2011
DOI: 10.1002/eet.577
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Moving Towards Sustainability? An Analysis of CITES’ Conservation Policies

Abstract: The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) has been criticised for following a narrow preservationist agenda centred on protecting charismatic species through trade-restrictive policies that disregard the livelihood strategies of communities living alongside wildlife. More recently, however, parties to CITES have embraced the sustainability discourse and taken steps to address the socio-economic dimensions of wildlife trade. This paper examines the policies deve… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although these species are highly valued alive and in situ by conservationists, largely for their existence value, they are equally in demand by those seeking to profit from them through lethal harvesting, be this for financial profit or sociocultural or livelihood reasons (e.g., t'Sas-Rolfes 2000; Roe et al 2002;Donovan 2004;Biggs et al 2013). In our view, the decision to reduce the complex social, cultural, and economic nature of wildlife trade into a simple law enforcement problem therefore fails to address the underlying drivers of poaching and trade (Velasquez Gomar & Stringer 2011). It also lacks legitimacy in source countries where it typically translates into disincentives for rural people to conserve wildlife and conflicts with local livelihood strategies, traditional practices, and cultural norms (e.g., Roe et al 2002;Donovan 2004;TRAFFIC 2008;MacMillan & Nguyen 2013).…”
Section: Why Poaching Is More Than An Enforcement Problemmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Although these species are highly valued alive and in situ by conservationists, largely for their existence value, they are equally in demand by those seeking to profit from them through lethal harvesting, be this for financial profit or sociocultural or livelihood reasons (e.g., t'Sas-Rolfes 2000; Roe et al 2002;Donovan 2004;Biggs et al 2013). In our view, the decision to reduce the complex social, cultural, and economic nature of wildlife trade into a simple law enforcement problem therefore fails to address the underlying drivers of poaching and trade (Velasquez Gomar & Stringer 2011). It also lacks legitimacy in source countries where it typically translates into disincentives for rural people to conserve wildlife and conflicts with local livelihood strategies, traditional practices, and cultural norms (e.g., Roe et al 2002;Donovan 2004;TRAFFIC 2008;MacMillan & Nguyen 2013).…”
Section: Why Poaching Is More Than An Enforcement Problemmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…This is because it typically restricts or prohibits their direct use, for example by rural communities in developing countries who may be dependent on wildlife for their livelihoods, adversely resulting in disincentives for conservation (e.g., Roe et al, 2002 andVelásquez Gomar andStringer, 2011). In recognition of the need to consider these factors in listing decisions, the Parties have adopted a number of Resolutions and Decisions to this end (see Table 1).…”
Section: Approaches To Controlling International Trade In Citesmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…As such, parallels have been drawn against the reliance on regulation in CITES and the failed 'war on drugs', which favoured increasing investment in enforcement effort over actions to tackle drug abuse directly (e.g., Challender and MacMillan, 2014;Poret andTéjédo, 2006 andWerb et al, 2013). In conservation terms, regulation implementing CITES in much of the developing world reduces the complex nature of wildlife trade, which is intrinsically linked to poverty alleviation, tenure rights, rural livelihoods and cultural traditions, into a simple law enforcement problem (Roe et al, 2002;Velásquez Gomar and Stringer, 2011). Yet, this approach typically translates into disincentives for conservation by restricting the direct use of wildlife on which rural communities depend socioeconomically (e.g., for food, income and trade) and culturally (e.g., ceremonial hunting; see Abdullah et al, 2011;Donovan, 2004 and.…”
Section: Over Reliance On Regulationmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…CITES had also cautioned against NGOs playing a significant role in the delivery of enforcement-related training and in developing enforcement strategies at national and sub-regional levels (for example, see CITES, 2010). Several scholars (Duffy, 2000a,b;Gomar and Stringer, 2011;Neumann, 1995) have shown how the CITES Convention has been caught up in debates of conservation and trade and has been accused by various factions on the way it operates in terms of preventing and allowing small amounts of regulated international trade (Moore, 2010). Though CITES has convened several meetings (CITES, 2012a) and working groups to decide a suitable wildlife crime database, a transboundary decision support system on wildlife crime still remains elusive in practice.…”
Section: Resistance From Citesmentioning
confidence: 97%