CITES Alone Cannot Combat Illegal Wildlife Trade

The document assesses the limitations of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in addressing illegal wildlife trade, noting that it is not legally binding unless implemented through national laws. It highlights a significant gap in compliance, with 50% of signatories lacking effective national legislation. The author recommends strengthening synergies between CITES and other agreements like the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), as well as fostering transregional consensus to prevent the displacement of illegal markets. Specific focus is placed on the need for increased capacity and funding for scientific authorities in high-biodiversity developing nations, particularly in Africa, to improve the evidence base for non-detriment findings (NDFs).

• CITES is not self-executing and depends on member states to reproduce its provisions in national laws to be legally binding; currently, 50% of CITES signatories lack the national laws required for effective and enforceable implementation.
• Trade suspensions are frequently used for non-compliance, often affecting under-resourced countries or those in internal conflict; at the 66th meeting of the CITES standing committee, 27 countries faced trade suspensions, 16 of which were in Africa.
• The effectiveness of CITES can be enhanced through synergy with other multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), to reduce duplication of effort and harmonize conservation efforts.
• Transregional consensus is necessary to prevent illegal trade from being displaced to areas with poorer governance; for example, the African Elephant Coalition, representing 70% of African elephant range states, advocates for a comprehensive ban on ivory trade.
• There is a critical need to increase funding and capacity for scientific and management authorities in high-biodiversity developing nations to improve the evidence base for non-detriment findings (NDFs) and ensure scientific recommendations are binding on management authorities.
• The document suggests that penalties for illegal wildlife trade should be increased specifically for commodities that are known to finance conflict, such as ivory, timber, and charcoal.

APA

Nowak, K. (2016). CITES Alone Cannot Combat Illegal Wildlife Trade. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Policy-Insights-34.pdf

Chicago

Nowak, Katarzyna. CITES Alone Cannot Combat Illegal Wildlife Trade. South African Institute of International Affairs, 2016. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Policy-Insights-34.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Nowak |first1=Katarzyna |title=CITES Alone Cannot Combat Illegal Wildlife Trade |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=August 2016 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Policy-Insights-34.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{nowak2016cites, author = {Nowak, Katarzyna}, title = {{CITES Alone Cannot Combat Illegal Wildlife Trade}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2016}, month = aug, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Policy-Insights-34.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }