Wildlife Trafficking between the European Union and Mexico

Inés Arroyo-Quiroz,Tanya Wyatt

doi:10.5204/ijcjsd.v8i3.1243

Abstract

Illegal wildlife trade or wildlife trafficking is a global threat to all kinds of species, not just charismatic megafauna or wildlife in Africa and Asia. This paper presents the findings of an investigation of the illegal trade in native and non-native wildlife and wildlife products between the European Union and Mexico. Using literature analysis, secondary trade data and expert interviews, this study explores the nature and extent of wildlife trafficking between these two regions, including the involvement of organised crime within an eco-global criminological framework. This is important for the regions studied and for the global community more generally, as wildlife trafficking is contributing not only to species extinction, but also to instability, violence and unhealthy physical environments for humans.

Highlights

Illegal wildlife trade or wildlife trafficking is not confined to charismatic megafauna or Africa and Asia
We argue that illegal wildlife trade sits within an eco-global criminological theoretical framework
201 cases correspond to CITES Appendix II, 52 to Appendix I, 15 species are not listed in CITES, and in 11 cases, it was not possible to determine if they are CITES listed or not, as entries are described only on the order or family level rather than the species level, which is needed to determine listing in Appendix I or II

Summary

Introduction

Illegal wildlife trade or wildlife trafficking is not confined to charismatic megafauna or Africa and Asia. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2016a) has identified suspected traffickers from 80 different countries, as well as trafficking flows from over 100 countries. This illustrates that wildlife trafficking is truly a global issue. The issue features on the global security agenda, as illegal trade in wildlife is, in some cases, thought to be associated with organised crime syndicates, arms trafficking and, to a much lesser degree, armed militant groups (Vira and Ewing 2014; Carlson et al 2015)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion