Abstract:

Background: The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), aims to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival. It achieves this by subjecting, and if necessary, suspending, international trade in listed species to certain controls and regulations. The effective implementation of the Convention relies on the coordination and consistency of countries worldwide in terms of terminology comprehension, law enforcement, data collection and statistics, and policy formulation. However, due to legacy issues at the time of CITES’s signing, United Nations’ languages such as Chinese, Russian and Arabic are not working languages of CITES. Despite China’s four-decade implementation of CITES, with Chinese CITES authorities having translated the Convention text and other valid documents into Chinese for domestic dissemination, China’s participation in the formulation and implementation of regulations for international trade in wild fauna and flora remains contingent upon accurate comprehension and translation of CITES terminology and definitions in English. Terminology is the core concept in the formulation and implementation of policies and regulations, and it is also the foundation of rules. As a highly technical and operational international agreement, CITES has a comprehensive implementation system with a complex and intertwined set of rules. Investigating the translation and characteristics of terminology can provide an entry point for understanding the establishment and evolution of CITES regulations. 

Main Content: This article traces the linguistic regulations at the time of CITES’ signing, lists important terms related to the conservation of endangered wild animals and plants and their translations in the CITES text and valid documents, and categorizes the CITES terms according to their nature and application scenarios. The definitions and explanations of CITES terms can be categorized into definitional, explanatory, and quotational according to their nature; and into scientific and definitional terms, regulatory and procedural terms, and cooperative and compliance terms according to their application scenarios. By using an online Large Language Model Moonshot AI, 14 terms with the most special English explanations and the greatest differences from common understanding were extracted from the 150 terms of the CITES glossary, and a comparison was made. 

Conclusion: The findings indicate that the CITES terminology is primarily anchored in the Convention’s legal framework, embodying purpose-driven linguistic features tailored to regulate wildlife trade. However, divergences from common usage emerge through three distinctive dimensions: more detailed, specific, and operationally robust. When Parties inadequately grasp these terminological nuances during routine implementation of Convention obligations, such comprehension gaps may not only impede regulatory compliance but also precipitate operational ambiguities. In severe cases, it may even trigger or activate the Convention’s review and suspension mechanisms. Mastery of the categories and characteristics of CITES terminology aids in understanding the background, rule evolution, and operational execution of this so-called “Convention with teeth”. It includes compliance and enforcement measures, such as the prohibition of trade. Only with a comprehensive understanding can we effectively implement the Convention, regulate international trade in wild fauna and flora, and advance global biodiversity governance. Additionally, the characteristics and interpretations of CITES terminology also provide insights and references for formulating China’s wildlife protection and management laws and regulations, as well as related standards.

Key words: languages of CITES, multilateral treaty, species conservation, trade regulation, law implementation