Advertisement

Ambio

, Volume 46, Issue 6, pp 644–654 | Cite as

On the tragedy of the commons: When predation and livestock loss may improve the economic lot of herders

  • Anders Skonhoft
  • Anne Borge Johannesen
  • Jon Olaf Olaussen
Report

Abstract

This paper studies the practice of semi-domestic reindeer (Rangifer t. tarandus) herding in Finnmark county in northern Norway. In this area, the Saami reindeer herders compete for space and grazing areas and keep large herds, while at the same time, the reindeer population is heavily exposed to carnivore predation by the lynx (Lynx lynx), the wolverine (Gulo gulo), and the golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). It is demonstrated that predation actually may improve the economic lot of livestock holders in this unmanaged local common setting. There are ecological as well as economic reasons as to why this happens. The ecological reason is that predation compensates for natural mortality; that is, increased predation reduces natural mortality, indicating that the net loss due to predation actually may be quite small. When predation reduces livestock density, the feeding conditions of the animals will improve, resulting in increased livestock weight and higher per animal slaughter value. At the same time, a smaller stock reduces the operating costs of the herders.

Keywords

Commons Ecological and economic compensation mechanisms Food limitation Livestock Predation 

Supplementary material

13280_2017_910_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (67 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 68 KB)

References

  1. Baland, J.M., and J.P. Platteau. 1996. Halting degradation of natural resources. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  2. Ballard, W.B., D. Lutz, T.W. Keegan, L.H. Carpenter, and J.C. deVos Jr. 2001. Deer–predator relationships: A review of recent North American studies with emphasis on mule and black-tailed deer. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29: 99–115.Google Scholar
  3. Bårdsen, B.J., T. Tveraa, P. Fauchald, and K. Langeland. 2010. Observational evidence of risk-sensitive reproductive allocation in a long-lived mammal. Oecologia 162: 627–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boman, M., G. Bostedt, and J. Persson. 2003. The bioeconomics of the spatial distribution of an endangered species. The case of the Swedish wolf population. Journal of Bioeconomics 5: 55–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bostedt, G. 2005. Pastoralist economic behavior: Empirical results from reindeer herders in Northern Sweden. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 30: 381–396.Google Scholar
  6. Boyce, M.S., A.R.E. Sinclair, and G.C. White. 1999. Seasonal compensation of predation and harvesting. Oikos 87: 419–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bromley, D. 1991. Environment and ecology. Property rights and public policy. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Dasgupta, P. 1982. The control of resources. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Dasgupta, P., and K.G. Mäler. 1995. Poverty, institutions, and the environmental resource Base. In Handbook of development economics, vol. III, ed. J. Behrman, and T. Srinivasan. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  10. Ekspertutvalget. 2011. Innstilling fra ekspertutvalget vedrørende endringer I erstatningsordningen for rovviltskade på husdyr. Trondheim: Direktoratet for Naturforvaltning (in Norwegian).Google Scholar
  11. Hardin, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162: 1243–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Johannesen, A.B. 2014: Samisk reindrift. In Naturessursenes Økonomi, ed. O. Flaaten and A. Skonhoft. Oslo: Gyldendal (in Norwegian).Google Scholar
  13. Johannesen, A.B. and A. Skonhoft. 2008. Culture, economy, and conflicts in reindeer herding. A descriptive analysis of Trøndelag and western Finnmark. SØF Report 3, Center for economic research at NTNU, Trondheim (in Norwegian).Google Scholar
  14. Johannesen, A.B., and A. Skonhoft. 2009. Local common property exploitation with rewards. Land Economics 85: 637–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Johannesen, A.B., and A. Skonhoft. 2011. Livestock as insurance and social status: Evidence from reindeer herding in Norway. Environmental & Resource Economics 48: 679–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Johansen, B., and S.R. Karlsen. 2005. Monitoring vegetation changes on Finnmarksvidda, Northern Norway, using Landsat MSS and Landsat TM/ETM+ satellite images. Phytocoenologia 35: 969–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Linnell, J., R. Aanes, and R. Andersen. 1995. Who killed Bambi? The role of predation in the neonatal mortality of temperature ungulates. Wildlife Biology 1: 209–223.Google Scholar
  18. Naess, M.V., B.J. Bårdsen, P. Fauchald, and T. Tveraa. 2010. Cooperative pastoral production—the importance of kinship. Evolution and Human Behavior 31: 246–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nilsen, E., T. Pettersen, H. Gundersen, A. Mysterud, J. Milner, J.E. Solberg, H. Andreassen, and N.C. Stenseth. 2005. Moose harvesting strategies in the presence of wolves. Spatially structured populations. Journal of Applied Ecology 42: 389–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Norwegian Reindeer Husbandry Administration (NRHA). 2013. Totalregnskap for reindriftsnæringen, Alta (in Norwegian)Google Scholar
  21. Norwegian Reindeer Husbandry Administration (NRHA). 2014. Ressursregnskap for reindriftsnæringen, Alta (in Norwegian).Google Scholar
  22. Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Riseth, J.Å. 2006. Sami reindeer herd managers: Why do they stay in low-profit business? British Food Journal 108: 541–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Riseth, J.Å., and A. Vatn. 2009. Modernization and pasture degradation: A comparative study of two Sami reindeer pasture regions in Norway. Land Economics 85: 87–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Seabright, P. 1993. Managing local commons. Journal of Economic Perspectives 7: 131–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sinclair, A.R.E., and R.P. Pech. 1996. Density dependence, stochasticity, compensation and predator regulation. Oikos 75: 164–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Skonhoft, A. 2016. The silence of the lambs: Payment for carnivore conservation and livestock farming under strategic behavior. Environmental & Resource Economics. doi: 10.1007/s10640-016-0011-9.Google Scholar
  28. Tveraa, T., P. Fauchald, C. Henaug, and N.G. Yoccoz. 2003. An examination of a compensatory relationship between food limitation and predation in semi-domestic reindeer. Population Ecology 137: 370–376.Google Scholar
  29. Tveraa, T., A. Stien, H. Brøseth, and N.G. Yoccoz. 2014. The role of predation and food limitation on claims for compensation, reindeer demography and population dynamics. Journal of Applied Ecology 51: 1264–1272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Vucetic, J.A., D.W. Smith, and D.R. Stahler. 2005. Influence of harvest, climate and wolf predation in Yellowstone elk 1961–2004. Oikos 111: 259–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wilmers, C.C., E. Post, and A. Hastings. 2007. The anatomy of predator–prey dynamics in a changing climate. Journal of Animal Ecology 76: 1037–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anders Skonhoft
    • 1
  • Anne Borge Johannesen
    • 1
  • Jon Olaf Olaussen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsNTNUTrondheimNorway
  2. 2.NTNU Business SchoolTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations