License

Blogroll

Search

When Bloodshed Fuels Bloodshed – An Animal-Human Continuum

February 25, 2009 by and tagged , , ,

So, the ivory trade is making a comeback after years of success in reestablishing elephant populations in various African countries, and it has a lot to do with human conflicts:

And here, when China enters a market as buyer, its impact is massive:

And last October, conservationists had this warning:

And guess what, yesterday:

I already blogged about the plight of gorillas in the DRC as well as Rwanda at the time of the genocide. Here, we find again a correlation between conflict in Sudan and the slaughter of elephants. At the same time, one can expect that the global economic crisis will have a negative impact on people’s livelihood and therefore make ivory a resource worth killing elephants for.

There is a human-animal continuum at work here: their interests are not mutually exclusive and when human conditions degrade, so do living conditions for wildlife. As a result, preservation of wildlife contributes to the preservation of the environment, and promotes tourism (although the economic conditions in Western countries have a negative impact on that as well). Similarly, these national parks require personnel, guides, park rangers against poachers, etc., which can contribute to sustainable development.

Posted in Biodiversity, Environment, Global Governance, Sustainability | 1 Comment »



One Response to “When Bloodshed Fuels Bloodshed – An Animal-Human Continuum”

  1.   dmayeda Says:

    Very interesting observation about the continuum of violence.

    What’s not surprising here is the ongoing relationship between China and those countries/groups that continue to violate human rights. China has a history of selling small arms, light weapons, and even major conventional weaponry to groups such as the janjaweed (I thought it was janaweed) and similar groups in Brazil, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, etc.

    Of course the direction of exchange is different here with the Sudanese militia group doing the selling. But the relationship is what’s key. These countries, or really groups within countries, are willing to do business, and those doing business in China could care less how their money or weaponry is used elsewhere.

    Reply

Leave a Reply