Black Markets: A Comparison of the Illegal Ivory and Narcotic Trades

Connections between trades and trafficking in wildlife and drugs

“…There is, as always, a need for more empirical data collection examining any links between these two - and other - illicit markets. As Sosnowski ( 2019 : 8) remarks, ‘Illicit markets are estimated to represent a fifth of global economic activity, but many remain poorly understood due to their clandestine nature’. Further analysis would consider what lessons can be learned and whether there are synergies in enforcement and conservation efforts that need to be explored.…”

“…For instance, a 2018 U.S. Intelligence Community analysis of multi-agency crime data on an East African country found that ‘more than two-thirds of the actors in the wildlife crime dataset overlapped with individuals and facilitators in the narcotics dataset’ (TNRC 2020 ). Sosnowski ( 2019 : 6) suggests that while Reuter and O’Regan ‘argue that there are more differences than commonly acknowledged between the illicit trades in wildlife and narcotics’ their study was ‘limited to trade activities in the Americas, and particularly smuggling into the United States.’ Sosnowski ( 2019 : 6) points out that a more global view is required, and, for example, illegal ivory is ‘primarily sourced across Africa and directed to markets in Asia’ leading to different trade patterns which ‘closely mirror … narcotics trafficking.’…”

Illegal and legal wildlife trade analysis discourse: response to Natusch et al. 2021

“…This assumption is false. In Sosnowski and Petrossian (2020) and our previous body of work, we neither petition for nor against trade in wildlife (i.e., Petrossian et al., 2016, 2020; Sosnowski, 2020; Sosnowski & Moreto, 2021; Sosnowski et al., 2019; van Uhm et al., 2019). Rather, we acknowledge that there are rules and regulations guiding what can legally be imported into the United States, for example, and examine the available data on wildlife goods that have been seized upon violations.…”