CITES in the new millennium - IUCN

WHY CITES?
A mixed record
Growth and adaptation of a Convention
David Brackett
From the largest mammal in existence, the blue whale,
to the dainty swallowtail butterfly, from the rarest orchids
on the planet to the mighty mahogany and ramin
trees, CITES regulates trade in a great variety of species.
All have one factor in common – the international
community has decided to cooperate to ensure
trade is not detrimental to the survival of species.
Now 27 years old, CITES is one of the older and
arguably more successful multilateral environmental
agreements. Although established some time before
contemporary views on international governance and
resource ownership came into vogue, CITES was nonetheless
far-reaching in outlook.
The Preamble establishes the principle that all national
governments have sovereign rights and responsibilities
over their wild species and equally that
international cooperation is essential for effective
management of international trade. In addition to
appreciating the beauty of wild species, the drafters
also recognised their increasing value. Perhaps most
important in this era of conservation consciousness,
when sustainable development and benefit-sharing
are pillars of the Convention on Biological
Diversity, the objective of CITES is to ensure that any
Spix’s macaw Cyanopsitta spixii was declared extinct in the wild in
1999, despite being fully protected by CITES since 1975. Over this
period, more than 60 birds have been successfully bred in captivity
under CITES coordination. The tiger is teetering on the brink with
successive resolutions urging Parties to take further measures. Rhino
poaching remained high for a decade after all species were included
in Appendix I, but for the last 8–10 years the combination of Appendix
I listings and investment in small rhino sanctuaries has prevented the
resurgence of high levels of poaching. Populations of white rhino have
increased substantially.
exploitation of wild species for trade is sustainable for
generations to come.
Hard law, soft law
Species are included in three Appendices to the Convention,
which provide different levels of protection
from trade (see page 6). These are amended at the
biennial meetings of the Conference of the Parties
and result in the most substantive decisions that are
taken, as they are enshrined in ‘hard law’.
In addition to the amendments, the COP also discusses
changes to its resolutions and decisions, although
as ‘soft law’ some discretion can be exercised
in implementing these texts.
CITES has broad global coverage, with 160 Parties
at the last count. With regional representation on committees,
the Convention brings together a wide range
of views on the best approaches to regulating exploitation
for international trade so that it does not threaten
species. The Parties overtly recognised the benefits of
trade in 1984, and this approach underpins many of
the sustainable use programmes that the Convention
helps to regulate.
Non-detrimental trade
According to the Convention, any trade in Appendix
II species (see page 6) should be non-detrimental
(see box, page 5), but over the years some Parties
have had to struggle to fulfil this requirement. Consequently,
a review of trade in Appendix II species was
instituted to assist Parties in managing trade
sustainably. This Significant Trade Review (see box,
page 5) allows the Plants and Animals Committees to
highlight specific problems that individual Parties may
have in trying to determine whether that trade is sustainable
and thus make targeted recommendations
to particular Parties. These recommendations may
include, for instance, limited trade bans or restrictions
in the volume of trade and can be a useful tool to
help a Party get its trade in a particular taxon onto a
sustainable footing.
Unforeseen consequences
The ability to use trade restrictions is one of CITES’
strengths, by giving it a means to enforce compliance.
But some trade restrictions have had unforeseen
consequences, as when trade has switched to a similar
taxon or to specimens from a different range state,
or when it encouraged ex situ captive breeding/artificial
propagation that did not provide benefits to the
range states. After 10 years of operation, a review of
the effectiveness of this process would help to make it
even better at helping Parties meet their obligations.
Inclusion in Appendix I has been a mixed success
for a number of species, and in cases where demand
4 World Conservation 3/2002
WWF-CANON/ROGER LEGUEN