Search

The unsustainable use of wildlife is a primary driver of global biodiversity loss. No comprehensive global dataset exists on what species are in trade, their geographic origins, and trade's ultimate impacts, which limits our ability to sustainably manage trade. The United States is one of the world's largest importers of wildlife, with trade data compiled in the US Law Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS). The LEMIS provides the most comprehensive publicly accessible wildlife trade database of non-the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) listed species. In total, 21,097 species and over 2.85 billion individuals were traded over the past 22 y (2000-2022). When LEMIS data are combined with CITES records, the United States imported over 29,445 wild species, including over 50% of all globally described species in some taxonomic groups. For most taxa, around half of the individuals are declared as sourced from the wild. Although the LEMIS provides the only means to assess trade volumes for many taxa, without any associated data on most wild populations, it is impossible to assess the impact on biodiversity, sustainability of trade, or any potential risk of pest or pathogen spread. These insights underscore the considerable underestimation of trade and the urgent need for other countries to adopt similar mechanisms to accurately record trade., Competing Interests: Competing interests statement:The authors declare no competing interest.

Illegal harvesting and trading of wildlife have become major threats to global biodiversity and public health 1-3 . Although China is widely recognized as an important destination for wildlife illegally obtained abroad 4 , little attention has been given to illegal hunting within its borders. Here we extracted 9,256 convictions for illegal hunting from a nationwide database of trial verdicts in China spanning January 2014 to March 2020. These convictions involved illegal hunting of 21% (n = 673) of China's amphibian, reptile, bird and mammal species, including 25% of imperilled species in these groups. Sample-based extrapolation indicates that many more species were taken illegally during this period. Larger body mass and range size (for all groups), and proximity to urban markets (for amphibians and birds) increase the probability of a species appearing in the convictions database. Convictions pertained overwhelmingly to illegal hunting for commercial purposes and involved all major habitats across China. A small number of convictions represented most of the animals taken, indicating the existence of large commercial poaching operations. Prefectures closer to urban markets show higher densities of convictions and more individual animals taken. Our results suggest that illegal hunting is a major, overlooked threat to biodiversity throughout China., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Protecting and promoting recovery of species at risk of extinction is a critical component of biodiversity conservation. In Canada, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) determines whether species are at risk of extinction or extirpation, and has conducted these assessments since 1977. We examined trends in COSEWIC assessments to identify whether at-risk species that have been assessed more than once tended to improve, remain constant, or deteriorate in status, as a way of assessing the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation in Canada. Of 369 species that met our criteria for examination, 115 deteriorated, 202 remained unchanged, and 52 improved in status. Only 20 species (5.4%) improved to the point where they were 'not at risk', and five of those were due to increased sampling efforts rather than an increase in population size. Species outcomes were also dependent on the severity of their initial assessment; for example, 47% of species that were initially listed as special concern deteriorated between assessments. After receiving an at-risk assessment by COSEWIC, a species is considered for listing under the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA), which is the primary national tool that mandates protection for at-risk species. We examined whether SARA-listing was associated with improved COSEWIC assessment outcomes relative to unlisted species. Of 305 species that had multiple assessments and were SARA-listed, 221 were listed at a level that required identification and protection of critical habitat; however, critical habitat was fully identified for only 56 of these species. We suggest that the Canadian government should formally identify and protect critical habitat, as is required by existing legislation. In addition, our finding that at-risk species in Canada rarely recover leads us to recommend that every effort be made to actively prevent species from becoming at-risk in the first place.

The evaluation of ecosystems and biodiversity has become an important field of investigation for economists. Although their interest has been largely motivated by the search for arguments in favour of broader conservation policies, both the methods and the meaning of the results remain controversial. This article aims at clarifying the interest and limitations of these works, by revisiting a number of issues, such as the economic qualification of the services that human societies take from biodiversity and ecological systems in general, the specificities of their contribution to human well-being and the consequences of a valuation of biodiversity based on ecosystem services. We conclude with a discussion of the purposes of evaluations: improving public policies or creating new markets?, (Copyright © 2011 Académie des sciences. Published by Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.)

