Evidence or delusion: A critique of contemporary rhino horn demand reduction strategies
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
- Dang & Nielsen (2020). Evidence or delusion_A critique of contemporary rhino horn demand reduction strategies
Final published version, 644 KB, PDF document
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.
|Journal||Human Dimensions of Wildlife|
|Number of pages||11|
|Publication status||E-pub ahead of print - 5 Sep 2020|