South Africa’s Plan to Sell Rhino Horn to Medical Tourists Sparks Debate
South Africa has historically been at the forefront of nature conservation, boasting a significant network of protected areas, including national parks, nature reserves, and conservation areas. The country's first national park, Kruger National Park, was established in 1926 and is one of Africa's largest game reserves.
However, the South African government has just released a controversial biodiversity strategy, including plans for the sale of rhino horn powder to Asian medical tourists. The country is home to 80% of the world’s rhino population, including the critically endangered black rhinoceros. The news of this “innovative” extractive conservation approach has sparked international debate and criticisms regarding its potential impact.
What is extractive conservation?
Extractive conservation is an approach to conservation that involves the sustainable use of natural resources within protected areas. It combines conservation efforts with the extraction of resources such as timber, minerals, or wildlife in a manner that is intended to be environmentally sustainable and socially responsible. The idea is to generate revenue from these resources while simultaneously protecting the ecosystem and biodiversity.
While this approach aims to strike a balance between conservation and economic development, it can be controversial. Ensuring that local communities benefit from the resources while also preserving the natural environment for future generations is challenging. Extraction of resources may still have ecological impacts that are difficult to measure, and legal commercial trade often acts as a shield for illegal, unregulated activities.
What is rhino horn used for medicinally?
In addition to being carved into decorative items, rhino horn has a long history of use in traditional Asian medicine, particularly in traditional Chinese medicine. Ingesting the ground powder is believed to reduce fever, detoxify blood, and reduce inflammation. It is also purported to have rejuvenating effects and contain aphrodisiac properties used to enhance libido and sexual performance.
Despite these traditional beliefs, there is no scientific evidence to support the medicinal efficacy of rhino horn. Rhino horn is primarily composed of keratin, just like human hair and nails. It lacks any pharmacologically active ingredients that could provide therapeutic benefits. Yet, demand for rhino horn has led to a devastating decline in rhino populations globally, making the trade in rhino horn illegal in most countries.
Key justifications for the plan
South Africa's government has justified aims to extract economic value from its wildlife primarily as a means to benefit historically excluded Black communities. It proposes the following benefits of the plan:
Incentivizing conservation: Revenue generated from Asian medical tourism will allow for involving local communities in conservation efforts. It is hoped that this will help prevent land invasions and poaching by poorer communities on the periphery of the country’s nature reserves.
Economic growth and job creation: The plan also includes the expansion of trophy hunting on communal lands, promoting local and international consumption of game meat (such as antelope, crocodile, and zebra) and expanding plant trade and bioprospecting (using plants for pharmaceuticals and cosmetics). These initiatives are expected to boost economic growth, create jobs, and benefit Black communities historically marginalized in the wildlife and conservation sectors.
Balancing conservation ethics and economic incentives: The strategy challenges the traditional conservation model by seeking to strike a balance between conservation ethics and economic incentives which are much needed.
Respecting the international context: The plan acknowledges international support for a ban on the trade of rhino horn and elephant tusks under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), while focusing on innovative approaches to domestic trade within South Africa.
Criticism of the plan
Critics of the strategy offer the following key points of contention:
Monetization and exploitation: Critics argue that the policy focuses on monetization rather than genuine conservation efforts, raising concerns about the exploitation of endangered animals.
Farming ethics applied to wild animals: Some experts view the strategy as applying a "farming ethic" to wild animals, which is contrary to conventional conservation models.
Domestic trade and global agreements: Critics worry that allowing tourists to use rhino horn powder within South Africa's borders could undermine global efforts to protect threatened rhino populations.
South Africa stands at a critical juncture, where its “innovative” biodiversity strategy intersects with broader socio-political challenges. It struggles with blatant wealth inequality whereby millions live in poverty in shantytowns that coexist with first-world cities. Unemployment sits at 32%.
Additionally, the ruling African National Congress (ANC), which has governed South Africa since 1994, has been grappling with corruption allegations. Its support has gradually waned, and with general elections looming in May, a coalition government may be in the cards. Globally, conservationists are watching the situation unfold, praying that a “perfect storm” is not unleased on the country’s defenseless wildlife.