TY - JOUR
T1 - Mischaracterizing wildlife trade and its impacts may mislead policy processes
AU - Challender, Daniel W.S.
AU - Brockington, Dan
AU - Hinsley, Amy
AU - Hoffmann, Michael
AU - Kolby, Jonathan E.
AU - Massé, Francis
AU - Natusch, Daniel J.D.
AU - Oldfield, Thomasina E.E.
AU - Outhwaite, Willow
AU - ’t Sas‐Rolfes, Michael
AU - Milner‐Gulland, Eleanor J.
N1 - Funding information: DC and EJMG acknowledge funding from the Oxford Martin Programme on Wildlife Trade and the UK Research and Innovation's Global Challenges Research Fund (UKRI GCRF) through the Trade, Development, and the Environment Hub project (project number ES/S008160/1). AH is funded by a Kadas Fellowship at Worcester College, Oxford. FM was supported by an ERC Advanced Investigator Grant (number 694995).
PY - 2022/1/1
Y1 - 2022/1/1
N2 - Overexploitation is a key driver of biodiversity loss but the relationship between the use and trade of species and conservation outcomes is not always straightforward. Accurately characterising wildlife trade and understanding the impact it has on wildlife populations are therefore critical to evaluating the potential threat trade poses to species and informing local to international policy responses. However, a review of recent research that uses wildlife and trade-related databases to investigate these topics highlights three relatively widespread issues: (1) mischaracterisation of the threat that trade poses to certain species or groups, (2) misinterpretation of wildlife trade data (and illegal trade data in particular), resulting in the mischaracterisation of trade, and (3) misrepresentation of international policy processes and instruments. This is concerning because these studies may unwittingly misinform policymaking to the detriment of conservation, for example by undermining positive outcomes for species and people along wildlife supply chains. Moreover, these issues demonstrate flaws in the peer-review process. As wildlife trade articles published in peer-reviewed journals can be highly influential, we propose ways for authors, journal editors, database managers, and policymakers to identify, understand and avoid these issues as we all work towards more sustainable futures.
AB - Overexploitation is a key driver of biodiversity loss but the relationship between the use and trade of species and conservation outcomes is not always straightforward. Accurately characterising wildlife trade and understanding the impact it has on wildlife populations are therefore critical to evaluating the potential threat trade poses to species and informing local to international policy responses. However, a review of recent research that uses wildlife and trade-related databases to investigate these topics highlights three relatively widespread issues: (1) mischaracterisation of the threat that trade poses to certain species or groups, (2) misinterpretation of wildlife trade data (and illegal trade data in particular), resulting in the mischaracterisation of trade, and (3) misrepresentation of international policy processes and instruments. This is concerning because these studies may unwittingly misinform policymaking to the detriment of conservation, for example by undermining positive outcomes for species and people along wildlife supply chains. Moreover, these issues demonstrate flaws in the peer-review process. As wildlife trade articles published in peer-reviewed journals can be highly influential, we propose ways for authors, journal editors, database managers, and policymakers to identify, understand and avoid these issues as we all work towards more sustainable futures.
KW - CITES
KW - database
KW - illegal trade
KW - policy
KW - IUCN Red List
KW - social media
KW - sustainable use
KW - threat
KW - wildlife trade
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85111814942&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/conl.12832
DO - 10.1111/conl.12832
M3 - Article
VL - 15
JO - Conservation Letters
JF - Conservation Letters
SN - 1755-263X
IS - 1
M1 - e12832
ER -