An Assessment of the Implementation of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora in Kenya

Abstract

International trade is hastening extinction for many species of plants and animals despite the fact that many countries have ratified CITES. The adoption of treaties is often symbolic as many countries, especially in the developing world where most biodiversity is found, experience a lack of fit between international agreements and national laws and institutions. Our main objective here is to assess the extent of jurisdictional and institutional fit in the implementation of CITES in Kenya, an important issue given the amount of international trade in wild products and the importance of wildlife tourism to the country. The specific objectives are to assess the following: the capacity and level of coordination among state actors and conservation mandates in national policy and law using a mixed methods approach involving a literature review and 38 key informant surveys representing professional expertise from various stakeholder groups. We found that over 60% of respondents indicated only moderate capacity for the implementation of CITES and coordination between local and central governments. Some participants indicated that judicial officers lack adequate conservation knowledge, thus hampering enforcement via low prosecution rates. A moderate (at best) structural fit involving inefficiencies such as conflicting processes, unequal enforcement, and suboptimal coordination implies a degree of failure in developing the implementation capacity of CITES within Kenya. Our results also show a mismatch between agency staffing and workload at several levels of government, and we make suggestions for improvement.

A theory of change to improve conservation outcomes through CITES

“…There remains variation between Parties: authorities in some countries are comparatively well-resourced (e.g., the US), but most Parties are developing countries and face high opportunity costs (Baker 1999, Challender & MacMillan 2016, may lack the political will to prioritize CITES (Reeve 2006), and may be affected by corruption and/or political interference (US Department of State 2023). Despite substantial support provided to Parties in recent decades (Reeve 2002, a lack of capacity and of human, financial, and technical resources persist as the main challenges to implementing the treaty effectively (Wellsmith 2011, Dongol & Heinen 2012, Ariffin 2018, CITES 2019c, Wyatt 2021a, Kilonzo et al 2024. Based on recent implementation reports (CITES n.d.), of 66 Parties, 67% have one or more Management, Scientific and/or Enforcement Authority that has insufficient financial resources to function effectively.…”