Namibia: A Model of How Deterrence Theory Can Lead to the African Rhino’s Salvation
By: Margaret Marshall
The deterrence theory is a concept that has woven itself into the very fabric of the criminal justice system.[1] It is a relatively simple theory to grasp—if you punish those for committing crimes, then others will be deterred from committing said crimes.[2] The concept was brought to life over 250 years ago by Italian philosopher and economist, Ceasare Beccaria, who wrote that “laws were necessary . . . and a violation of laws should result in punishment whose purpose ‘is no other, than to prevent others from committing the like offence.’”[3] This theory has been tested and utilized across the globe and in different aspects of criminal law, with varying success.[4] One area that has shown the potential for success in the use of the deterrence theory is illegal wildlife poaching.[5]
Recently, Namibia has proven that the use of a modified deterrence theory approach, which includes heightening punishment for illegal poaching to deter international crime rings, coupled with heightened aid for local villagers forced to poach out of desperation as its own means of deterrence, has had a positive effect in preserving the country’s most vulnerable species—African Rhinos.[6]
Poaching, and, more specifically, Rhino poaching, is a criminal activity that has plagued Namibia for decades, and at one point nearly wiped out Namibia’s entire population of African Black Rhinos.[7] Currently, there are around 5,500 African Black Rhinos that reside in Namibia, and that number is steadily on the rise.[8] However, only fifteen years ago, poaching nearly decimated the Black Rhino population in Namibia.[9] In just a thirty-five year span, between 1960 and 1995, Namibia’s Black Rhino population dropped by an astounding 96.7%, with just 2,300 Black Rhinos remaining in the wild.[10] With Namibia housing nearly half of the world’s Black Rhino population, this poaching-induced plummet pushed the Black Rhino to the very edge of extinction.[11]
The crime of illegal wildlife poaching is one that draws individuals in from all walks of life due to two primary reasons. The first reason is the potential monetary gain from selling wildlife parts on the illegal black market, which draws in individuals who control and run the illegal international wildlife crime rings.[12] Rhino horn, at one point, was worth over $100,000 per kilogram, making it worth more than its weight in gold.[13] Most of these illegally obtained rhino horns makes their way overseas to illegal black markets in countries like China and Vietnam where the horns are sold under the guise of having restorative medicinal properties.[14] In addition, the second reason for illegal wildlife poaching is it is a means for disenfranchised individuals to support themselves and their families.[15] These individuals are often local villagers who either poach to individually sell the bush meat for income,[16] or else sell the animal to a larger international crime ring group, where these villagers are sometimes paid as little as $15, while the middleman makes the real money.[17] Clearly, the monetary reward for international crime rings and the means of income for disenfranchised individuals from illegal wildlife poaching is an indication that there needs to be some form of deterrence theory utilized to stop illegal poaching at all levels.
Truly, no country has seen greater success in utilizing the deterrence theory to inhibit illegal wildlife poaching than Namibia.[18] Namibia has been spearheading the campaign for the use of the deterrence theory to combat illegal wildlife poaching for nearly a decade, and the results have been evident. In 2016, a Namibian court sentenced four Chinese citizens who attempted to smuggle fourteen rhino horns out of the country to fourteen years imprisonment.[19] The magistrate who oversaw the trial noted that “[t]he message must be clear to the rest of the community and the international community that this type of behaviour will not be tolerated.”[20] Since this sentencing, Namibia has employed the deterrence theory to an even greater extent in illegal wildlife poaching. This past year, Namibia increased its fines for poaching to 25,000,000 Namibian dollars (1.43 million U.S. dollars) from 200,000 Namibian Dollars (13,431 U.S. dollars), and the potential prison sentence time has risen from twenty years to twenty-five years.[21] Since this increase in jail time and fines has been implemented, rhino poaching has fallen by over 63% from 2019 to 2020.[22] In addition, not only has Namibia strengthened its use of the deterrence theory in combatting illegal wildlife poaching with the hopes of dissuading major crime rings from seeking out rhino horn, it has also implemented additional funds to wildlife management, which includes aiding local villages, with the hopes of utilizing a reward system to deter local villagers from seeking poaching out of desperation.[23] Namibia’s Minister of Environment, Forestry, and Tourism, Pohamba Shifeta noted that:
The main objectives and outcomes of the wildlife and protected areas conservation programme will be to increase the income generated for communities from wildlife and forest products, strengthen governance in conservation and community forests, create more employment for rural communities and provide rural communities with game meat for household consumption.[24]
Namibia’s use of a modified deterrence theory has proven immensely successful. On the one hand, by increasing the punishment that poachers could face by increasing fines and prison time, Namibia has deterred the international crime rings who poach for the immense monetary gain from selling wildlife parts like rhino horns. With fines heightened to over 1.3 million U.S. dollars, and the prison time increasing to 25 years, many poachers undoubtedly see the risk of being caught as far outweighing the potential monetary reward.[25] In addition, Namibia has deterred local villagers from committing these crimes not through punishment, but through reward of increased funding and job opportunities to local villages, thereby eliminating the need for poaching in these villages out of sheer desperation.[26] Namibia’s approach has proven that a modified deterrence theory can be successfully used to combat illegal wildlife poaching. To save the African Rhino and other endangered species like it, Namibia’s modified deterrence theory approach should be utilized by other countries to combat poaching at all levels.
