A new analysis led by University of Oxford researchers has found that the main agreement that regulates international wildlife trade is failing to adequately deter the illegal extraction and trade of many species. The year 2025 marks 50 years since CITES, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, came into force. However, the research team urge that reform is needed to ensure that trade does not damage the status of wild populations of plants and animals. Their proposed new framework for CITES has been published this week in Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution .
Billions of people worldwide depend on wild species for food security, livelihoods, income generation, and well-being. Achieving long-term sustainability in the trade and use of wild species is a key global priority-not only for conservation but also to support the billions of people who rely on these species. CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) is the foundation of international action to support sustainable trade. It currently provides legal protection to over 40,000 animal and plant species, playing a crucial role in safeguarding biodiversity.
Researchers at the University of Oxford critically evaluated the effectiveness of CITES, asking 'is the Convention solving the problem for which it was designed?' Their analysis revealed critical flaws in the CITES approach - including a predominant focus on state-led law enforcement to prevent the illegal trade and extraction of species, and the exclusion of nuanced socio-economic analysis in decision-making. While the Convention has drawn attention to overexploitation, it is not deterring widespread illegal activities in wildlife trade systems in many parts of the world. Evidence indicates that in recent years illegal wildlife trade has involved thousands of CITES-listed species and occurred in at least 162 countries.
The current approach is proving ineffective for many species due to under-resourced public agencies and a lack of motivation, as many consider the laws illegitimate. In some cases, simply prohibiting international trade appears to accelerate overexploitation-the opposite of the intended effect.
Co-author Dr Michael 't Sas-Rolfes (School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford)
Informed by this evaluation, the researchers have developed a new decision support tool for CITES. This is based on an in-depth understanding of wildlife trade systems, and the use of inclusive and consultative governance processes to revise or redesign the rules and regulations around the use and trade of species.
Dr Dan Challender (University of Oxford), lead author of the study, says: 'Current decision-making processes in CITES assume that a predominant focus on state-led law enforcement is the best solution, when in fact, this approach is proving inadequate for many species across most parts of the world. The time has come for CITES to change. There should be much more focus on exploring institutionally diverse conservation models so there is less reliance on under-resourced public agencies.'
Co-author, Professor E.J. Milner-Gulland (University of Oxford), adds: 'We need to move away from debates about whether to simply ban international trade in species and toward understanding wildlife trade systems in-depth so that interventions are evidence-based, tailored to particular species and trade systems, and legitimate for the people involved. This may involve tightening or relaxing trade measures for species, and importantly, situating CITES trade measures within the wider institutional landscape.'
Unlike the current approach, where many species in CITES receive a one-size-fits-all approach to trade regulation, the proposed framework tailors interventions to specific trade systems, situates them within broader institutional settings, and aligns institutions along international supply chains. Supported by a robust evidence base, these interventions could include:
- devolving land and/or use rights to species to indigenous peoples and local communities;
- management and/or ownership of species by private actors;
- programmes to reduce consumer demand;
- the development of responsible markets for wildlife products in circumstances where this would be likely to benefit species.
The Oxford University researchers. Left to right: Professor E.J. Milner-Gulland (Credit: John Cairns); Dr Dan Challender; Dr Michael 't Sas-Rolfes.As one example, pangolins are a group of species threatened by overexploitation, including for illicit, international trade. Use of the proposed approach could suggest that securing tenure rights and/or formal rights to use and potentially trade pangolins by indigenous peoples and local communities in West and Central Africa - where this can be demonstrated to be sustainable - could better serve the conservation of the species in the long term. Current trade measures and associated recommendations in CITES advise against any trade and promote non-consumptive use of these species. This is despite the extraction and consumption of pangolins being socially legitimate in many parts of these regions.
'Tailoring interventions to specific trade systems and embracing collaborative governance can help to ensure that new or revised laws and rules are legitimate to actors along supply chains, meaning there is a greater likelihood that these actors will comply with such rules' explains Dr Challender. 'State-led law enforcement would still be needed at some level but community-based monitoring and clearly-defined property rights could mean less reliance on the state.'
Professor Milner-Gulland adds: 'This more nuanced approach does require collecting and analysing relevant evidence in collaboration with local people, regional and national officials, but this evidence is needed anyway in order to make informed decisions - the new framework provides a way of integrating social, economic and ecological evidence to enhance understanding of what might work, and avoid unintended consequences of international decisions.'
Using this approach, the researchers believe CITES could fulfil its promise to safeguard biodiversity as well as support the people who rely on these vital resources, ensuring that international wildlife trade is legal and sustainable as the Convention enters its 51st year. The researchers are liaising closely with colleagues in different countries who are signatories to CITES, and with the secretariat, to ensure that this new framework is developed in a way that meets their needs, and could complement and enhance existing approaches and initiatives at both national and international levels.
The paper 'A theory of change to improve conservation outcomes through CITES' has been published in Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution .
