Suchergebnisse

In 2019, government representatives from more than 150 countries convened in Geneva for 18th Conference of the Parties for CITES. But trade in wild animals is not reversing the decline in wild animal numbers. The world needs to wake up to the fact that we cannot trade our way out of the extinction crisis. If we are to prevent further declines and secure a future for wild animals, we cannot go on treating them as mere tradable commodities.

.

This study focusses on the role of trust in the illegal distribution of protected wildlife in China. This research attempts to contribute to the literature by disentangling the establishment of trust within the illegal wildlife trade based on ethnographic fieldwork between 2011 and 2016. Both traders and consumers are resorting to mechanisms of trust to foster exchange and to increase credibility of their agreements. This study discusses the existence of such mechanisms of trust within wildlife trafficking networks that are rather characteristic of illegal wildlife trade in China.

This report reviews and recommends strategies to regulate the trade of wildlife through Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. Ulaanbaatar is an ideal site to launch an effort to support improved enforcement of wildlife trade regulations. The city is the seat of Mongolia's government, media markets, and civil society, as well as the center of the wildlife trade. Some of the country's largest raw materials markets are located to the east and west of the city. Ulaanbaatar's many road inspection points, its train station, and its airport are all strategic sites for enforcing trade regulation. Responsibility for enforcement of wildlife trade regulations is distributed among half a dozen different agencies. This report focuses specifically on Mongolia's existing legal framework for controlling the wildlife trade, and on strategies for improving enforcement, particularly in Ulaanbaatar. Before turning to those subjects, the next section provides a brief overview of the Mongolian wildlife trade.

Indonesia is one of the countries that lack a sense of concern for animals due to the rampant wildlife trade that occurs in the country. Bushmeat is not consumable since it is not regulated inside the Indonesian Law Number 18 of 2012 concerning food (hereinafter abbreviated as Law on Consumables). Various traded wild animals are believed by several individuals to have contained many good properties when consumed and can cure various diseases. But Bushmeat is a source of diseases such as Emerging Infectious Diseases (EIDs) and Coronavirus Disease (Covid-19) while also endangering the preservation of biodiversity. This bushmeat trade also sells the meat of protected endangered animals, which are proven to have violated Law Number 5 of 1990 concerning Conservation of Biological Natural Resources Article and its Ecosystem (hereinafter abbreviated as Law on Conservation of Biological Natural Resources Article and its Ecosystem), as well as other laws. The research method applied in this research would be normative juridical, which uses positive Law as a source of existing Law. The goal of this research is to understand the regulations related to Bushmeat trading based on the Law and the application towards bushmeat dealers established in Indonesia's Law Number 41 of 2014 concerning Amendments to Law Number 18 of 2009 concerning Animal Husbandry and Health (hereinafter abbreviated as Law on Livestock and Animal Health), Law on Consumables, Law on Conservation of Biological Natural Resources Article and its Ecosystem, Government Regulation Number 7 of 1999 concerning Preservation of Plant and Animal Species, Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection (hereinafter abbreviated as Law on Consumer Protection) and the Criminal Code.

Illegal wildlife trade threatens key forest landscapes throughout the world. These practices decimate valuable resources and millions of livelihoods, and contribute to global warming. Illegal trade in wildlife is depriving developing economies of billions of dollars in lost revenues and development opportunities. Understanding the phenomenon requires a broad insight into the relationship between the environmental resources at stake, their legal and illegal exploitation, loopholes, as well as the scale and type of crimes committed. Due to the problem's broad scale, a comprehensive approach is required. To curb the rise in environmental crime the response must involve legal responses, enforcement, legislation, regulation, environmental management, consumer and demand-reduction strategies, and alternative livelihood opportunities.

This article examines the intricacy within stylized debates that surround conservation and the regulation of wildlife trade in Southeast Asia. Illegal and unregulated trade in wildlife has been characterized by conservation groups as a great risk for wildlife worldwide and the prime threat for remaining wildlife populations in Laos. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) is the centrepoint of the global discourse on wildlife trade. Popular representations of wildlife trade promoted by conservation organizations construct an image of regulation through CITES as a global necessity. The assumed morality of such interventions can provoke counter accusations about the immorality of impositions by Western conservationists. Yet both of these competing representations of wildlife trade regulation encourage externally-focused moralized debates that obscure the internal dynamics within global conservation, national policy formation and local practice. Recognition of the simplifications that characterize these three domains cautions against any idealized contrast between global hegemony and local resistance in critical studies of conservation. Instead, the focus becomes the contestation that is often hidden within such dichotomies. Keywords: Conservation, wildlife, Lao PDR, CITES

This article examines the intricacy within stylized debates that surround conservation and the regulation of wildlife trade in Southeast Asia. Illegal and unregulated trade in wildlife has been characterized by conservation groups as a great risk for wildlife worldwide and the prime threat for remaining wildlife populations in Laos. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) is the centrepoint of the global discourse on wildlife trade. Popular representations of wildlife trade promoted by conservation organizations construct an image of regulation through CITES as a global necessity. The assumed morality of such interventions can provoke counter accusations about the immorality of impositions by Western conservationists. Yet both of these competing representations of wildlife trade regulation encourage externally-focused moralized debates that obscure the internal dynamics within global conservation, national policy formation and local practice. Recognition of the simplifications that characterize these three domains cautions against any idealized contrast between global hegemony and local resistance in critical studies of conservation. Instead, the focus becomes the contestation that is often hidden within such dichotomies. Keywords: Conservation, wildlife, Lao PDR, CITES