Strengthening International Legal Cooperation to Combat the Illegal Wildlife Trade Between Southeast Asia and China

Abstract

China is among the world’s leading consumer markets for wildlife extracted both legally and illegally from across the globe. Due to its mega-richness in biodiversity and strong economic ties with China, Southeast Asia (SEA) has long been implicated as a source and transit hub in the transnational legal and illegal wildlife trade with China. Although several cross-border and domestic wildlife enforcement mechanisms have been established to tackle this illegal trade in the region, international legal cooperation and policy coordination between China and its SEA neighbors remain limited in both scope and effectiveness. Difficulties in investigating and prosecuting offenders in overseas jurisdictions, as well as organized criminal groups that sustain the illicit supply chain, continue to undermine efforts by the region’s governments to combat wildlife trafficking. In addition to reviewing the key trends in both the legal and illegal wildlife trade between SEA and China, this paper examines existing legal and policy frameworks in SEA countries and China, and provides a synthesis of evidence on the latest developments in regional efforts to curtail this multibillion-dollar trade. In particular, it discusses how proactive and effective China has been in cooperating with its SEA neighbors on this issue. The paper also draws on the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) framework to suggest pathways to deepen legal cooperation between China and SEA countries in order to disrupt and dismantle transnational wildlife trafficking in the region.

Pandemics and the human-wildlife interface in Asia: land use change as a driver of zoonotic viral outbreaks

“…SEA and China have the world's highest rate of wildlife declines, with more than one million animals, especially mammalian species, exported both legally and illegally from 2014 to 2018 (Nijman 2010, Symes et al 2018, CITES 2021). Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, and China are the largest exporters of wild-caught animals, while Japan and the European Union are the largest importers; however, as we discuss in a later section, much of the wildlife caught in China and SEA is traded and consumed domestically or within the region as food, fashion products, traditional medicine, and pets (Vu and Nielsen 2018, CITES 2021, Jiao et al 2021.…”

Wildlife management and conservation in Vietnam: From policy to practice

“…In addition, Vietnam also revised its Criminal Code in 2017 (Law No. 12/2017/QH14) with a 40-fold increase in the maximum fine (VND 15 billion) and a threefold increase to 15 years in the maximum prison sentence for crimes related to endangered and rare species (Jiao et al 2021).…”

“…Data on the status of biodiversity, legal and illegal wildlife trading, and direct and online trade in Vietnam are limited and not up-to-date (Giles et al 2006;Van et al 2019;Pham et al 2021b). Existing data often underreports wildlife crime, fails to accurately represent the large volumes of wildlife being poached and trafficked (Yiming and Dianmo 1998), or only reflects part of the complex wildlife management chain (OECD 2019;Jiao et al 2021). Performance indicators have frequently rated law enforcement and oversight in Vietnam as being inefficient due to overlapping policies, lack of resources for enforcement, inefficient transnational and cross-sectoral cooperation, and vested interests and corruption (To 2009;Nguyen et al 2019).…”

Selective border permeability: Governing complex environmental issues through and beyond COVID-19

“…From the demand side, such transboundary cooperation would need to tackle the unabated reliance on exotic wildlife by Chinese Traditional Medicine (TCM), a global industry worth around US$50 billion annually ( Cyranoski, 2018 ). In Southeast Asia, where links with markets in China have strengthened through the latter's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) for transport, trade and human connectivity ( Jiao et al, 2021 ), conditions are ripe for these illicit cross-border flows to flourish in the post-pandemic period.…”