An Economic Analysis of the International Ivory Ban as Applied to Garrett hardin's "Tragedy of the Commons"
Abstract
"Some look at elephants and celebrate the· majesty of nature.
Others see only jewelry, ornaments, personal seals, dice, piano . keys,
billiard balls and knife handles that can be fashioned from an
elephant's massive ivory tusks" (54, p. 11). Both views differ
dramatically, but both assume that the elephant will continue to
exist, and that its existence directly benefits society. The African
elephant's continued existence, however, is anything but certain. It
may, in fact, become extinct within the next ten to twenty years.
The major objectives of this paper are to demonstrate precisely
how drastic the African elephant's position has become, and to
supply ·economic justification for the adoption of an international ban
on ivory as an appropriate means of preventing its future extinction.
In order to accomplish these objectives, I have focused primarily
upon two major aspects of the African elephant's current situation.
The first concerns the history of the international trade in ivory and
the subsequent movement demanding its demise. The second
focuses upon basic economic concepts and Garrett Hardin's "tragedy
of the commons." Once these foundational aspects have been
sufficiently examined, an analysis is presented which manages to
incorporate all of the varying factors involved, and displays exactly
why an international ban on ivory may be the elephant's only
remaining chance for survival.
Bill Mckibben stated within his book, The End of Nature, that
mankind had finally achieved a position of complete dominance over
the environment in which it lives. He said that humans are no longer
intruders upon the environment, but rather, are now the sole
controllers of what transpires within it. Therefore, mankind has a
tremendous responsibility to "properly" direct the processes of
nature. If it fails to accomplish this task, the result can be directly
attributed to its own shortcomings. He continues to predict that this
dominance will undoubtedly lead to a perversion of "nature", and
that only· those who love man, and the accomplishments of man, will
find happiness within such a world. Those who love nature will find
only sorrow and aggravation. I hope that this does not transpire, and
that nature will remain largely independent of our own fluctuating
ideals and drastically limited perceptions of the world and our place
in it. But if it turns out that that is the dismal course which we are
ultimately forced to follow, perhaps this study, and others like it,
may in some way be able to preserve the dignity of nature, and
possibly prevent it from being ruthlessly abused and ultimately destroyed.