An expert-driven causal model of the rhino poaching problem

A significant challenge in ecological modelling is the lack of complete sets of high-quality data. This is especially true in the rhino poaching problem where data is incomplete. Although there are many poaching attacks, they can be spread over a vast surface area such as in the case of the Kruger National Park in South Africa, which is roughly the size of Israel. Bayesian networks are useful reasoning tools and can utilise expert knowledge when data is insufficient or sparse. Bayesian networks allow the modeller to incorporate data, expert knowledge, or any combination of the two. This flexibility of Bayesian networks makes them ideal for modelling complex ecological problems. In this paper an expert-driven model of the rhino poaching problem is presented. The development as well as the evaluation of the model is performed from an expert perspective. Independent expert evaluation is performed in the form of queries that test different scenarios. Structuring the rhino poaching problem as a causal network yields a framework that can be used to reason about the problem, as well as inform the modeller of the type of data that has to be gathered.

[1]  R. Duffy,et al.  Poverty, Poaching and Trafficking: What are the links? , 2013 .

[2]  Sam M. Ferreira,et al.  Management strategies to curb rhino poaching: Alternative options using a cost–benefit approach , 2014 .

[3]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Formal Ontology in Information Systems , 1998 .

[4]  Hugh P Possingham,et al.  Legal Trade of Africa's Rhino Horns , 2013, Science.

[5]  Kevin B. Korb,et al.  Bayesian Artificial Intelligence , 2004, Computer science and data analysis series.

[6]  Fiona M. Underwood,et al.  Global Trends and Factors Associated with the Illegal Killing of Elephants: A Hierarchical Bayesian Analysis of Carcass Encounter Data , 2011, PloS one.

[7]  Martin Brooks,et al.  African Rhino: Status, Survey, and Conservation Action Plan , 1999 .

[8]  J. Pearl.  Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference , 2000 .

[9]  Timothy C. Haas,et al.  Conservation Risks: When Will Rhinos be Extinct? , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics.

[10]  A. Plumptre,et al.  Spatiotemporal trends of illegal activities from ranger‐collected data in a Ugandan national park , 2015, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[11]  G. K. Theron,et al.  Landscape preference of the white rhinoceros in the southern Kruger National Park , 1992 .

[12]  Magdalena Rzewuska,et al.  Effectiveness of Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2015, PloS one.

[13]  Izak P. J. Smit,et al.  Disruption of Rhino Demography by Poachers May Lead to Population Declines in Kruger National Park, South Africa , 2015, PloS one.

[14]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  A spiral model of software development and enhancement , 1986, Computer.

[15]  Alta de Waal,et al.  A framework for inferring predictive distributions of rhino poaching events through causal modelling , 2014, 17th International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION).

[16]  Kevin B. Korb,et al.  Bayesian Artificial Intelligence, Second Edition , 2010 .

[17]  V. S. Subrahmanian,et al.  APE: A Data-Driven, Behavioral Model-Based Anti-Poaching Engine , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems.

[18]  Lawrence E. Cohen,et al.  Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach , 1979 .

[19]  Meredith L. Gore,et al.  Beyond the cooking pot and pocket book: Factors influencing noncompliance with wildlife poaching rules , 2012 .

[20]  G. K. Theron,et al.  Landscape preference of the white rhinoceros in the central and northern Kruger National Park , 1993 .

[21]  Milind Tambe,et al.  An extensive study of Dynamic Bayesian Network for patrol allocation against adaptive opportunistic criminals , 2015 .

[22]  Richard E. Neapolitan,et al.  Learning Bayesian networks , 2007, KDD '07.