Understanding markets to conserve trade-threatened species in CITES Daniel W.S. Challender a,⇑ , Stuart R. Harrop b , Douglas C. MacMillan a a Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology (DICE), School of Anthropology and Conservation, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent CT2 7NR, UK b School of Law, Politics and Sociology, Friston Building, University of Sussex, Southern Ring Road, Falmer, Brighton, East Sussex BN1 9RH, UK article info Article history: Received 29 September 2014 Received in revised form 6 April 2015 Accepted 16 April 2015 Keywords: CITES Demand Economics Markets Pangolin Special reporting requirements Wildlife trade abstract International trade in wildlife is a major threat to biodiversity conservation. CITES, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, is the primary mechanism for main- taining sustainability in international wildlife trade. Although a comparatively well-designed legal instrument, CITES has been criticised because of its emphasis on regulatory measures and disregard for the economic reality of wildlife trade. Through means of a case study on the trade in pangolins (Pholidota: Manidae) in Asia, we evaluate the CITES approach to controlling trade and demonstrate sig- nificant areas to be addressed. These arise because CITES fails to accurately monitor supply, particularly where trade is illegal, it fails to consider the impact of trade controls in realistic terms, and it does little to consider the complex nature of demand or contend with changing market dynamics. To more effectively manage trade we argue that reforms are needed within CITES. Specifically, we highlight improved mon- itoring of supply (by accounting for illegal and legal trade) and of demand and prices for wildlife (through national wildlife consumption surveys). This information would generate a more holistic understanding of wildlife trade and, if integrated with the Convention’s existing trade database, would allow a more realistic evaluation of the performance of trade controls, and could inform decision-making and the implementation of interventions which go beyond regulation and address demand directly. In a world of rapid economic and social change understanding markets and addressing demand as well as supply is essential to conserving the world’s trade threatened species. Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction International trade in wildlife is a major threat to biodiversity conservation (Broad et al., 2003; Sutherland et al., 2009) and can diminish species’ populations, cause extirpations, and ultimately threaten ecosystem function (Challender et al., 2015; Duckworth et al., 2012; Smith et al., 2010). It is of serious concern to policy- makers at present as a result of rising demand for traditional Asian medicine, luxury foods and curios, among other trades (e.g., pets), and current laws and regulations are increasingly being by-passed (Challender and MacMillan, 2014; Natusch and Lyons, 2012; Rosen and Smith, 2010). CITES, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, which entered into force in 1975, is the primary mechanism for controlling international wild- life trade (CITES, 2014a). It seeks to ensure that international trade does not threaten the survival in the wild of c.35,000 species (CITES, 2014a). It relies on precise and specific regulatory measures including trade bans (3% or 931 species are listed in Appendix I) and controls (96% or 34, 419 species are listed in Appendix II and < 1% or 147 species are listed in Appendix III), which are estab- lished following an assessment of species’ extinction risk, and the subsequent monitoring of trade levels (CITES, 2014a; Wijnstekers, 2011). It is implemented by member states (known as Parties, currently numbering 181) through a system of permits, national legislation and enforcement mechanisms, and nominated national agencies (CITES, 2014a). Although CITES has had successes in species conservation terms, it has also been criticised because it disregards the eco- nomic reality of wildlife trade and its broader socio-economic and cultural drivers (e.g., Challender et al., 2015; Challender and MacMillan, 2014; Cooney and Abensperg-Traun, 2013; Roe et al., 2002). Controlling trade requires understanding markets, including supply (e.g., species abundance, production and trade volumes) and demand (e.g., consumer preferences, demand elasticity and social norms surrounding consumption) and how these forces interact (e.g., price and market structure), and crucially, how they can be influenced and respond to different interventions (e.g., http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.04.015 0006-3207/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. ⇑ Corresponding author at: Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, School of Anthropology and Conservation, Marlowe Building, University of Kent, Canter- bury, Kent CT2 7NR, UK. Tel.: +44 (0) 7745 547585. E-mail addresses: dc344@kent.ac.uk (D.W.S. Challender), s.r.harrop@sussex.ac. uk (S.R. Harrop), dcm@kent.ac.uk (D.C. MacMillan). Biological Conservation 187 (2015) 249–259 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon