who has ownership?

dagfft

Main

Home >Homework Answsers >Business & Finance homework help >Economics homework help

Read the case study on page 27 “Protecting Endangered Species with Private Property Rights.” Write an essay 1,000-1,250 words, answering the following questions:

Economists argue that scarcity is different than poverty. To understand why many wild animals are scarce we need to look at scarcity in the context of private property. Explain how scarcity is affected by private property rights in the case study.
Compare and contrast how incentives accompanying private property rights can both help protect and endanger the rhino, an endangered species.

Be sure to cite at least three relevant scholarly sources in support of your content. These sources can include trade journals and think tank reports.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

Case study

Have you ever wondered

why the wild tiger is endangered

in much of the

world but most cats are

thriving? Or why spotted

owls are threatened in

the Pacific Northwest but

chickens are not? Why

have elephant and rhinoceros

populations declined

in number but not cattle

or hogs? The incentives accompanying private ownership provide

the answer.

To understand why many wild animals are scarce, consider

what happens with animals that provide food, most of which are

privately owned. Suppose that people decided to eat less beef.

Beef prices would fall, and the incentive for individuals to dedicate

land and other resources to raise cattle would decline. The

result would be fewer cows. The market demand for beef creates

the incentive for suppliers to maintain herds of cattle and to protect

them under a system of private ownership.

In some ways, the rhinoceros is similar to a cow. A rhino,

like a large bull in a cattle herd, may charge if disturbed. At

3,000 pounds, a charging rhino can be very dangerous to humans.

Also like cattle, rhinos can be valuable to people—a

single horn from a black rhino, used for artistic carvings and

medicines, can sell for up to $30,000. But when hunting rhinos

and selling their horns is illegal, rhinos become a favorite

target of poachers—people who hunt illegally. Poachers are

sometimes even assisted by local people eager to see fewer

rhinos present because rhinos make life risky for humans and

they also compete for food and water.

However, rhinos are very different from cattle in one

important respect: in most of Africa where they naturally

range, private ownership of the rhino is prohibited. Since

1977, many nations have outlawed rhino hunting and forbidden

the sale of rhino parts. But this approach has only made

things worse for the rhino: between 1970 and 1994, the number

of black rhinos declined by 95%.1 According to South

African economist Michael ’t Sas-Rolfes, the trade ban “has

not had a discernible effect on rhino numbers and does not

seem to have stopped the trade in rhino horn. If anything,

the . . . listings led to a sharp increase in the black market

price of rhino horn, which simply fuelled further poaching

and encouraged speculative stockpiling of horn.”

But what if the powerful incentives created by private

ownership were instead brought to bear on the rhino? That actually

happened for a while in Zimbabwe. Landowners were

allowed to fence and manage game animals on their property.

Because they could profit from protecting the big animals,

some ranchers shifted their operations from producing cattle to

wildlife protection, ecotourism, and hunting, often in cooperation

with neighboring landowners. Under these rules, the black

rhino population climbed dramatically. And because ranchers

were allowed to cooperate and combine operations, they could

reduce fencing between ranches and manage the larger preserves

as a unit, better helping not only rhinos but other valued

wildlife as well.

Indeed, several parts of southern Africa have a tradition,

extending back to the 1960s, of allowing ownership of wildlife.

Namibia, for example, gave those rights to private landholders

in the 1960s and extended them to communal lands in the

mid-1990s. With this policy change, tribal communities began

to hold ownership rights over the wildlife in their communal

areas and were able to keep all revenues from wildlife. This

transformed the incentives in Namibia. By 2007, Namibian

communities were receiving $4.3 million from wildlife, says

Fred Nelson, a wildlife expert who spent 11 years in Africa developing

wildlife management partnerships. The revenues come

primarily from trophy hunting and tourism ventures—important

new opportunities in semi-arid areas where income-earning options

are limited.2

To ensure that trophy hunting of elephants, lions, and other

animals would be profitable, local communities had to protect

the animals and their habitat. These new incentives have led to

a natural resurgence in wildlife numbers—lions are returning

to areas where they had been overhunted—as well as deliberate

restocking of wildlife. Even the number of black rhinos in

Namibia has risen from 707 in 1997, to 1,134 in 2004.

