Nature Need More can with 100% certainty state that there is No Chance of achieving the CITES Strategic Vision 2030. Equally, there is No Chance of achieving the KMGBF Target 5 by 2030. Why do we say this? Because neither body is making any substantive effort to achieve a transparent, legal, and sustainable trade by 2030, that can be independently validated. Instead, just look at what the CITES is actually doing to achieve its strategic vision for 2030. In essence the CITES document submitted to CoP20 reports: We mapped the CITES Strategic Vision 2030 indicators against the KMGBF indicators and UN Sustainable Development Goals We will provide relevant data to the KMGBF monitoring framework We [...]

Plenty of conventions and IGOs deal with the rights of people, poverty and development; The World Bank and UNCTAD were created for this very purpose. So why, when there are so few that focus on non-human species does the corporate conservation sector and conservation academics want to bring these considerations 'formally' into the CITES? Recent years have seen an increasing focus on Sustainable Use and Livelihoods (SULi) on committee and the CoP agendas of the CITES. While indigenous peoples and local communities have a right to be at the table as observers, poverty alleviation is not the role of the CITES; CITES must not be captured by this issue.  The ONLY possible explanation for many corporate conservation organisations [...]

The illusion and delusion of the supposed CITES effectiveness must end. While a modern and well-funded CITES is desperately needed, the convention cannot survive in its current state because it has long failed in its stated objective of protecting endangered species from overexploitation through international trade. Over decades the CITES has undergone a death by a thousand cuts. The neglect of the convention itself means its activities are primarily performative in nature. Its time is up, it must be modernised and made fit for purpose or be shut down. Maintaining the status quo is just selling out wild species and gutless. The most important document submitted to CITES CoP20 is Doc. 14, that admits, “The current situation [in [...]

Given the CITES trade measures have never been enforced, the valid question is, has the CITES ever really been a regulator of the trade in wild species? That CITES is believed to be a regulator in not in doubt. In a briefing session, John Scanlon, who was Secretary General of CITES between 2010 and 2018 summarised the CITES this way, “CITES is a convention of the 1970s. It is focused on a very specific issue, in this case regulating international trade in wildlife to protect against over exploitation from international trade. [CITES Parties] have preferred to maintain the narrow focus of the convention”. He continued, “CITES regulates trade in certain species to ensure the trade is legal and [...]

Over the years of researching the CITES listed legal trade in wild species, periodically the question arose, “What if Jeff Bezos ran Amazon Inc. with the same supply chain processes as the CITES?”. Amazon Inc. is a perfect contrast of what can be achieved when it is in the business’ interest for supply chains to be well monitored. Amazon runs 175 fulfilment centres across the globe and stocks hundreds of millions of items, so the complexity of the trade is not the issue when it comes to real-time monitoring and tracking. In stark contrast, the CITES trade management processes, based on a 1970s paper-permit system, is what happens when businesses would rather keep you in the dark about [...]

No stakeholder is interested in validating the sustainable use model that the CITES is purportedly based on. After 50 years of the CITES, there is still no way to validate if the trade this regulator manages is sustainable. Businesses and industries know genuine validation of sustainable use of wild species would threaten their profits and is likely to reduce access to the ‘raw materials’ they need for production. After seafood, fashion and furniture are the biggest users of these ‘raw materials’. Governments know that validating the sustainable use model would challenge their ‘economic growth at all costs’ mindset because a transparent and precise assessment of the current scale of extraction would undoubtedly mean a reduction in trade. [...]

The convention cannot deliver anything for wild species until the funding crisis is solved. For decades the CITES has been an ineffective regulator due to its impoverished state. Submissions to CITES CoP 20 detail that the contributions due to the CITES for 2025 are US$6.6 million, but to-date only $3.3 million have been received. That’s means another US$3.3 million are outstanding plus an additional $1.4 million in unpaid contributions from prior years. What makes this both tragic and ridiculous is that that the CITES trade is primarily for the luxury markets, with fashion and furniture being the biggest users of wild species after seafood. In 2016, a European Parliament Report acknowledged that “The wildlife trade is one of [...]

In a 2024 article, On Climate Week and Toxic Positivity, journalist Amy Westervelt, said, “the focus on positivity to the exclusion of anything else felt completely surreal and, if I’m being honest, a little scary….seeing so many climate leaders demand positivity, and only positivity, was more than a little unnerving”. In the world of conservation, phantom solutions and incrementalist actions to deal with biodiversity loss are even called ‘nature positive’, an equally surreal and completely meaningless term. I don’t meet many conservationists who I would say can embrace and deal with conservation’s Stockdale Paradox. Inspired by Admiral James Stockdale’s survival of seven years in a North Vietnamese prisoner of war camp, the Stockdale Paradox combines the ability to [...]

Two tragic things happened in the last month and taken together they highlight the lack of courage global conservation organisations and academics have shown in both exposing, and trying to fix, the structural weaknesses of the system that regulates the global, industrial trade in over 40,000 endangered and exotic species. First, in a submission document to CITES CoP20, the organisation’s leadership acknowledges, “The current mode of work is no longer viable”, continuing, “The time for action is now, to safeguard the Convention’s integrity and effectiveness”. A concern that Nature Needs More contacted the CITES leadership about in 2018. The second is that well-known global conservation organisations have lent their brands to help small, private sector entities [...]

Photo by Rafael Ishkhanyan on Unsplash The CITES, which came into force in July 1975, was born out of a set of assumptions and a geopolitical prospective that reflect the 1960s. As the world changed drastically from the late 1970s CITES didn’t, the articles of the convention have stayed the same. CITES has had only one strategic review in its 50-year history, back in 1994, which also didn’t result in any significant changes. This lack of evolution goes someway to explaining how ineffective the convention is today. Key to the staggering inertia is that the mindset of the academics, NGOs and IGOs, who could have lobbied the convention’s government signatories to evolve with a changing world, are also [...]