This paper discusses the economic and philosophical inadequacies that have characterised the Project Tiger scheme in India. Launched in the 1970s to protect the habitats of the Royal Bengal Tiger, Project Tiger has over time evolved into a management system that has abstracted the tiger from its habitat by highlighting its charismatic functions. However the abstraction has also caused the tiger to be valued for its narrow consumptive uses. By comparison the habitats that have nurtured the tiger have received less attention. The paper critiques partial equilibrium frameworks that have attempted to value a tiger in terms of demand and supply functions rather than as an integral element of an ecosystem. While considering the superiority of the Total Economic Value concept as a value-determining method, the paper also points to the limitation of the concept in not addressing the conflicts between use and non-use values of a tiger. In the light of these facts, the paper advances the theory of complementarity as a valuation approach that considers the tiger and its habitat as a joint resource that needs to be protected and conserved in the larger interests of biodiversity conservation in India.
AllenBryon P. and LoomisJohn B.. 2005. ‘Deriving Values for the Ecological Support Function of Wildlife: An Indirect Valuation Approach’, Ecological Economics56: 49–57.
2.
Anonymous, 2005. ‘Imaginary Tigers’, Down To Earth, pp. 29–31.
BarbierE.B., BurgessJ.C., SwansonT.M. and PearceD.W.1990. Elephants, Economics and Ivory. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
5.
BrownG. and HenryW.1993. ‘The viewing value of elephants’, in BarbierEdward B. (ed.), Economics and Ecology: New Frontiers and Sustainable Development (London: Chapman and Hall), pp. 146–55.
6.
Butler JamesR., HvenegaardGlen T. and KrystofiakDoug K.. 1994. ‘Economic Values of Bird-Watching at Point Pelee National Park, Canada’, in MunasingheMohan and McNeelyJeffrey (eds), Protected Area Economics and Policy-Linking Conservation and Sustainable Development (Washington, D.C.: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development), pp. 253–62.
7.
ChildBrian. 2004. Parks in Transition: Biodiversity, Development and the Bottom Line. London: Earthscan.
8.
CummingD.H.M. and JacksonP. (eds) 1984. The Status and Conservation of Africa's Elephants and Rhinos. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
9.
CummingD.H.M., du ToitR.F., and StuartS.N.1990. African Elephants and Rhinos: Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN Species Survival Commission.
10.
DamodaranA.2000. ‘Project Tiger, Biodiversity Conservation and Valuation Issues’, Mimeo, Indian Institute of Plantation Management, Bangalore.
11.
DamodaranA1993. ‘The Economics of Forest Conservation and Sustainable Development’, in BashaChand S., MuraleedharanP.K., SeethalakshmyK.K., SankaranK.V. and NairK.K.N. (eds), Socio-Economic Research in Forestry (The Kerala Forest Research Institute and The Ford Foundation), pp. 388–408.
12.
DiamondPeter A.1996. Discussion of the ‘Conceptual Underpinnings of the Contingent Valuation Method’ by A.C. Fisher, in BjornstadDavid J. and KahnJames R. (eds), The Contingent Valuation of Environmental Resources: Methodological Issues and Research Needs (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar), pp. 61–71.
13.
Douglas-HamiltonI., MichelmoreF. and InamdarA.1992. African Elephant Database, European Commission African Elephant Survey and Conservation Programme, February 1992.
14.
DurrellL.1986. State of the Ark: An Atlas of Conservation in Action. London: Gaia Books Limited.
15.
GopalRajesh2005. Personal communication.
16.
GopalRajesh2000. ‘Project Tiger and People – The Kanha Experience’, in GopalRajesh, NegiH.S., ShrivastavaAseem and ShuklaRakesh (eds), An Anthology of Research Papers (Madhya Pradesh: Kanha Tiger Reserve), pp. 117–24.
17.
Grootde, RudolfS.1994. ‘Functions and Values of Protected Areas: A Comprehensive Framework for Assessing the Benefits of Protected Areas to Human Society’, in MunasingheMohan and McNeelyJeffrey (eds), Protected Area Economics and Policy-Linking Conservation and Sustainable Development (Washington, D.C.: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development), pp. 159–70.
18.
GuptaRitu. 2005. ‘Maneaten’, Down To Earth, 13(20): 26–8.
19.
HiedanpaaJuha and BromleyDaniel W.2002. ‘Environmental Policy as a Process of Reasonable Valuing’, in BromleyDaniel W. and PaavolaJouni (eds), Economics, Ethics and Environmental Policy – Contested Choices (Oxford, UK; Blackwell Publishing), pp. 69–84.
HughesGeorge. 2004. ‘Case Study: Commercialization of the Former Natal Parks Board’, in Derek de la Harpe, Peter Fearnhea, George Hughes, Richard Davies, Anna Spenceley, Jonathan Barnes, Jenny Cooper and Brian Child, ‘Does Commercialization of Protected Area Threaten Their Conservation Goals?’, in ChildBrian (ed.), Parks in Transition, Biodiversity, Rural Development and the Bottom Line (London: Earthscan), pp. 189–216.
22.
