生物多样性

• • 上一篇    下一篇

《濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约》议事规则及投票表决机制的比较研究

周志华1*, 曾岩2,4, 金效华3,4   

  1. 1. 国家林业和草原局野生动物保护监测中心,北京 100714
    2. 中国科学院动物研究所,北京 100101
    3. 中国科学院植物研究所,北京 100093
    4. 中华人民共和国濒危物种科学委员会,北京 100101
  • 收稿日期:2025-05-27 修回日期:2025-08-23 接受日期:2025-10-01
  • 通讯作者: 周志华

Comparing research on rules of procedures and the voting rules of Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

Zhihua Zhou1*, Yan Zeng2,4, Xiaohua Jin3,4   

  1. 1 Wildlife Conservation and Monitoring Center, National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100714, China

    2 Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China

    3 Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100093, China

    4 Endangered Species Scientific Commission, P. R. China, Beijing 100101, China

  • Received:2025-05-27 Revised:2025-08-23 Accepted:2025-10-01
  • Contact: Zhou, Zhihua

摘要: 《濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约》(Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, CITES)是基于有效许可证制度的强势国际公约, 其附录调整、条款解释和执行建议对全球野生动植物保护和国际贸易有深远影响。CITES缔约方大会的议事规则, 特别是投票表决机制, 在其决策中发挥了重要作用。本文介绍了CITES议事规则的基本原则、主要内容、历史演变和重点争议。文章汇总了1997年CITES第十次缔约方大会以来附录修订提案的投票情况和结果, 并以关键时间点上CITES海洋动物物种议题的投票决策为例, 讨论了CITES与其他生物多样性相关多边国际协定(如《生物多样性公约》、《联合国防治荒漠化公约》等)的缔约方大会议事规则中投票规则, 包括投票权利、多数票要求、秘密投票和重开辩论等方面的异同。比较发现: (1)其他国际协定大多倾向于协商一致, 而CITES经常使用投票机制, 助推其更快做出决策; (2) CITES实质性议题的通过需获得2/3多数, 而不结盟国家经常难以协调到足够票数, 欧盟的主导性增强; (3) CITES特定动议(如重开辩论、秘密投票等程序性规则)增加了谈判的激烈程度, 但对于维护中小国家利益至关重要; (4)相比其他国际公约, CITES过度使用投票表决, 虽然有利于使物种的国际贸易得到较快控制, 但也导致有的缔约方因缺少资金和技术方面的支持, 无法有效执行相关决议决定, 不利于缔约方通过国际合作解决问题。我们建议深入研究各公约和协定的议事规则, 密切跟踪规则演变和决策趋势, 积极维护秘密投票规则, 加强与其他缔约方的沟通, 推动形成科学严谨、公平合理、积极有效的管理规范, 以保证合法贸易正常开展, 打击非法贸易, 贡献于全球生物多样性保护。

关键词: 濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约(CITES), 议事规则, 生物多样性相关多边国际协定, 提案决策, 投票

Abstract

Aims: The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is a powerful international agreement based on an effective permit system. Its decisions, including appendix amendments, resolutions, and recommendations, have a profound impact on global wildlife conservation and trade. The rules of procedure for the Conference of the Parties (CoP), especially its voting mechanisms, are crucial to its decision-making process. This study aims to analyze these rules in detail.

Methods: This paper introduces the principles, evolution, and key controversies of CITES rules of procedure. We analyze voting data for CITES Appendix amendment proposals since CoP10 in 1997 and use key marine species votes as case studies. We then compare CITES voting rules—including voting rights, majority requirements, secret ballots, and debate reopening—with those of other biodiversity-related multilateral agreements.

Results: While other agreements often prefer consensus, CITES’s frequent use of voting allows it to make decisions more quickly. The two-thirds majority requirement for substantive issues makes it difficult for non-allied countries to achieve their goals, strengthening the influence of blocs like the European Union. Although procedural rules like secret ballots and debate reopening can lead to intense negotiations, secret ballots are vital for protecting the interests of small and medium-sized countries. While frequent voting can speed up trade regulation, it may also lead to a lack of financial or technical support, hindering effective implementation and undermining international cooperation.

Conclusion: This paper provides an analysis of negotiation strategies within CITES. We recommend in-depth research into the rules of procedure for all such conventions to better track their evolution and decision-making trends. We also suggest maintaining the secret ballot rule and that early engagement with other parties can help non-allied countries achieve better outcomes. Developing management regulations that are scientific, fair, and effective will contribute to maintaining legal trade, combating illegal trafficking, and conserving global biodiversity.