TPP must protect wildlife

Lost amid the noise surrounding the Trans-Pacific Partnership has been the fact that the deal’s environment chapter can potentially help curb one of the severest transnational crimes: wildlife trafficking. It’s estimated that the value of this trade is 8-10 billion U.S. dollars in Southeast Asia alone. Accordingly, wildlife crime may seem like a remote issue – but the United States has become the world’s second-largest market for illegal wildlife products. This means the U.S. must lead in combating this insidious market. 

The trade of live wild animals causes some of the worst suffering imaginable. Trafficked animals experience extreme physical pain, often packed into tight spaces without food or water for days. As many as four out of five of these animals will die in transit, or within a year. Targeted species like pangolins may well be extinct, as Prince William put it, “before most people have even heard of them.”

{mosads}Like many, I was skeptical that free trade agreements (FTAs) could meaningfully help protect the world’s wild animals. The threats they face – illegal logging and fishing; poaching for live sale and for parts like elephant ivory and rhino horns – are overwhelming. How could a trade agreement intended to lower tariffs and increase trade protect wildlife? But trade agreements – if they contain stringent standards — can provide the commercial leverage needed to tackle these systemic crises.

World Animal Protection is not for or against FTAs generally; we recognize that trade deals can have adverse and positive impacts. But we also believe that any international agreement of this magnitude must yield the strongest possible protections for the world’s animals.

The White House has made public its commitment to enforceable environmental standards in TPP, and has pledged to deliver “the toughest environmental protections of any regional trade agreement.”  In a recent report, the USTR and State Department illustrated how U.S. FTAs with powerful environmental commitments have led to major reforms. Coupled with capacity building, FTAs have catalyzed America’s trading partners, like Peru and Oman, to bring their legislation into compliance with CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species). They’ve spurred FTA partners to build the necessary institutional and legal frameworks to protect wildlife locally; Peru established a Ministry of Environment and safeguards for protected species. Through CAFTA-DR, the Central American Wildlife Enforcement Network was established to combat wildlife trafficking. The U.S. FTA with Oman led to stronger protection of species like the Arabian oryx and loggerhead sea turtles.

The inclusion of enforceable commitments is crucial for real reform. The most recent U.S. FTAs have included environmental provisions covering issues ranging from public participation to implementation of CITES, all of which are fully enforceable and subject to trade sanctions – not just diplomatic pressure, if any party doesn’t fulfill its commitments. This gives the provisions teeth, ensuring they’re not just words on paper.

While EU FTAs include environmental provisions, they haven’t been enforceable. The EU has instead relied on a cooperative approach.  While this approach can benefit the environment, it isn’t backstopped with the proverbial stick to ensure that commitments are satisfied.  And so we haven’t seen the types of reforms U.S. FTAs are catalyzing for wildlife under EU agreements – not in breadth or speed.

TPP could be the most ambitious FTA yet to protect the environment and animals – if the Administration can deliver fully enforceable provisions to prevent wildlife trafficking and illegal fishing, and enhance marine mammal protection. The U.S. must also help equip those working on the ground for wildlife in partner countries with the necessary resources.

These lessons should apply to future FTAs, to protect even more animals. EU agreements, for example, have had impact for farm animals in Brazil and Chile; we believe the inclusion of similar commitments to protect all animals in future negotiations, including the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, is imperative. 

Time will tell if TPP will pass and how the final deal will look.  But we urge the U.S. government to remain steadfast in its commitments to protect the environment and its animals. The question is not whether trade treaties are right or wrong but whether they protect or undermine the high standards we all expect. TPP’s environment chapter can potentially enhance and embed standards for wildlife and marine animals. As an advocate for animals, when World Animal Protection sees potential to help them, we are compelled to press for the best possible outcome. 

Baker is chief executive of World Animal Protection.