The project did not aim to assess whether the highest risk species identified met the specific criteria for listing within the Appendices to CITES or CMS, nor was it intended to identify a ‘shopping list’ of candidates for listing. Rather, it was intended that this project should help to inform thinking on whether, or how, both Conventions might better complement fisheries management and fish conservation.

TRAFFIC was contracted to undertake the review based on an approach developed by an FAO appraisal of the suitability of the CITES criteria for listing commercially-exploited aquatic species.  That approach suggests that risks faced by aquatic species can be characterized in terms of:

• vulnerability: related to the inability (for bio-ecological reasons) of a species to sustain the levels of exploitation that it may be subjected to, this factor could also be called ‘bio-ecological risk’.
• value: related to the profitability of the species’ exploitation, this factor could also be called ‘economic risk’.
• violability: related to the extent to which conventional management measures may be circumvented, this factor could also be called ‘compliance risk’.

The results of TRAFFIC’s application of this approach are presented in this report and its associated database*.

In developing this method, the authors identified a number of practical difficulties in applying the approach taken. As a result, an expert workshop was held to provide peer review of the method and to identify ways in which it might be improved. The outcome of this workshop, with its various recommendations, forms an addendum to this report; the two should be read in combination.

In order to take forward the workshop recommendations, a further application of the method, with refinements, to a single taxonomic group (namely sharks) has been commissioned from TRAFFIC. The outcome of this will be reported separately.

* - NB the database will be provided here in the near future.’

A related article in Nature News can be found here