Enforcement and capacity building to combat illegal trade of Alexandrine Parakeets Psittacula eupatria (Linnaeus 1766) in Odisha, India
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13995583Keywords:
Frontline Forest Staff, Wildlife Trafficking, Capacity Building, Socio-economic factors, Staff engagement and education, Staff TrainingAbstract
Illegal wildlife trade poses a significant threat to global biodiversity, and the bird trade is a prominent contributor to this issue. India, particularly Odisha, has witnessed the illicit trade of Alexandrine Parakeets, a prized species in the pet trade. This research examines the enforcement efforts against illegal parakeet trading in Odisha, focusing on frontline forest staff's attitudes, knowledge, and experiences using a survey-based approach. The study identifies the socio-economic factors such as poor economic conditions and lack of education as major factors motivating local communities’ participation and support for illegal wildlife trade activities, shedding light on the complexities of wildlife trafficking in the region. Findings highlight the importance of staff engagement and education in augmenting conservation efforts and enhancing the effectiveness of enforcement strategies aimed at curbing the illegal trade of Alexandrine Parakeets in Odisha, India. This approach can be implemented in other states of India also where the socio-economic factors are a significant factor contributing to illegal trading activities for biodiversity as awareness is the key factor driving change. The insights gained from this research could inform policy interventions and conservation initiatives.
References
Auliya, M., Altherr, S., Ariano-Sanchez, D., et al. (2016). Trade in live reptiles, its impact on wild populations, and the role of the European market. Biological Conservation, 204, 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.04.026
Barber-Meyer, S. M. (2010). Dealing with the clandestine nature of wildlife-trade market surveys. Conservation Biology, 24(4), 918–923. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01382.x
Bensizerara, D., Chenchouni, H., Bachir, A. S., & Houhamdi, M. (2013). Ecological status interactions for assessing bird diversity in relation to a heterogeneous landscape structure. Avian Biology Research, 6(1), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.3184/175815513X13630969001757
BirdLife International. (2015). Wild bird trade and CITES. In BirdLife International. Retrieved from http://www.birdlife.org/worldwide/policy/wild-bird-trade-and-cites
BirdLife International. (2008). Nearly half of all bird species are used directly by people. In BirdLife State of the World’s Birds website. Retrieved from http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/casestudy/98
Cardador, L., Tella, J., Anadón, J., & Carrete, M. (2019). The European trade ban on wild birds reduced invasion risks. Conservation Letters, 12(e12631). https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12631
Carrete, M., & Tella, J. (2008). Wild-bird trade and exotic invasions: A new link of conservation concern? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 6(4), 207–211. https://doi.org/10.1890/1540-9295
Carvalho, J. C. M. (1951). Relações entre os índios do alto Xingu e a fauna regional.
Challender, D. W., Brockington, D., Hinsley, A., Hoffmann, M., Kolby, J. E., Massé, F., ... & Milner-Gulland, E. J. (2022). Mischaracterizing wildlife trade and its impacts may mislead policy processes. Conservation Letters, 15(1), e12832. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12832
Challender, D. W. S., Harrop, S. R., & MacMillan, D. C. (2015). Towards informed and multi-faceted wildlife trade interventions. Global Ecology and Conservation, 3, 129–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2014.11.010
Chandrakar, A. K. (2012). Biodiversity conservation in India. Central University of Gujarat: Gandhinagar, India.
da Câmara Cascudo, L. (1983). Civilização e cultura: pesquisas e notas de etnografia geral (Vol. 1). Editora Itatiaia.
FEDIAF. (2018). Number of pet animals in Europe in 2017, by animal type (in 1000s). In Statista. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/453880/pet-population-europe-by-animal/
IUCN. (2019). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (Version 2019-1). Retrieved from http://www.iucnredlist.org
Jenkins, P. (2007). The failed regulatory system for animal imports into the United States—and how to fix it.
Karesh, W. B., Cook, R. A., Gilbert, M., & Newcomb, J. (2007). Implications of wildlife trade on the movement of avian influenza and other infectious diseases. Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 43(S1), S55–S59. https://doi.org/10.7589/0090-3558-43.s1.s55
Nijman, V. (2010). An overview of international wildlife trade from Southeast Asia. Biodiversity and Conservation, 19(4), 1101–1114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-009-9758-4
Poonia, A., Ghanghas, A., Sharma, S., Jangra, M., & Sindhu, V. (2022). Trends in CITES-listed bird’s trade in South Asian countries in view of the evolution of Indian laws during the last four decades. International Journal of Ecological Economics and Statistics, 43(9), 115.
Rosen, G. E., & Smith, K. F. (2010). Summarizing the evidence on the international trade in illegal wildlife. Ecology and Health, 7(1), 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-010-0338-7
Simberloff, D., Martin, J. L., Genovesi, P., et al. (2013). Impacts of biological invasions: What’s what and the way forward. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 28(1), 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.013
Singh, R., Lehana, P., & Singh, G. (2009). Investigations of the phonemes in the calls of little owls using vector quantization. International Journal of Information Technology, 2(2), 337–342.
Smith, K. M., Anthony, S. J., Switzer, W. M., et al. (2012). Zoonotic viruses are associated with illegally imported wildlife products. PLoS ONE, 7(5), e29505. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0029505
Traffic. (2008). What’s driving the wildlife trade? A review of expert opinion on economic and social drivers of the wildlife trade and trade control efforts in Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, and Vietnam. East Asia and Pacific Region Sustainable Development Discussion Papers.
UNEP & Interpol. (2016). The rise of environmental crime. UNEP.
UNEP. (2018). Decision adopted by the conference of the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. In Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Sustainability and Biodiversity Conservation
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