A new international initiative for plant conservation was first called for as a resolution of the International Botanical Congress in 1999. The natural home for such an initiative was considered to be the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the CBD agreed to consider a Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC) at its 5th meeting in 2000. It was proposed that the GSPC could provide an innovative model approach for target setting within the CBD and, prior to COP5, a series of inter-sessional papers on proposed targets and their justification were developed by plant conservation experts. Key factors that ensured the adoption of the GSPC by the CBD in 2002 included: (1) ensuring that prior to and during COP5, key Parties in each region were supportive of the Strategy; (2) setting targets at the global level and not attempting to impose these nationally; and (3) the offer by Botanic Gardens Conservation International (BGCI) to support a GSPC position in the CBD Secretariat for 3 years, which provided a clear indication of the support for the GSPC from non-governmental organizations (NGO).

Mexico as a megadiverse country houses between 6 and 8% of the world's flora. However, the Mexican flora is facing challenges, including the presence of at least 981 threatened plant species and 618 exotic plant species, habitat loss, pollution, overexploitation of natural resources and the adverse effects of climate change, which are compromising its conservation and sustainable use. Mexico has been actively involved in the development and update of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC) adopted by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). As a party to CBD, Mexico has established a Coordinating Committee for the Mexican Strategy for Plant Conservation (MSPC), which has adapted the GSPC to fit national needs and drafted a number of projects, indicators, means of verification and actors to ensure that the MSPC, as a public policy tool, really drives conservation and sustainable use actions among all sectors and lasts beyond the current administration. An agenda is being developed with activities that include the following: approaching Congress, identifying the relevance of the MSPC in the National Development Plan and the Mexican Biodiversity Strategy, making use of current environmental policies and an aggressive awareness programme. The MSPC includes simultaneous programmes of technical and political work.

Invasive alien species spread through the environment and threaten native biodiversity, assisted by the absence of natural enemies. Alien species may also carry pathogens, which can be transmitted to native species. About half of the known endangered species are under threat from invasive alien species. The Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in 2008 invited relevant international organisations to work together to fill the gap in the international regulatory framework on invasive alien species. The Convention also reaffirmed the need for capacity and expertise to deal with invasive alien species in many countries, especially in developing countries. In this paper, the authors review the findings of this project.

Indigenous people inhabit approximately 85% of areas designated for biodiversity conservation worldwide. They also continue to struggle for recognition and preservation of cultural identities, lifestyles, and livelihoods--a struggle contingent on control and protection of traditional lands and associated natural resources (hereafter, self-determination). Indigenous lands and the biodiversity they support are increasingly threatened because of human population growth and per capita consumption. Application of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to tribal lands in the United States provides a rich example of the articulation between biodiversity conservation and indigenous peoples' struggle for self-determination. We found a paradoxical relationship whereby tribal governments are simultaneously and contradictory sovereign nations; yet their communities depend on the U.S. government for protection through the federal-trust doctrine. The unique legal status of tribal lands, their importance for conserving federally protected species, and federal environmental regulations' failure to define applicability to tribal lands creates conflict between tribal sovereignty, self-determination, and constitutional authority. We reviewed Secretarial Order 3206, the U.S. policy on "American Indian tribal rights, federal-tribal trust responsibilities, and the ESA," and evaluated how it influences ESA implementation on tribal lands. We found improved biodiversity conservation and tribal self-determination requires revision of the fiduciary relationship between the federal government and the tribes to establish clear, legal definitions regarding land rights, applicability of environmental laws, and financial responsibilities. Such actions will allow provision of adequate funding and training to tribal leaders and resource managers, government agency personnel responsible for biodiversity conservation and land management, and environmental policy makers. Increased capacity, cooperation, and knowledge transfer among tribes and conservationists will improve biodiversity conservation and indigenous self-determination.