Wildlife trade in Egypt: Untangling the social and economic drivers to inform policy change

Early Egyptian civilizations were one of the first to document commercial trade involving wildlife, and the trade in wildlife has persisted ever since. Wild species are used as the source for a large array of products, including foods, medicines, exotic pets, display and entertainment, clothing, cultural items, industrial resins and extracts, and household items (TRAFFIC, 2008). Today, human consumption and trading of wildlife represents significant risks to public health, animal welfare and biodiversity due to widespread unsustainable and exploitative wildlife trade practices (‘t Sas-Rolfes et al., 2019). The management of the wildlife trade is crisis-driven, meaning decisions are made quickly, and, often, inefficiently (Patel, 2015). Deciding on an appropriate policy change in response to unsustainable practices depends on the actors involved, the goods being traded and a complex set of parameters that shift across taxa, cultures, region, time and consumer market segments (‘t Sas-Rolfes, 2019). There is consensus that the main driver of the trade in wildlife products is increasing consumer demand which in itself is influenced by a complex set of social and economic factors, such as consumerism and social status, as well as cultural beliefs, social norms and tradition. However, multiple dimensions are revealed when the underlying and complex structures that enable the trade are considered, such as poverty, corruption, lack of alternative livelihoods and subsidence on the supply side. Moreover, political instability, corruption and poor governance and enforcement further perpetuate exploitative wildlife trade (TRAFFIC, 2008). Little is known about how the drivers of the wildlife trade interact and shift with policy interventions (Milner-Gulland et al., 2018). Currently, there are no studies investigating the complexities of the wildlife trade system in Egypt, despite it representing an opportunity to significantly impede global trade as a major transit hub for wildlife trafficking. The data that does exist suggests that interventions introduced over the years have not been effective, this is seen in the persistent ivory trade that occurs openly despite criminalisation (Martin and Vigne, 2011), highlighting the need for more policy evaluations and to integrate the needs and values of local people in wildlife trade policy formulation. Although implementation and enforcement of appropriate legislation is necessary, the social, cultural and economic nature of the trade cannot be solved by simple ‘command and control’ measures alone (Velasquez Gomar & Stringer, 2011). Initiatives based on local people’s knowledge, rights, needs and values are also required if a policy is to be successful. For community-based interventions to heed the desired outcome, the local context must be understood, and a nuanced understanding of the whole trade system is required. Many existing ‘alternative livelihood’ projects are initiated without sufficient understanding of the local context leading to ineffective and even socially unjust outcomes (Milner-Gulland et al., 2018). Moreover, conservationists are increasingly endorsing demand-side interventions, designed to reduce the desire for wildlife products in order to reduce harvesting or hunting intensity in source countries. This is because traditional supply side interventions (i.e. antipoaching measures) have largely been found to fail, as they do not address the root driver of poaching, demand from consumers (Challender & MacMillan, 2014). Recently, NGO-led demand-side measures have focused on voluntary behaviour change, with interventions taking the form of from awareness-raising and educational campaigns or more strategic evidence based social marketing campaigns. Developing robust interventions to promote behavioural change is challenging and also requires a multi-faceted approach to understand the drivers of consumer demand for wildlife products (Travers et al., 2019).