Externalities are costs or benefits of an activity that spill over and are experienced by an

unrelated third party not directly involved in the production or consumption (Kenton, 2021).

Externalities can be either positive or negative.

Positive externalities is defined as benefits from production or consumption activities

experienced by unrelated third parties. They occur when benefits spill over on both the private

and social level. An example of positive production externalities that we currently experience in

my country is Research and Development activities (R&D).

Negative externalities; on the other hand, is defined as negative consequences of a production

or consumption activity experienced by unrelated third parties.

Elephant Poaching is an example of negative externalities. Poaching is the illegal hunting or

capturing of wild animals for either the products such as tusks for ivory trade as in the case of

elephants, or due to the human animal conflicts that arise from land use rights, retaliation to

animals destroying their sources of livelihood or animals becoming rogue and killing human

beings.

1. Based on our two cases, we are asked to choose one of the approaches on protecting

elephants from poachers in African countries.  

I will choose approach B, that is, the government sets up national parks and designates ten

villages around the park's edges as official tourist centers that become places where tourists can

stay and bases for guided tours inside the national park. 
 2. How the incentives will affect the local villagers, who are often very poor

With the government-involving village in the conservancy effort, the villages will be positive

towards the government measures and will be more engaged in the efforts towards protecting the

elephant population. Besides, with the setting up of official tourist centers, many local villagers

stand to gain employment, as many positions will be available, such as cooks, receptionists, tour

guides, interpreters, administrators, and so on. With this, their livelihood will be improved.

3. The approach that seems more likely to help the elephant population

Both will help elephants. However, B will be more likely. This is because, for approach A, the

idea of setting up large national parks where no local public can enter will create emotional

petition. Without the support from villagers, it is difficult to impose this policy, since, whatever

the law states, villagers who are always poor will be making a living by cutting trees, killing

elephants escaping from the elephant habitat for water resources, and so on. Other hand,

approach A will create harmony in living between villagers and elephants, and this will make the

villagers to help conserve the elephant population by even reporting to the relevant agency when

an elephant escapes its habitat without necessarily harming it, and they will also be more willing

to report to the government in case there is any poaching activity.

On the other hand,

3. The approach that is more likely to help elephant population

 4. The practice of elephant poaching and the need for environmental protection

Elephants play key role in balancing ecosystem. They trample forests making space for small

species to coexist, they create water holes that help other animals get water especially during low

rainfall period, they also disperse seeds in their dung that help generate new green growth, and

lastly, they benefit a country as a result of tourism, earning a country a lot of money out of

tourism.

However, poaching is threatening these wildlife conservation efforts. The populations of

elephants is severely devastated as the elephants are killed for the bush meat, elephant tasks due

to a brisk escalation in ivory trade especially in Asia, or as a form of resistance due to human

wildlife conflict. Such acts severely affect the wildlife population that could lead to extinction of

the species. As a result, the country risks a lot of money from tourism. Due to this, there is need

to conserve the animal species.

5. How the practice of elephant poaching is a negative externality

It is worth noting that elephant poaching leads to the extinction of these endangered species of

wildlife, and leads to the loss of benefits that comes with having them such as money from
tourism industry- an industry that supports livelihood of many households directly and indirectly.

However, because of poaching, the government and the people that rely on tourism as their

source of income both directly and indirectly stand to lose their livelihood. In addition, the small

animals that benefit directly from the elephant activities such as digging small boreholes with

their feet that reserve water may stand to suffer during low rainfall periods because of extinction

of elephant, and this may make them cover long distance looking for water.

To reduce the negative effects of elephant poaching, the government has to implement stringent

measures to control poaching. Moreover, the whole of this effort can only bear fruits when the

community and the international community as a whole are involved positively towards it.
References

Kenton, W. (2021, May 7). Externality. Retrieved May 12, 2021, from Investopedia.com

website: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/externality.asp