Role of Prices and Wealth in Consumer Demand for Bushmeat in Gabon, Central Africa
Abstract
Abstract: Unsustainable hunting of wildlife for food is often a more immediate and significant threat to the conservation of biological diversity in tropical forests than deforestation. Why people eat wildlife is debated. Some may eat bushmeat because they can afford it; others may eat it because it is familiar, traditional, confers prestige, tastes good, or adds variety. We completed a survey of 1208 rural and urban households in Gabon, Africa, in 2002–2003 to estimate the effect of wealth and prices on the consumption of wildlife and other sources of animal protein. Consumption of bushmeat, fish, chicken, and livestock increased with increasing household wealth, and as the price of these commodities rose, consumption declined. Although the prices of substitutes for bushmeat did not significantly, in statistical terms, influence bushmeat consumption, as the price of wildlife increased and its consumption fell, the consumption of fish rose, indicating that fish and bushmeat were dietary substitutes. Our results suggest that policy makers can use economic levers such as taxation or supply reduction through better law enforcement to change demand for wildlife. These measures will help to regulate unsustainable exploitation and reduce the risk of irreversible loss of large‐bodied and slow‐reproducing wildlife species. If policy makers focus solely on reducing the unsustainable consumption of wildlife, they may see adverse impacts on the exploitation of fish. Furthermore, policy makers must ensure that raising household wealth through development assistance does not result in undesirable impacts on the conservation status of wildlife and fish.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In such context, bushmeat consumption level can vary according to variations in prices of alternative foods, such as fish.
“In such context, bushmeat consumption level can vary according to variations in prices of alternative foods, such as fish (Wilkie et al. 2005).”
From Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins (2011) · cites this paper as Wilkie et al. 2005
Consumption in Libreville (Gabon) is estimated at 7.2 kg/person/year.
“consumption in Libreville (Gabon) is estimated at 7.2 kg/person/year (Wilkie et al. 2005),”
From Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins (2011) · cites this paper as Wilkie et al. (2005)
When wild fish is available it can outweigh the importance of bushmeat in the diet of forest dwellers.
“When wild fish is available it can outweigh the importance of bushmeat in the diet of forest dwellers (Rushton et al. 2005 in Peru or Wilkie et al. 2005 in Gabon).”
From Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins (2011) · cites this paper as Wilkie et al. 2005
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins
Nasi, R., Taber, A., & Van Vliet, N. (2011) · International Forestry Review · doi:10.1505/146554811798293872 · Cited by 457 · see citing works
- Authors
- WILKIE, D. S., STARKEY, M., ABERNETHY, K., EFFA, E. N., TELFER, P., & GODOY, R.
- Affiliations
- Wildlife Conservation Society (US)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Centre International de Recherches Médicales de Franceville (GA)
- Brandeis University (US)
- Venue
- Conservation Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-01-19
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 268-274
- ISSN
- 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-1739
- OpenAlex
- W2022078393
- Cited by
- 296
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 7.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Conservation Biology (publishedVersion)
- Stirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Wildlife Conservation Society
- Economic and Social Research Council
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Wildlife Conservation and Criminology Analyses
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Socioeconomics of Resources and Conservation
- Keywords
- bushmeat consumption, wildlife hunting, household wealth, food prices, dietary substitution, fish consumption, animal protein sources, wildlife conservation, economic incentives for conservation, law enforcement, tropical forest biodiversity, Gabon
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review