CITES and beyond: Illuminating 20 years of global, legal wildlife trade

Andersson, Astrid Alexandra; Tilley, Hannah B.; Lau, Wilson Chun Yu; Dudgeon, David; Bonebrake, Timothy C.; Dingle, Caroline

doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01455

Cited by 41 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of those listed species, only 154 are fish (CITES 2019 ) even though as mentioned fish are almost three quarters of the weight of animals on Earth (Bar-on et al 2018 ). Also, seafood and fish trade are recorded in the greatest numbers within international wildlife trade reporting categories (Anderson et al 2021 ), and more than one-third of fish stocks are being captured at biologically unsustainable levels (FAO 2020 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Fish Wild?

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the global biodiversity crisis continues, it is important to examine the legislative protection that is in place for species around the world. Such legislation not only includes environmental or wildlife law, but also trade law, such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which gets transposed into national legislation. This commentary analyses legislative definitions of wildlife, whether or not that includes fish, which has implications for fish welfare, use of fish for food security, and biodiversity conservation when fish, or other wildlife, are excluded. Through a legislative content analysis of the 183 parties’ legislation of CITES, we explore whether fish are afforded the same protections as other species by being included in legal definitions of wildlife. We found that while a majority of CITES parties’ legislation appear to define fish as wildlife, there are a number of instances where this is unclear or not the case, and this could have significant ramifications for the welfare of non-human animals, their use, and conservation.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Fish Wild?

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, CITES should be updated to reflect both national and international species trade policy updates, and nations should be responsible for submitting updates accordingly. Furthermore, as recommended by Andersson et al (2021), modified HS codes would be a viable way to create specificity in internationally traded wildlife goods in a way that can be analysed and directly connected to specific species, especially those likely to be traded for traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), pets and wild meat. International interagency partnerships should be formed, and monitoring activities allocated productively to ensure systematic monitoring of online wildlife trade across websites and the dark web.…”

Section: Enhance Wildlife Trade Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numbers of wildlife interceptions via human border-crossings may have been reduced due to lockdowns and international travel bans, which means air and sea ports-of-entry have been provided with a unique opportunity during the pandemic to become primary pinch-points of the illegal wildlife trade. However, due to undistilled Harmonized System codes (HS Codes) used to classify goods, and ineffective methods and resources available to identify animal parts, many transboundary trade records remain unspecific and unhelpful in documenting goods, which may be contributing to the unsustainable harvest of specific species (Andersson et al 2021).…”

Section: Figures 1 Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effectiveness of policies for addressing Covid-19 impacts on wildlife conservation in Vietnam

T.M.¹,

Pham²,

V.T.³

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We would like to thank all funding partners who supported this research through their contributions to the CGIAR Fund. For a full list of the 'CGIAR Fund' funding partners please see: http://www.cgiar.org/our-funders/ Any views expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of CIFOR, the editors, the authors' institutions, the financial sponsors or the reviewers. ContentsAbbreviations iv Acknowledgements v Executive summary vi 1 Introduction 2 Methods 3 Results 3.1 Covid-19 impacts on wildlife conservation in Vietnam 3.2 Policies and measures in response to Covid-19 3.3 Effectiveness of policies and measures 4 Discussion and recommendations 4.1 Holistic and cross-sectoral approaches for sustainable wildlife management 4.2 Enhance wildlife trade monitoring 4.3 Diversify funding sources for both state and non-state actors 4.4 Post-Covid-19 recovery plans and preventive measures to reduce the risk of future disease outbreaks References List of figures and tablesThis study was funded by the Covid-19 Hub, the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). We would like to express our special thanks to all experts participating in the national policy dialogue on "Assessing the effectiveness of wildlife conservation policies, lessons learned and recommendations for 2021-2030, with a vision to 2050" held on

show abstract

“…The trade of live exotic (i.e., non-domesticated) pets is a major source of global conservation and biosecurity threats (Ribeiro et al 2019;Gippet and Bertelsmeier 2021). While pet keeping can improve human mental and physical wellbeing (Pasmans et al 2017;Peng and Broom 2021), and pets can be traded as commodities that support businesses (Andersson et al 2021), market demand for pets can also drive the unsustainable harvest of wild populations, which is of particular concern for threatened species (Altherr and Lameter 2020;Marshall et al 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of the live pet trade: the role of species traits, socioeconomic attributes and regulatory systems

Toomes¹,

García‐Díaz²,

Stringham³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The live pet trade is a major driver of both biodiversity loss and the introduction of invasive alien species. Building a comprehensive understanding of the pet trade would improve prediction of conservation and biosecurity threats, with the aim to prevent further negative impacts. We used South Australia’s native wildlife permit reporting system as a data-rich example of a live vertebrate pet market, spanning 590 species across 105 families of terrestrial vertebrates (mammals, reptiles, birds and amphibians). Using a piecewise Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) approach, we tested the influence of 11 a priori variables relating to pets (e.g., species traits), pet owners (e.g., socioeconomic metrics), and regulatory systems (e.g., permit requirements) on the quantities of bird and reptile captive keeping, breeding, trading, and escapes into the wild. Birds and reptiles with higher annual fecundity, as well as widely distributed reptiles with higher adult mass, were more likely to be kept in captivity and sold. Species with more stringent permit requirements were possessed, and escaped, in lower abundances. Pet keeping was weakly correlated with regions of lower population densities and higher unemployment rates, yet other socioeconomic variables were ultimately poor at explaining trade dynamics. More escapes occurred in regions which possessed larger quantities of pets, further emphasising the role of propagule pressure in the risk of pet escapes.Synthesis and applications: Species traits are a strong determinant of pet trade dynamics, yet permit systems also play a key role in de-incentivising undesirable trade practices. While our research highlights the potential of trade regulatory systems, we recommend that consistent permit category criteria are established to reduce trade in threatened species, as well as alien species of high biosecurity risk. Implementation of such systems is broadly needed across a greater diversity of wildlife markets and jurisdictions.

show abstract

CITES and beyond: Illuminating 20 years of global, legal wildlife trade

Cited by 41 publications

References 61 publications

Are Fish Wild?

Are Fish Wild?

The effectiveness of policies for addressing Covid-19 impacts on wildlife conservation in Vietnam

Drivers of the live pet trade: the role of species traits, socioeconomic attributes and regulatory systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About