TY - JOUR
T1 - CITES as Global Governance
T2 - Paths to Consensus and Defining Nature Through Uncertainty
AU - Le, Tuyen
N1 - Funding Information:
The member nations of CITES are collectively called the Conference of the Parties. Signing on to the Convention is completely voluntary. The Conference of the Parties holds a major meeting every two or three years to review and revise the Convention and its implementation. Though a separate entity, CITES has many close links to the United Nations through its various sub-organizations. Bureaucratic tasks are handled by the CITES Secretariat, which is administered by the United Nations Environment Programme. The CITES Standing Committee manages the Secretariat budget and assists in giving policy guidance to the Secretariat with regard to implementation. Scientific advice and expertise are provided as needed by CITES’s Animals and Plants Committees. Though once financed by the United Nations Environment Programme, funding was gradually phased out beginning in the late 1970s. Each party member now contributes to the CITES Trust Fund, which fully finances administrative costs and the standing committees. Contribution amounts are determined by a scale of assessment established by the United Nations. Beginning in 1976, the IUCN Specialist Group for Trade Records Analysis of Flora and Fauna in Commerce (TRAFFIC), which compiles the official Red List of Threatened Species, began independently monitoring and collecting data on CITES violations in different countries and passing its findings to the CITES Secretariat for further action, in effect acting as the CITES “watchdog” (Sand, , p. 25).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, © 2019 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
PY - 2019/4/3
Y1 - 2019/4/3
N2 - As concern over various environmental issues has risen at the international level, questions regarding what constitutes “nature” and how it should be portrayed and treated have gained a greater sense of urgency. This paper explores varying concepts and attributes of nature articulated by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (“CITES”). Much of the research on CITES comes from the fields of policy and ecology, exploring matters of biodiversity, sustainability, enforcement, functionality, and evaluation of CITES as a “success” or “failure” of policy, with little focus on issues of cultural context and ambiguities. In contrast, within the social sciences, the contemporary literature is broadly dedicated to critiquing the static, dualistic ideas of nature upon which environmental regulations are based. However, what is often missing from this discourse is how environmental policies often have an implicit understanding that these static conceptions of nature are not accurate–that within the environmental legislation process, there is “an awareness, for example, of the messy, improvised character of knowledges about nature”. This paper explores CITES’s understanding of nature, how it characterizes nature, and how these conceptions become implemented in legislative practice. It illustrates CITES as a manifestation of what Krueger calls a regulatory process of “coded and recoded text with material implications” (p. 880), wherein a relatively unchanging set of legislation can create “multiple, even contradictory, outcomes coexisting simultaneously in the same system” (p. 872).
AB - As concern over various environmental issues has risen at the international level, questions regarding what constitutes “nature” and how it should be portrayed and treated have gained a greater sense of urgency. This paper explores varying concepts and attributes of nature articulated by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (“CITES”). Much of the research on CITES comes from the fields of policy and ecology, exploring matters of biodiversity, sustainability, enforcement, functionality, and evaluation of CITES as a “success” or “failure” of policy, with little focus on issues of cultural context and ambiguities. In contrast, within the social sciences, the contemporary literature is broadly dedicated to critiquing the static, dualistic ideas of nature upon which environmental regulations are based. However, what is often missing from this discourse is how environmental policies often have an implicit understanding that these static conceptions of nature are not accurate–that within the environmental legislation process, there is “an awareness, for example, of the messy, improvised character of knowledges about nature”. This paper explores CITES’s understanding of nature, how it characterizes nature, and how these conceptions become implemented in legislative practice. It illustrates CITES as a manifestation of what Krueger calls a regulatory process of “coded and recoded text with material implications” (p. 880), wherein a relatively unchanging set of legislation can create “multiple, even contradictory, outcomes coexisting simultaneously in the same system” (p. 872).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073064623&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85073064623&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/13880292.2019.1629176
DO - 10.1080/13880292.2019.1629176
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85073064623
SN - 1388-0292
VL - 22
SP - 115
EP - 144
JO - Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy
JF - Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy
IS - 2
ER -