Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Biosphere - WBGU

54 D The use of genetic and species diversity
tems and identification methods (eg genetic tests)
remains an important task in relation to Appendix II
species.
In the case of Appendix I species, the acute danger
of extinction continues to demand strict trade regulation.
This reduces drastically the number of specimens
or products found (as a result of exceptions) in
legal international trade, making the control and
monitoring job of the responsible authorities easier
and helping to prevent possible forgery of requisite
documents. It should however be considered that
strict regulation of Appendix I species cuts off important
sources of income for the regional states (particularly
developing countries). Nonetheless, given the
acute danger of extinction, appropriate compensation
should not take the form of a relaxation of the
trade ban, but rather financial assistance, compensatory
payments, debt waivers and development
assistance projects (Section I 3.5).
Export quota arrangements and management
plans
In the case of the quota arrangements arrived at for
the species in Appendix II, it must be criticized that
this does not fix the absolute number of specimens
but rather the number that is allowed in international
trade (Sand, 1997). This is a deficit that arises out of
the sectoral approach of CITES and illustrates the
need for all instruments and agreements within a
global protection system of species and species diversity
conservation to interlock (Chapter I). However,
in the countries of origin, annually fixed export
quotas for Appendix II species may guarantee a certain
amount of control over the level of international
trade. As the Council recommended back in its 1994
report, for really effective protection they would
have to take into account key biological data on the
basis of the latest scientific findings (eg population
dynamics and reproductive patterns) as well as the
scale of the threat from trade, habitat destruction and
environmental stress. It would make sense for the
role of the relevant committees (Animals Committee,
Plants Committee) to be strengthened considerably
and their recommendations be given more
weight. As in the case of the decisions regarding the
African elephant, export quota arrangements should
be supplemented by management plans for the use,
reinvestment in and maintenance of national populations,
something that may indirectly also promote the
conservation of habitats.
The German Federal Government should also
advocate that when decisions are made with regard
to including a species in Appendix II, at the same
time a resolution be adopted that addresses the
necessary research, protection, conservation and
control measures in the regional and buying countries.
One example is the resolution on the conservation
of the sturgeon (Resolution 10.12).
Mechanism for the classification of species
In order to counteract the primarily politically or
economically motivated classification decisions, for
some time now the appointment or at least participation
of an independent scientific decision-making
body has been advocated. With regard to the people
making up that body, an independent expert body
could be considered (possibly an Intergovernmental
Panel on Biodiversity, Section I 3.2.1.1) or the existing
committees (Animals and Plants Committees). It
must be considered however that the decisions with
regard to including species in a list or moving them
between lists are quasi legislative acts that cannot be
simply transferred to scientists. Both when delegating
decisions to experts, but also if giving voting participation
to experts, the problem of democratic legitimacy
arises.
It would therefore make more sense to expand the
competences of the existing committees to include
examining and evaluating biological and traderelated
data and issuing corresponding recommendations,
not just for species already listed in the Appendices
but also for species worthy of inclusion. Collaboration
with external institutions qualified in these
areas is recommended (IUCN, red lists). Furthermore,
the scientific recommendations of the committees
could gain more weight through publication.
Effective enforcement mechanisms in the
case of infringement or non-compliance
In the case of violations of the Convention it is the
Secretariat’s job to contact the enforcement authorities
of the member states in question. However, the
measures and investigation of the facts that follow
depend upon their being in accordance with national
legal provisions and the ‘initiative right’ of the member
state in question (Art. 13 CITES). It would be
necessary here, in addition to supporting incentives
and recommendations for implementation of the
agreement, to establish binding provisions with
regard to investigations, assistance measures or sanctions.
In such cases in the past the Secretariat has at
times involved the Standing Committee that, in a resolution,
has recommended applying collectively Art.
14 para 1 CITES and to ban any trade in endangered
species with the state in question (Sand, 1997). Examples
of such a move were measures against the
United Arab Emirates, Thailand and Italy, which
improved their legislation and enforcement in
response and thus managed to get the sanctions lifted
(Birnie, 1996). Such measures should be continued
and established in a more binding form. In order to
address appropriately the differing degrees of viola-