Vietnam's Wildlife Trade Policy Review project

UNCTAD

Vietnam’s WLT Policy Review project

• The wildlife trade policy review was undertaken within 2007-2008 with a strong commitment of relevant GOs and NGOs

• Actively participation of three ministries, CITES MA, SA and local NGO

• Two consultative workshop were organized to gather feedback for review process and review report.

• Four meetings of national steering committee were organized during the review

• Four field trips to different wildlife trade hot pots to perceive information from wildlife collectors, trader and implementation agencies on WLT policy

Policy content• Vietnam has developed 50 policies and legislations on wildlife trade

from 1963 up to present.

• National Action Plan on strengthening the management of wildlife trade towards 2010 (2004) shows a strong commitment of Vietnam on wildlife trade management

• Numbers of species have been protected and saved from overexploitation and illegal trade

• Loopholes, inconsistency and ineffective were identified during the implementation of WLT policy

• Weak connection of wildlife trade policy to other national development and poverty goals

• Lack of a long-term vision for wildlife trade policy policy development and implementation

Policy Implementation

• Inappropriate investment of fund and resources

has slowed down the implementation and limit

much effect on the illegal trade.

• inadequate consultation between beneficiaries,

policy maker and implementation agencies

• Inappropriate alternative options for livelihood

and wildlife trade

• Weak monitoring and evaluation mechanism for

WLT policy

Environmental impacts

• The creation protected areas system has given good shelter to wildlife as an positive impact of the WLT policy

• Listing procedure of protected species had stop overexploitation and trade on some endangered species.

• Legal commercial captive bred and artificial propagation increase and someway reduces pressure on wild harvest.

• Illegal trade and overexploitation were not effectively controlled - underground trade is still a problem

• Inadequate attention between animal and plant trade.

• Sustainable use and harvest mechanism was not paid adequate attention

Social impacts • Credit incentive to the legal operation was promote.• Up-listed and down-listed of protected wildlife has

impacted to livelihood and income of local people.• Increase the produce cost and impact on income of the

harvesting and trade community.• Lack of proper market orientation and strategy therefore

WLT not yet shows as a sustainable business, • High investment therefore the trade has little interest from

community, especially the poor• Unbalance sharing within the trade chain, most of the

benefit from wildlife trade go to the middle man and top trader

• Only a minor part of population has proper understand of WLT policy

Economic impacts

• The flourish of captive bred and artificial propagated that bring significant income and works for some communities and areas.

• WLT policy does not make a strong impact on demand and the price of wildlife - continuing underground trade

• Lack of suitable mechanism on balancing the benefit sharing between the trade chain – do not facilitate legal harvest and trade

• Protected species listing impact work and livelihood of some community – need an alternative mechanism for livelihood

Policy analysis and findings

• The existence WLTP is an important framework for wildlife

trade management and protection of the country.

• Lack of proper preparation and consultation that make the

some confusions and loopholes in the existing policy.

• Overlap issues as a consequence of too many policy and

legal document – one may not enough but too many make

confusion

• Ban and strict regulation actually drives trade underground

- Balance of harvest, use and protection

Policy analysis and findings

• Unbalance of attention on plant and animal.

• Unclear criteria on listing of protected species

and terms for endangered and protected species.

• Inappropriate budget and resources have limit the

implementation and effective of policy.

• Lack of proper training and guidance of policy

implementation

• Lack of evaluation and monitoring mechanism of

policy implementation and policy impacts.

Recommendations

• Refine the current policy to cover identified loopholes

and inconsistencies;

• Recommend for a new WLT policy that all

environmental, social and economic issues are equally

considered;

• Distinctive of illegal wildlife trade and the legality of

wildlife use and livelihood.

• Standardize the criteria term for species listing

Recommendations

• Adequate budget to enhance implementation

• Appropriate training;

• Develop a standard protocol for wildlife confiscation and

rescue

• Regularly evaluate and monitor of policy implementation and

impacts Develop a pilot project of community management of

sustainable wildlife harvest and trade

• Publishing the review report and social dynamic of wildlife

trade

Feedback on framework

• Comprehensive and useful for reviewing

• Clear explanation and example

• Good hypothesis question for each section

• Easy to understand and use

• Good to have an accompany training on method

and procedure

Recommendation on framework

• It is necessary to define indicator of impacts

• Clear scope on the focusing of national or

international wildlife trade regulation as they both

parallel exist

• Should focus on the assessment of some specific

policy and its impacts and implementation

• Should be revised as feedback from experience of

four countries.