
ABSTRACTBiodiversity loss is mainly driven by changes in land use and overexploitation, with the commercial trade of wildlife being a smaller but still important contributor to resource depletion and species decline. The trade—including live animals, plants, fungi, and derived products—is a major economic sector valued at US$145–220 billion annually. The European Union (EU) is a key market, importing wildlife products worth approximately €100 billion. While legal trade has surged, illegal wildlife trade remains a significant transnational crime, estimated at US$20 billion annually and threatening endangered species. Monitoring wildlife trade is challenged by species‐level data gaps and inadequate regulation of many traded species, hindering conservation efforts and increasing biosecurity risks, including the transmission of zoonotic diseases. Global databases, like the United Nations Comtrade, provide insufficient species‐specific details, limiting regulatory effectiveness. The EU's database Trade Control and Expert System (TRACES) offers a powerful, underutilized tool for wildlife trade monitoring. Originally designed for biosecurity, TRACES enables real‐time tracking of wildlife imports across 90+ countries in 39 languages. It facilitates detailed data collection, cross‐border information sharing, accurate species identification, automated processing, and enhanced risk assessment. However, studies indicate that significant gaps in species identification persist, which could be mitigated through stricter enforcement and data verification. A more effective use of TRACES is needed to reinforce the EU's leadership in sustainable wildlife trade regulation, protecting endangered species while promoting ecological integrity.
Viewpoint, Wildlife Trade, Monitoring, TRACES, European Union
Viewpoint, Wildlife Trade, Monitoring, TRACES, European Union
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
