Dr Dan Challender, a conservation scientist, argues that CITES CoP20 demonstrates we need to reform how decisions on international trade controls for wild species are made if they are to be protected from overexploitation. Read the full expert comment on the University of Oxford website.
Overexploitation (harvesting at a rate that exceeds the ability of populations to recover) is a major driver of biodiversity loss. Globally, tens of thousands of animal, plant and fungi species are used and traded at different scales for purposes including food, fashion, medicine, pets, and building materials, among many others. Some of this use and trade is legal and sustainable and some not. Research I have led demonstrates that thousands of species are likely threatened by exploitation for international trade and preventing overexploitation of such species is therefore key to conserving life on earth.
Recently, the world’s governments convened in Samarkand, Uzbekistan for the 20th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP20) to CITES, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. CITES is the primary multilateral environmental agreement through which international trade in nearly 41,000 species is regulated. CITES was established in 1975 and is considered by some to be one of the most successful international environmental agreements. Participating countries must enact legislation to implement the Convention and the harvest and international trade in species covered by CITES is regulated using a system of permits and certificates.
At CoP20, Parties to the Convention took decisions to apply new, or revising existing, international trade controls for species ranging from manta and devil rays to seed finches and Indian bdellium plants. Thirty-eight of 51 proposals were adopted, meaning that for some species international trade will now be closely regulated and for others, commercial international trade in specimens taken from the wild will be prohibited. Seventy-eight species were newly added to CITES. These measures are designed to protect species, so surely this is a cause for celebration. Well, no, not necessarily.
Myself and colleagues at Oxford recently evaluated the effectiveness of CITES by asking the question, is the Convention preventing the overexploitation of species for international trade – the very problem it was designed to address? Worryingly, our research indicates that CITES is not as effective as it could be for several reasons.
To read the full expert comment, visit: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2025-12-17-expert-comment-how-can-we-effectively-regulate-international-trade-wild-species