Citing the 40 years of progress in Namibia, first by

giving private ranchers rights to wildlife on their property

and then extending them to tribal communities, Nelson

told an interviewer in 2013, “This is an extraordinary

achievement due to a very iconoclastic approach to conservation.”

3 Clearly, property rights to ownership or use

are one key to conservation.

1See Michael De Alessi, Private Conservation and Black Rhinos in

Zimbabwe: The Savé Valley and Bubiana Conservancies, available online at

www.cei.org/gencon/025,01687.cfm.

2Fred Nelson, “Conservation Can Work: Southern Africa Shows Its Neighbours

How,” Swara (East African Wildlife Society) 32, no. 2 (2009): 36–37.

3Interview with Fred Nelson, found on March 14, 2013, at www.iucn.org/

about/union/commissions/sustainable_use_and_livelihoods_specialist_

group/sulinews/issue_2/sn2_frednelson.cfm

protecting endangered Species with private-property rights

appliCatiOnS in eCOnOMiCS

9781337345866, Economics: Private and Public Choice, Fifteenth Edition, Gwartney/Stroup/Sobel/Macpherson - © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. No distribution allowed without express authorization. Distributed by Grand Canyon University.

Rubic


25.0 % Read the case study on page 27, Protecting Endangered Species with Private Property Rights. Write an essay 1,000-1,250 words, answering the following questions, 1. Economists argue that scarcity is different than poverty. To understand why many wild animals are scarce we need to look at scarcity in the context of private property. Explain how scarcity is affected by private property rights in the case study.	Essay does not explain how scarcity is affected by private property rights in the case study.	Essay somewhat explains how scarcity is affected by private property rights in the case study. The topic is skimmed over and is lacking depth of any kind. Demonstrates poor understanding of topic.	Essay explains how scarcity is affected by private property rights in the case study with some level of depth; explanation is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Demonstrates a minimal understanding of the topic.	Essay explains how scarcity is affected by private property rights in the case study with accurate details and evidence; explanation provides analysis with clear evidence to support claims.	Essay explains how scarcity is affected by private property rights in the case study with quality details and factual evidence; explanation is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Demonstrates an exceptional understanding of topic.
35.0 % 2. Compare and contrast how incentives accompanying private property rights can both help protect and endanger the rhino, an endangered species.	Essay does not compare and contrast how incentives accompanying private property rights can both help protect and endanger the rhino, an endangered species.	Essay somewhat compares and contrasts how incentives accompanying private property rights can both help protect and endanger the rhino, an endangered species. The topic is skimmed over and is lacking depth of any kind. Demonstrates poor understanding of topic.	Essay compares and contrasts how incentives accompanying private property rights can both help protect and endanger the rhino, an endangered species with some level of depth; explanation is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Demonstrates a minimal understanding of the topic.	Essay compares and contrasts how incentives accompanying private property rights can both help protect and endanger the rhino, an endangered species with accurate details and evidence; explanation provides analysis with clear evidence to support claims.	Essay compares and contrasts how incentives accompanying private property rights can both help protect and endanger the rhino, an endangered species with quality details and factual evidence; explanation is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Demonstrates an exceptional understanding of topic.
10.0 % Utilize the GCU Library to locate at least three relevant, scholarly sources in support of the content.	No outside sources are cited.	Some sources may be cited but they are not scholarly and/or relevant.	At least three relevant, scholarly sources are cited in a loosely connected, vague way.	At least three relevant, scholarly sources are cited in a well-connected way that clearly support claims.	At least three relevant, scholarly sources are cited and are flawlessly integrated into the essay to support the claims made therein.
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
10.0 % Paragraph Development and Transitions	Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence. No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope. Organization is disjointed.	Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness. Some degree of organization is evident.	Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.	A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent. Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose.	There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions. Ideas progress and relate to each other. Paragraph and transition construction guide the reader. Paragraph structure is seamless.
10.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
10.0 %Format
5.0 % Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	Appropriate template is not used or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.	Appropriate template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	Appropriate template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	All format elements are correct.
5.0 % Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment)	No reference page is included. No citations are used.	Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.	Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.	Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and style is usually correct.	In-text citations and a reference page are complete. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
100 % Total Weightage