Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10356/155055
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFajrini, Rikaen_US
dc.contributor.authorNichols, Rebecca Michelleen_US
dc.contributor.authorPhelps, Jacoben_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-03T08:18:06Z-
dc.date.available2022-02-03T08:18:06Z-
dc.date.issued2022-
dc.identifier.citationFajrini, R., Nichols, R. M. & Phelps, J. (2022). Poacher pays? Judges' liability decisions in a mock trial about environmental harm caused by illegal wildlife trade. Biological Conservation, 266, 109445-. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109445en_US
dc.identifier.issn0006-3207en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10356/155055-
dc.description.abstractConservation litigation applies environmental liability law to biodiversity conservation contexts—holding parties who harm biodiversity responsible for providing remedies such as restoration, compensation, apologies and investments into education and cultural activities. Many countries have enabling legislation, but these types of lawsuits are rare in most countries and have been infrequently used to protect biodiversity from drivers such as illegal wildlife trade. Yet, these types of cases could be strategically used to provide remedies for cases of egregious harm and help catalyze social change through the power of judicial decisions. The viability of future cases, however, relies heavily on the judges and juries who adjudicate cases. Rather than wait potentially decades for test cases to emerge to help evaluate the success of this strategy, we conducted mock trials and post-trial interviews with Indonesian judges (N = 32), a population that is rarely explored in conservation science. We presented them with a hypothetical civil lawsuit in a case of illegal tiger trade, which sought to hold the defendant liable for providing 11 different remedies to address the harm purportedly caused by their actions. The results show that judges were very amenable to providing remedies in this type of civil lawsuit; for eight of the 11 claims, over 60% of the respondents indicated each claim would be likely to be accepted. The results also highlighted six key themes important in judicial decision-making, which provide insights for practitioners developing future lawsuits. The results suggest a favorable setting for testing real-world application of liability laws to remedy biodiversity harm, which may become an important part of future environmental governance.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBiological Conservationen_US
dc.rights© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This paper was published in Biological Conservation and is made available with permission of Elsevier Ltd.en_US
dc.subjectSocial sciences::Geography::Environmental sciencesen_US
dc.titlePoacher pays? Judges' liability decisions in a mock trial about environmental harm caused by illegal wildlife tradeen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.contributor.schoolSchool of Social Sciencesen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109445-
dc.description.versionAccepted versionen_US
dc.identifier.volume266en_US
dc.identifier.spage109445en_US
dc.subject.keywordsConservation Litigationen_US
dc.subject.keywordsLawen_US
dc.subject.keywordsEnvironmental Governanceen_US
dc.subject.keywordsLiabilityen_US
dc.subject.keywordsJudicial Decision-Makingen_US
dc.subject.keywordsIllegal Wildlife Tradeen_US
dc.description.acknowledgementThis work was funded by the UK Government through the Illegal Wildlife Trade Challenge Fund.en_US
item.grantfulltextembargo_20240307-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
Appears in Collections:SSS Journal Articles
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Fajrini, Nichols & Phelps (2022) Poacher pays_author preprint.pdf
  Until 2024-03-07
Full text477.35 kBAdobe PDFUnder embargo until Mar 07, 2024

Page view(s)

47
Updated on Jun 30, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Plumx

Items in DR-NTU are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.