Hyde, WilliamF., KanelKeshav R. and MisomaliErnest D.. 1994. ‘The Marginal Costs of Endangered Species Management’, in MunasingheMohan and McNeelyJeffrey (eds), Protected Area Economics and Policy-Linking Conservation and Sustainable Development (Washington, D.C.: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development), pp. 171–80.
23.
JainPushp. 2001. Project Tiger Status Report, New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India.
24.
UllasKaranth K. and StithBradley M.. 1999. ‘Prey Depletion as a Critical Determinant of Tiger Population Viability’, in SeidenstickerJohn, ChristieSarah and JacksonPeter (eds), Riding the Tiger:Conservation in Human-Dominated Landscapes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 100–113.
25.
KatzEric. 1996. ‘Searching For Intrinsic Value: Pragmatism and Despair In Environmental Ethics’, in LightAndrew and KatzEric (eds), Environmental Pragmatism (London: Routledge), pp. 307–18.
26.
MacKinnonKathy, MishraHemanta and MottJessica. 1999. ‘Reconciling the Needs of Conservation and Local Communities: Global Environment Facility Support for Tiger Conservation in India’, in SeidenstickerJohn, ChristieSarah and JacksonPeter (eds), Riding the Tiger:Conservation in Human-Dominated Landscapes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 307–15.
27.
MacmillanDouglas C., HarleyDavid and MorrisonRuth. 1999. ‘Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Forest Biodiversity Enhancement: An Application of Expert Judgement’, in O'ConnorMartin and SpashClive L. (eds), Valuation and the Environment: Theory, Method and Practice (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar), pp. 109–22.
28.
MendelssohnG.1996. Economics and the Conservation of the African Elephant. Report for the European Commission, Oxford.
29.
MendelssohnGaie. 1999. ‘The Relevance of Economic Valuation for Species Conservation Policy: The Case of the African Elephant’, in O'ConnorMartin and SpashClive L. (eds), Valuation and the Environment: Theory, Method and Practice (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar), pp. 123–46.
30.
MitraBarun. 2005. ‘Don't Copy Western Models of Conservation. The Lord of the Jungle can be Saved if Commerce is Harnessed to His Cause’, Indian Express, oped page, Delhi edition.
31.
PanwarH.S.2000. ‘Population Dynamics and Land Tenures of Tiger in Kanha National park’, in GopalRajesh, NegiH.S., ShrivastavaAseem and ShuklaRakesh (eds), An Anthology of Research Papers (Madhya Pradesh: Kanha Tiger Reserve), pp. 9–20.
32.
PerringsCharles, FolkeCarl and MalerKarl-Goran. 1992. ‘The Ecology and Economics of Biodiversity Loss: The Research Agenda’, Ambio, 21(3): 208–10.
33.
RandallAlan. 1991. ‘Total and Non-Use Values’, in BradenJ.B. and KolstadC.D. (eds), Measuring the Demand for Environmental Quality (Elsevier Science Publishers), pp. 303–21.
34.
RussowLilly-Marlene. 1998. ‘Why Do Species Matter?’, in VanDeVeerDonald, and PierceChristine (eds), The Environmental Ethics and Policy Book (USA: Wadsworth Publishing Company), pp. 497–503.
35.
SankhalaKailash, 1978. Tiger! The Story of the Indian Tiger.London: William Collins.
36.
SeidenstickerJohn, ChristieSarah and JacksonPeter. 1999. ‘Approaches to tiger conservation’, in SeidenstickerJohn, ChristieSarah and JacksonPeter (eds), Riding the Tiger:Conservation in Human-Dominated Landscapes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 193–8.
37.
ShuklaRakesh. 2000. ‘Humanized Tiger Reserves: The Siege Within?’, in GopalRajesh, NegiH.S., ShrivastavaAseem and ShuklaRakesh (eds), An Anthology of Research Papers (Madhya Pradesh: Kanha Tiger Reserve), pp. 149–50.
38.
ThaparValmik. 1999. ‘The Tragedy of the Indian Tiger: Starting from Scratch’, in SeidenstickerJohn, ChristieSarah and JacksonPeter (eds), Riding the Tiger:Conservation in Human-Dominated Landscapes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 296–306.
39.
VorhiesD. and VorhiesF.. 1993. Introducing Lion into Pilansesberg: An Economic Assessment. Eco Plus (PTY), Ltd for Bophuthatswana National Parks and Wildlife Management Board, July.
40.
WikramanayakeEric D., DinersteinEric, RobinsonJohn G., KaranthUllas K., RabinowitzAlan, OlsonDavid, MathewThomas, HedaoPrashant, ConnorMelissaHemleyGinette and BolzeDorene. 1999. ‘Where Can Tigers Live in the Future? A Framework for Identifying High-Priority Areas for the Conservation of Tigers in the Wild’, in SeidenstickerJohn, ChristieSarah and JacksonPeter (eds), Riding the Tiger:Conservation in Human-Dominated Landscapes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 255–72.
41.
ZimmerHeinrich. 1990. Philosophies of India. Princeton: Princeton University Press, Reprinted by Motilal Banarsi Dass Publishers, Delhi.
