Science and Uncertainty in South Africa's Elephant Culling Debate

Paul Dickson and William M Adams

Environment and Planning C, 2009, vol. 27, issue 1, 110-123

Abstract: We analyse the debate about the culling of elephants in South Africa's national parks. This pits the need to reduce elephant density and grazing pressure to prevent environmental damage against animal-welfare concerns about the killing of elephants. This complex debate is characterised by factual uncertainty and moral complexity. The procull storyline suggests that high elephant densities pose a risk to biodiversity. The anticull standpoint critiques this position as politically and economically motivated and lacking in adequate scientific support. Both procull and anticull positions draw on science as a source of authority, and on the precautionary principle as a framework for making decisions. They differ in their interpretation of the scientific evidence for serious impacts of high elephant densities, the relations between scientific, ethical, and economic arguments, and the way uncertainty and the idea of a precautionary approach are used. A decision to resume culling of elephants in South Africa was made in February 2008, but debate continues.

Date: 2009
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/c0792j (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:envirc:v:27:y:2009:i:1:p:110-123

DOI: 10.1068/c0792j

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Environment and Planning C
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().