The value of wildlife: -EN- -FR- -ES-
Abstract
The value of wildlife has been widely ignored or under-rated in the past by the international community. At most, wildlife was considered from the limited aesthetic and touristic aspects. This situation has changed somewhat. In the majority of the veterinary profession, which is largely livestock-oriented, wildlife is increasingly considered in terms of wild animal production and occupies just as relevant a position as domestic animal production. Some economists are now trying to quantify the informal nature of a large portion of the wildlife sector. The importance of wildlife to local communities is now globally recognised in community-based or participatory natural resources management programmes. The authors highlight not only the economic importance of wildlife (which amounts to billions of United States dollars world-wide), through consumptive and non-consumptive uses, but also the present and potential nutritional value, the ecological role as well as the socio-cultural significance of wildlife for human societies of both the developed and the developing worlds. Also addressed in this chapter is a discussion on one of the main threats to wildlife conservation which consists of the reduction or even retrieval of the different values wildlife can offer.
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?
While the ubiquity of Eastern gray squirrels reduces their novelty, the emergence of a variation in their pelage coloration may change the way they are generally regarded by communities.
“While the ubiquity of Eastern gray squirrels reduces their novelty, the emergence of a variation in their pelage coloration may change the way they are generally regarded by communities (Chardonnet et al., 2002;Pearce et al., 2017).”
From Of Rarity and Symbolism: Understanding Human Perceptions of Charismatic Color Morphs (2024) · cites this paper as Chardonnet et al., 2002
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 56 · Cited by 198
- Authors
- CHARDONNET, P., DES CLERS, B., FISHER, J. R., GERHOLD, R., JORI, F., & LAMARQUE, F.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'OIE
- Published
- 2002-04-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 15-51
- ISSN
- 0253-1933 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2167620687
- Cited by
- 198
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 2.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- fr
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Scientific and Technical Review (World Organisation for Animal Health) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Agritrop (Cirad) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Socioeconomics of Resources and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Keywords
- wildlife values, economic value of wildlife, wildlife conservation, non-consumptive use, consumptive use, community-based natural resource management, wildlife threats, wildlife economics
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Animal Husbandry, Animals, Wild, Conservation of Natural Resources, Developing Countries, Food Supply, Humans, Meat, Nutritive Value, Ecosystem, Developed Countries, Value of Life
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