On taxing wildlife films and exposure to nature

Sven Wunder*, Douglas Sheil

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)


Some conservation finance strategies feature taxes on nature's benign, and arguably educational, uses. This applies to a recent proposal to extract payment from producers of nature films and also to past efforts to raise entrance fees to protected areas. We argue that, as they are currently formulated, it is misleading to label these proposals as payments for environmental service schemes, as they lack voluntary and conditional payments. Rather, they are a form of taxation. Such revenue-seeking measures may prove to be short-sighted. They will raise prices and curtail the demand for those environmental services that embody some element of education, thus reducing public exposure to nature. This could diminish public awareness, curb people's biophilia and devalue Nature's 'existence values'. This drive for more conservation cash income in the short term could undermine a broad, long-term societal basis for conservation and its future financing.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)483-485
Number of pages3
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2013
Externally publishedYes


  • Biophilia
  • conservation attitudes
  • films
  • payments for environmental services
  • PES

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'On taxing wildlife films and exposure to nature'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this