Trophy hunting benefits conservation, communities – study
A comprehensive review of trophy hunting across sub-Saharan Africa has found that the practice produced positive outcomes for conservation and local communities in nearly two-thirds of documented cases, while warning that its success depends heavily on who controls wildlife rights and hunting revenues.
The study, published in Conservation Letters, reviewed 89 scientific articles covering 13 sub-Saharan African countries. Researchers assessed the impacts of trophy hunting on wildlife populations, habitats and local communities, including income, employment and food security.
Lead author Dr Hayley Clements, at Stellenbosch University’s Centre for Sustainability Transitions, said the review provides the most comprehensive assessment of its kind to date.
“Trophy hunting tends to be talked about as either an unqualified good or an unqualified evil,” Clements said. “What our review shows is that the reality is far more context-specific – and that context is something policymakers can act on.”
Overall, 65% of documented outcomes were positive, compared with 26% negative and 9% ambiguous.
The strongest benefits were recorded for habitat conservation. Trophy hunting was associated with an increase in the amount of land under conservation in 92% of cases reviewed.
According to the researchers, hunting revenues can provide private landowners and communities with an incentive to retain wildlife and natural habitat rather than converting land to agriculture or livestock farming.
Positive outcomes for landholders’ income, employment and food security were recorded in at least 85% of cases.
However, the researchers found more mixed results for hunted species. While populations of hunted species were more often stable or increasing than declining, other indicators, including age and sex ratios, were more frequently negatively affected. Impacts on animal movement were also mixed.
The review found that governance played a particularly important role.
More than 80% of outcomes were positive where local communities or private landowners held rights to land and wildlife and received revenues generated by hunting. This pattern was evident in Namibia and South Africa.
By contrast, outcomes were more mixed in areas where the state retained greater control over wildlife on communal land and communities received only a partial share of hunting revenues, including parts of Tanzania and Zambia.
The researchers said the findings suggest that the question is not simply whether trophy hunting takes place, but how it is governed and managed.
The study comes amid growing international debate over trophy imports. France suspended imports of hunting trophies from endangered species in August 2026, while the UK's Hunting Trophies Bill is before the House of Lords.
The researchers caution that blanket import bans could remove revenues that, in some contexts, support communities and conservation. They instead propose standards requiring evidence that hunting contributes to conservation, communities receive an equitable share of revenues and quotas are science-based and adaptively managed.
The study was conducted by researchers from Stellenbosch, Florida, British Columbia and Helsinki universities.