Picture Credit: Lucas Alexander, Wikimedia Commons
#Namibia #Poaching #African #Rhino #Marshall #Deterrence #International #Law
[1] Kelli D. Tomlinson, An Examination of Deterrence Theory: Where Do We Stand?, U.S.Courts.Gov 1 (Dec. 2016), https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/80_3_4_0.pdf.
[2] Id.
[3] Ben Johnson, Do Criminal Laws Deter Crime? Deterrence Theory in Criminal Justice Policy: A Primer, MN House Research 3 (Jan. 2019), https://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/deterrence.pdf.
[4] Id.
[5] Nyasha Nyaungwa, Rhino Poaching in Namibia Down 63% on Tougher Policing, Penalties (Mfuneko Tyana & Barbara Lewis eds., Reuters, Aug. 7, 2020, 8:31 AM) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-namibia-poaching-rhino/rhino-poaching-in-namibia-down-63-on-tougher-policing penaltiesidUSKCN2531TD#:~:text=Rhino%20poaching%20in%20Namibia%20down%2063%25%20on%20tougher%20policing%2C%20penalties,2%20Min%20Read&text=WINDHOEK%2C%20Aug%207%20(Reuters),sentences%20and%20fines%20for%20poachers.
[6] Id.
[7] Extreme Namibia—The World’s Most Free-Roaming Black Rhinos, Namibia Extreme Horizions (last visited Aug. 28, 2020), https://namibiatourism.com.na/blog/EXTREME-NAMIBIA-the-world-s-most-free-roaming-black-rhinos
[8] Id.
[9] Id.
[10] Id.
[11] Id.
[12] Neha Jain, Probing Rural Poachers in Africa: Why do they Poach?, Mongabay (Mar. 5, 2020) https://news.mongabay.com/2017/03/probing-rural-poachers-in-africa-why-do-they-poach/.
[13]Gwynn Guilford, Why Does a Rhino Horn Cost $300,000? Because Vietnam Thinks It Cures Cancer and Hangovers, The Atlantic (May 15, 2103), https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/05/why-does-a-rhino-horn-cost-300-000-because-vietnam-thinks-it-cures-cancer-and-hangovers/275881/#:~:text=The%20answer%20is%20Vietnam.,%2C%20depending%20on%20the%20species.).
[14] Id.
[15] Jain, supra note 12.
[16] Id.
[17] Id.
[18] Nyaungwa, supra note 5.
[19] Werner Menges, Rhino Horn Smugglers Get 14 Years in Prison, The Namibian (Mar. 12, 2020) https://www.namibian.com.na/156302/archive-read/Rhino-horn-smugglers-get-14-years-in-prison.
[20] Id.
[21] Nyaungwa, supra note 5.
[22] Id.
[23] Inès Magoum, Namibia: Government Allocates US$12 Million for Wildlife Management, Afrik 21 (Jun. 19, 2020) https://www.afrik21.africa/en/namibia-government-allocates-us12-million-for-wildlife-management/.
[24] Id.
[25] Nyaungwa, supra note 5.
[26] Magoum, supra note 23.