|
|
|
| Failures of EuropeanAmerican Approach to Global Species Conservation Strategies: Manifestations, Causes and Responses |
| Qingdao University |
|
|
|
Abstract The global species conservation strategy led by European and American countries has promoted the global species conservation process. However, it is necessary to recognize the current context of this strategy. International wildlife trade bans have been implemented widely, particularly having military measures to control poaching, while it has been quite difficult to achieve the sustainable use of the resources in developing countries. In fact, the combination of sustainable use and conservation is not only a consensus reached in a range of multilateral environmental agreements, but also an important position adopted by developed countries, particularly those European and American countries, in terms of protecting their native species. As species conservation has become an important issue in international environmental politics and has been used to maintain the dominant position of the European and American countries in the global species conservation strategies, the EuropeanAmerican global species conservation strategy differs from their domestic conservation actions. They are committed to promoting a narrow conservation agenda in other countries with the resources of species. Under this strategy, European and American countries use their dominance and flexible interpretation to constantly interfere with the equal application of the CITES between developed and developing countries.
As a result, it imposes more stringent pressures on the countries of generating good conservation outcomes and restricting or prohibiting sustainable use, rather than choosing the best conservation approach in terms of populations and regional management. The narrow conservation agenda alienates species conservation concepts and confuses the causes of threats to species population. It not only deviates the conservation strategy from the real need to improve the status of populations, but also increases unnecessary costs of management in the countries, which ultimately hinders the longterm species conservation. The confusion of causality makes the public fall into the wrong perception of the main obligation of species conservation, and assigns the direct responsibility to indigenous people around the protected areas, while ignoring the various reasons closely related to justice, such as the huge consumption of wildlife and products by European and American colonizers for a long time and the economic development in developing countries. The EuropeanAmerican strategy has been rising in inequality within the colonial relations and developed in indirect maintenance of the unequal power of international relations. Undoubtedly, this strategy has hindered the achievement of sustainable conservation of global species. In order to improve the existing EuropeanAmerican strategy, it is necessary to construct local communities and countries as the effective stakeholders of protecting their native species and implementing pluralistic global conservation strategies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
