Societal Impact Statement A wide variety of plant species are threatened by illegal wildlife trade (IWT), and yet plants receive scant attention in IWT policy and research, a matter of pressing global concern. This review examines how “plant blindness” manifests within policy and research on IWT, with serious and detrimental effects for biodiversity conservation. We suggest several key points: (a) perhaps with the exception of the illegal timber market, plants are overlooked in IWT policy and research; (b) there is insufficient attention from funding agencies to the presence and persistence of illegal trade in plants; and (c) these absences are at least in part resultant from plant blindness as codified in governmental laws defining the meaning of “wildlife.” Summary This review investigates the ways in which “plant blindness,” first described by Wandersee and Schussler (1999, p. 82) as “the misguided anthropocentric ranking of plants as inferior to animals,” intersects with the contemporary boom in research and policy on illegal wildlife trade (IWT). We argue that plants have been largely ignored within this emerging conservation arena, with serious and detrimental effects for biodiversity conservation. With the exception of the illegal trade in timber, we show that plants are absent from much emerging scholarship, and receive scant attention by US and UK funding agencies often driving global efforts to address illegal wildlife trade, despite the high levels of threat many plants face. Our article concludes by discussing current challenges posed by plant blindness in IWT policy and research, but also suggests reasons for cautious optimism in addressing this critical issue for plant conservation.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are aimed at improving human well-being at a global scale, whilst enhancing and preserving global biodiversity. Recently, botanic gardens worldwide have become more conservation focused, and gardens are increasingly influential in scientific roles that address both biodiversity loss and human well-being—particularly in urban areas. As the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (Kew) launched its new Manifesto for Change in 2021, this paper outlines how the organisation currently contributes to the SDGs and examines where the work of botanic gardens can have the biggest impact. This paper focuses on the use of policy engagement, education and outreach, and scientific research to document Kew’s contribution to the goals so far, both in the UK and elsewhere. The SDGs address high level global objectives, many of which are not directly relatable to the activities of a single organisation. Kew’s approach to this challenge is to seek out the intention of the Goals by interrogating their subsidiary Targets. We then translate the intention of any given SDG into actions that are meaningful to our specific practice. Many of RBG Kew’s existing projects and programmes address the SDGs and we are aligning our aims with them more closely still.

Unsustainable and illegal wildlife trade is a well-known conservation issue, but there are still large gaps in our understanding of how trade chains operate for the majority of over-exploited wildlife products. In particular, the large-scale global plant trade is under-reported and under-researched, and this is even more pronounced when the trade takes place within a country’s borders. A clear example is the trade in orchids, all species of which are listed by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Although countries such as Viet Nam are known hotspots for the large-scale collection of wild orchids for the international horticultural trade, little is known about how plants move from the wild to the end-consumer, what role is played by domestic markets and the sustainability of this trade. We use a mixed-methods approach to determine the structure of trade chains for orchids in key trading areas of Northern Viet Nam, and use a thematic framework to identify five groups of actors trading wild-harvested orchids. Trade occurs both domestically and internationally, underpinned by demand for rare, wild plants. An important first step to address the illegal and unsustainable plant trade is to recognise it as a major and growing conservation issue, and develop diverse approaches that consider the complexity of the supply chains involved. It is imperative that the scale and process of domestic trade is understood, and its impact on long term conservation of these species assessed to make more informed decisions about effective interventions that take into account the full supply chain.

Illegal wildlife trade (IWT) can have significant and deleterious impacts. Academic-practitioner knowledge exchange can improve the effectiveness of strategies to counter IWT; however, cases of inadequate knowledge exchange have been reported. To explore the challenges to academic-practitioner knowledge exchange on IWT, we conducted three workshops in the United Kingdom with a total of 10 academics from five universities and 15 practitioners from nine organisations that work on IWT, plus one interview with a senior conservation practitioner. We identified five main challenges, including general differences in the aims and worldviews of academics versus practitioners; poor communication; and the large size, diversity, and dynamism of networks working on IWT. Stretched resources, particularly insufficient time and funding, accentuate these challenges. The challenges we identified align with the challenges experienced in other areas of conservation, but some aspects are particularly acute for IWT. Our identification and description of these main challenges to academic-practitioner knowledge exchange on IWT could guide efforts to address them in current or future work on IWT. Also, as shown, consideration of our findings alongside relevant literature flag measures that could contribute towards countering the identified challenges to academic-practitioner knowledge exchange on IWT.