File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Determining the sustainability of legal wildlife trade

TitleDetermining the sustainability of legal wildlife trade
Authors
KeywordsBiodiversity loss
CITES
Livelihoods
Non-detriment findings
Overexploitation
Populations
Precautionary principle
Threatened species
Unsustainable
Issue Date1-Sep-2023
PublisherElsevier
Citation
Journal of Environmental Management, 2023, v. 341 How to Cite?
Abstract

Exploitation of wildlife represents one of the greatest threats to species survival according to the Intergovern-mental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Whilst detrimental impacts of illegal trade are well recognised, legal trade is often equated to being sustainable despite the lack of evidence or data in the majority of cases. We review the sustainability of wildlife trade, the adequacy of tools, safeguards, and frameworks to understand and regulate trade, and identify gaps in data that undermine our ability to truly understand the sustainability of trade. We provide 183 examples showing unsustainable trade in a broad range of taxonomic groups. In most cases, neither illegal nor legal trade are supported by rigorous evidence of sustain -ability, with the lack of data on export levels and population monitoring data precluding true assessments of species or population-level impacts. We propose a more precautionary approach to wildlife trade and monitoring that requires those who profit from trade to provide proof of sustainability. We then identify four core areas that must be strengthened to achieve this goal: (1) rigorous data collection and analyses of populations; (2) linking trade quotas to IUCN and international accords; (3) improved databases and compliance of trade; and (4) enhanced understanding of trade bans, market forces, and species substitutions. Enacting these core areas in regulatory frameworks, including CITES, is essential to the continued survival of many threatened species. There are no winners from unsustainable collection and trade: without sustainable management not only will species or populations become extinct, but communities dependent upon these species will lose livelihoods.


Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/333771
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 8.0
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.771
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHughes, Alice-
dc.contributor.authorAuliya, Mark-
dc.contributor.authorAltherr, Sandra-
dc.contributor.authorScheffers, Brett-
dc.contributor.authorJanssen, Jordi-
dc.contributor.authorNijman, Vincent-
dc.contributor.authorShepherd, R Chris-
dc.contributor.authorD'Cruze, Neil-
dc.contributor.authorSy, Emerson-
dc.contributor.authorEdwards, P David-
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-06T08:38:56Z-
dc.date.available2023-10-06T08:38:56Z-
dc.date.issued2023-09-01-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Environmental Management, 2023, v. 341-
dc.identifier.issn0301-4797-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/333771-
dc.description.abstract<p>Exploitation of wildlife represents one of the greatest threats to species survival according to the Intergovern-mental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Whilst detrimental impacts of illegal trade are well recognised, legal trade is often equated to being sustainable despite the lack of evidence or data in the majority of cases. We review the sustainability of wildlife trade, the adequacy of tools, safeguards, and frameworks to understand and regulate trade, and identify gaps in data that undermine our ability to truly understand the sustainability of trade. We provide 183 examples showing unsustainable trade in a broad range of taxonomic groups. In most cases, neither illegal nor legal trade are supported by rigorous evidence of sustain -ability, with the lack of data on export levels and population monitoring data precluding true assessments of species or population-level impacts. We propose a more precautionary approach to wildlife trade and monitoring that requires those who profit from trade to provide proof of sustainability. We then identify four core areas that must be strengthened to achieve this goal: (1) rigorous data collection and analyses of populations; (2) linking trade quotas to IUCN and international accords; (3) improved databases and compliance of trade; and (4) enhanced understanding of trade bans, market forces, and species substitutions. Enacting these core areas in regulatory frameworks, including CITES, is essential to the continued survival of many threatened species. There are no winners from unsustainable collection and trade: without sustainable management not only will species or populations become extinct, but communities dependent upon these species will lose livelihoods.<br></p>-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherElsevier-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Environmental Management-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectBiodiversity loss-
dc.subjectCITES-
dc.subjectLivelihoods-
dc.subjectNon-detriment findings-
dc.subjectOverexploitation-
dc.subjectPopulations-
dc.subjectPrecautionary principle-
dc.subjectThreatened species-
dc.subjectUnsustainable-
dc.titleDetermining the sustainability of legal wildlife trade-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117987-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85159087065-
dc.identifier.volume341-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:001009102400001-
dc.identifier.issnl0301-4797-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats