Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35098582›Full record

ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2022

Understanding why consumers in China switch between wild, farmed and synthetic bear bile products.

A Hinsley, A K Y Wan, D Garshelis, M Hoffmann, S Hu, T M Lee, K Meginnis, B Moyle, Y Qiu, X Ruan and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Understanding why consumers in China switch between wild, farmed and synthetic bear bile products.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

A HinsleyDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1.
A K Y WanSchool of Life Sciences and Ecology and State Key Laboratory of Biological Control, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
D GarshelisIUCN SSC Bear Specialist Group, Cohasset, MN, USA.
M HoffmannConservation Programmes, Zoological Society of London, London, UK.
S HuSchool of Life Sciences and Ecology and State Key Laboratory of Biological Control, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
T M LeeSchool of Life Sciences and Ecology and State Key Laboratory of Biological Control, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2698-9358
K MeginnisInstitute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
B MoyleSchool of Economics and Finance, Massey University, New Zealand.
Y QiuChina Association Of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
X RuanAcademy of Inventory and Planning, National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
E J Milner-GullandDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An important rationale for legally-farmed and synthetic wildlife products are that they reduce illegal wild-sourced trade by supplying markets with sustainable alternatives. For this to work, more established illegal-product consumers must switch to legal alternatives than new legal-product consumers drawn to illegal wild products. Despite widespread debate on the magnitude and direction of switching, studies among actual consumers are lacking. We used an anonymous online survey of 1421 Traditional Chinese Medicine consumers in China to investigate switching between legal farmed, synthetic, and illegal wild bear bile. We examined past consumption behaviour, and applied a discrete choice experiment framed within worsening hypothetical disease scenarios, using latent class models to investigate groups with shared preferences. Bear bile consumers (86% respondents) were wealthier, more likely to have family who consumed bile, and less knowledgeable about bile treatments than non-consumers. Consumer preferences were heterogenous but most consumers preferred switching between bile types as disease worsened. We identified five distinct latent classes within our sample: 'law-abiding consumers' (34% respondents), who prefer legal products and were unlikely to switch; two 'all-natural consumer' groups (53%), who dislike synthetics but may switch between farmed and wild products; and two 'non-consumer' groups (12%) who prefer not to buy bile. People with past experience of bile consumption had different preferences than those without. Willingness to switch to wild products was related to believing they were legal, although the likelihood of switching was mediated by preferences for cheaper products sold in legal, familiar places. We show that consumers of wild bile may switch, given the availability of a range of legal alternatives, while legal-product consumers may switch to illegal products if the barriers to doing so are small. Understanding preferences that promote or impede switching should be a key consideration when attempting to predict consumer behaviour in complex wildlife markets. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Indexed as

Asiatic black bearconsumer behaviourconsumer demandstated preferencessupply-side approacheswildlife farming

Identifiers

PMID35098582
PMCPMC9320993

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.