Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Complex Links between Governance and Biodiversity

The Complex Links between Governance and Biodiversity Abstract: We argue that two problems weaken the claims of those who link corruption and the exploitation of natural resources. The first is conceptual and the second is methodological. Studies that use national‐level indicators of corruption fail to note that corruption comes in many forms, at multiple levels, that may affect resource use quite differently: negatively, positively, or not at all. Without a clear causal model of the mechanism by which corruption affects resources, one should treat with caution any estimated relationship between corruption and the state of natural resources. Simple, atheoretical models linking corruption measures and natural resource use typically do not account for other important control variables pivotal to the relationship between humans and natural resources. By way of illustration of these two general concerns, we used statistical methods to demonstrate that the findings of a recent, well‐known study that posits a link between corruption and decreases in forests and elephants are not robust to simple conceptual and methodological refinements. In particular, once we controlled for a few plausible anthropogenic and biophysical conditioning factors, estimated the effects in changes rather than levels so as not to confound cross‐sectional and longitudinal variation, and incorporated additional observations from the same data sources, corruption levels no longer had any explanatory power. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Conservation Biology Wiley

The Complex Links between Governance and Biodiversity

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/the-complex-links-between-governance-and-biodiversity-iVlY0zRpGL

References (70)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0888-8892
eISSN
1523-1739
DOI
10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00521.x
pmid
17002753
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract: We argue that two problems weaken the claims of those who link corruption and the exploitation of natural resources. The first is conceptual and the second is methodological. Studies that use national‐level indicators of corruption fail to note that corruption comes in many forms, at multiple levels, that may affect resource use quite differently: negatively, positively, or not at all. Without a clear causal model of the mechanism by which corruption affects resources, one should treat with caution any estimated relationship between corruption and the state of natural resources. Simple, atheoretical models linking corruption measures and natural resource use typically do not account for other important control variables pivotal to the relationship between humans and natural resources. By way of illustration of these two general concerns, we used statistical methods to demonstrate that the findings of a recent, well‐known study that posits a link between corruption and decreases in forests and elephants are not robust to simple conceptual and methodological refinements. In particular, once we controlled for a few plausible anthropogenic and biophysical conditioning factors, estimated the effects in changes rather than levels so as not to confound cross‐sectional and longitudinal variation, and incorporated additional observations from the same data sources, corruption levels no longer had any explanatory power.

Journal

Conservation BiologyWiley

Published: Oct 1, 2006

There are no references for this article.