Back

Synthetic Substitutes as a Conservation Tool: Evaluating Synthetic Leopard Fur for Demand Reduction and Species Recovery

Malgaonkar, A. S.; Whittington-Jones, G.; Dickerson, T.; Lishandu, M.; Davies, S.; Woodgate, Z.; Stevens, X.; Mulenga, C.; Mulenga, G.; Phiri, M.; Mulenga, L.; Mukela, M.; Kasamu, G.; Nieman, W. A.; Mann, G.; Harihar, A.; Verissimo, D.; Pickles, R.

2025-07-31 ecology
10.1101/2025.07.31.666914 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Providing synthetic substitutes is a widely promoted strategy to shift consumer demand away from wildlife products derived from threatened species. Yet, there is little evidence on whether such product substitution interventions effectively prevent illegal or unsustainable harvesting and contribute to the recovery of threatened populations. Drawing on the Furs For Life (FFL) Zambia initiative, which supplied synthetic furs known as "Heritage Furs" to replace leopard skins traditionally worn during Lozi royal ceremonies in Western Zambia, we present an evaluation designed to test both the effects and causal mechanisms of substitution. Guided by the EMMIE framework, commonly used in crime prevention evaluation, we triangulated data from semi-structured questionnaires, law enforcement patrols, court records, camera trap monitoring, and stakeholder interviews conducted between 2018 and 2024. Qualitative analysis using the General Elimination Method was employed to assess plausible alternative explanations for leopard recovery. By 2024, adoption of synthetic furs among leopard fur users exceeded 80 percent, while self-reported ownership of authentic leopard furs declined by 70 percent. At the same time, patrol detections of leopard poaching incidents decreased, and camera trap density estimates increased from an average of 2.7 to 3.8 leopards per 100 square kilometers across the focal landscape. An integrated mechanism of change, derived from stakeholder perspectives, indicates that while substitution reduced demand, concurrent and reinforcing effects of counter-poaching and counter-trafficking operations were critical to leopard recovery. This study provides the first empirical link between a demand reduction initiative based on synthetic substitutes and measurable species population recovery.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 10%
18.2%
2
Conservation Science and Practice
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.1%
3
Conservation Letters
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
4
Journal of Applied Ecology
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
5
Biological Conservation
43 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
50% of probability mass above
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 20%
6.2%
7
Animal Conservation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
8
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.0%
9
Global Ecology and Conservation
25 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.4%
10
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
11
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.0%
12
Journal of Environmental Management
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.8%
13
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.7%
14
Preventive Veterinary Medicine
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
15
Conservation Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.6%
16
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 34%
1.6%
17
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.1%
18
Frontiers in Veterinary Science
30 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
19
One Health
29 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
20
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
21
Biodiversity and Conservation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
22
Ecosphere
53 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
23
PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET
21 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
24
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 66%
0.6%