 A conflict of visions: Ideas shaping wildlife trade policy toward African megafauna’t Sas-Rolfes, Michael and Jennifer Lynn Gooden No bzse5, SocArXiv from Center for Open Science Abstract: 1. Among factors that threaten wild populations of African megafauna, wildlife trade has gained prominence as a global policy issue, with concerted international campaigns aiming to influence the trade of species such as elephants, rhinos, and lions. Trade policy is strongly contested, confounding attempts to develop coherent approaches across jurisdictions and through international mechanisms such as CITES. This undermines conservation efforts. Understanding the drivers of such conflict may help to address this problem. 2. Scholars of political science increasingly recognize the power of ideas as drivers within policy processes. Guided by this literature, we developed an analytical framework and conducted a thematic analysis to examine the ideas driving wildlife trade policy conflict. Our nested case study approach examined debates over trade policy toward African elephants, rhinos, and lions, at two levels: the international policy arena of CITES and within a single country, South Africa. Informed by earlier literature, we tracked the evolution of international trade policy debates over a four-year period (2016–2019) and analysed submissions to a national policy review process in South Africa that took place during 2020. 3. During the study period, state and non-state actors contributed to vigorous trade policy debates within seven key thematic issues across the case study species. Arguments were driven by both cognitive ideas, which specify cause-and-effect relationships, and normative ideas, which are values-based and especially salient elements of anti-trade stances. 4. Fusing these cognitive and normative ideational elements, we identified three distinct over-arching narratives relating to wildlife trade policy. These three narratives align with broader environmental policy and political narratives and elucidate inherent tensions within the CITES arena. They also reveal differing ethical interpretations and perceptions of risk, precaution, and the role of property rights. 5. Policy implications: Wildlife trade policy conflict is driven at least in part by competing ideological visions, which may be entrenched by the CITES Appendix listing system. The structural role of CITES in perpetuating this polarization—and the consequences thereof—warrants further research. Date: 2023-06-16 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:socarx:bzse5 Access Statistics for this paper More papers in SocArXiv from Center for Open Science |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.