaluating its efficacy. Difficulties in interviewing rhino horn consumers have further contributed to lacking information about their values and characteristics. We call for more scientific evidence and a more culturally nuanced approach to rhino horn demand reduction campaigns.",
author = "Dang, {Vu Hoai Nam} and Nielsen, {Martin Reinhardt}",
year = "2021",
doi = "10.1080/10871209.2020.1818896",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "390--400",
journal = "Human Dimensions of Wildlife",
issn = "1087-1209",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evidence or delusion

T2 - A critique of contemporary rhino horn demand reduction strategies

AU - Dang, Vu Hoai Nam

AU - Nielsen, Martin Reinhardt

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - Considerable effort has been devoted to reducing rhinoceros (i.e., rhino) horn demand by changing consumer behavior. Implementing organizations often claim that their campaigns are based on reliable insights into rhino horn demand and that there is no scientific support for any medicinal effects of rhino horn. In this opinion piece, we evaluate the scientific evidence supporting this claim and discuss how campaigns using a delusive and paternalistic approach may backfire. As the use of rhino horn in traditional medicine has a thousand-year history, it is unlikely that such deeply entrenched beliefs will be swayed by a one-sided representation of the limited scientific evidence evaluating its efficacy. Difficulties in interviewing rhino horn consumers have further contributed to lacking information about their values and characteristics. We call for more scientific evidence and a more culturally nuanced approach to rhino horn demand reduction campaigns.

AB - Considerable effort has been devoted to reducing rhinoceros (i.e., rhino) horn demand by changing consumer behavior. Implementing organizations often claim that their campaigns are based on reliable insights into rhino horn demand and that there is no scientific support for any medicinal effects of rhino horn. In this opinion piece, we evaluate the scientific evidence supporting this claim and discuss how campaigns using a delusive and paternalistic approach may backfire. As the use of rhino horn in traditional medicine has a thousand-year history, it is unlikely that such deeply entrenched beliefs will be swayed by a one-sided representation of the limited scientific evidence evaluating its efficacy. Difficulties in interviewing rhino horn consumers have further contributed to lacking information about their values and characteristics. We call for more scientific evidence and a more culturally nuanced approach to rhino horn demand reduction campaigns.

U2 - 10.1080/10871209.2020.1818896

DO - 10.1080/10871209.2020.1818896

M3 - Journal article

VL - 26

SP - 390

EP - 400

JO - Human Dimensions of Wildlife

JF - Human Dimensions of Wildlife

SN - 1087-1209

IS - 4

ER -

ID: 247933727