A Different Way to Study Illegal Wildlife Consumption
Studying illegal behaviour presents a challenge for scientists. When researchers ask people directly whether they buy or consume wildlife products, the answers are not always reliable.
After all, admitting to illegal activity is not something most people are comfortable doing.
This research explores a creative approach known as the nominative technique, a survey method designed to estimate wildlife consumption without asking individuals to confess their own behaviour.
Instead of asking participants about themselves, researchers ask about the behaviour of people within their social networks. This approach allows scientists to gain a clearer picture of how common wildlife consumption may be within a community while protecting the anonymity of participants.
The technique can help researchers compare different types of responses and better understand whether direct answers are likely to reflect real behaviour.
Researchers tested this approach through 179 interviews in Luang Prabang, Laos, using bear part consumption as a case study. In this case, direct questioning produced a higher estimate of bear part use than the nominative technique, suggesting that use of bear parts may not be especially hidden or sensitive in this part of Northern Laos.
Accurate information like this is essential for conservation planning. Without reliable data, it becomes much harder to understand where demand for wildlife products is coming from or how widespread the problem may be.
For organisations working to reduce demand for wildlife products, including Free the Bears, improved research tools like this help guide education campaigns and policy responses aimed at ending the exploitation of bears for bile and other body parts.
Publication authors: Elizabeth Oneita Davis, Brian Crudge, Jenny Anne Glikman